Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:28:45.016Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Local or global: A biophysical analysis of a regional food system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2018

Meidad Kissinger ,
Cornelia Sussmann ,
Caitlin Dorward  and
Kent Mullinix
Meidad Kissinger*
Affiliation:
Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel
Cornelia Sussmann
Affiliation:
Institute for Sustainable Food Systems, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, British Columbia, Canada
Caitlin Dorward
Affiliation:
Institute for Sustainable Food Systems, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, British Columbia, Canada
Kent Mullinix
Affiliation:
Institute for Sustainable Food Systems, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, British Columbia, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: Meidad Kissinger, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Growing concern regarding environmental, social, economic and food quality outcomes of the modern global industrial food system as well as the implications of climate change on food security and food system sustainability have fomented interest in, and action to advance localized food systems. Environmental stewardship is an oft-touted benefit of food system localization. However, few studies have comparatively examined actual environmental benefits of local versus global supply systems and most focus on only one aspect (e.g., GHG emissions). The study reported here comparatively analyzes land, water, carbon and ecological footprints of a localized food supply and contemporary global food supply for the South-West British Columbia (Canada), bioregion (SWBC). The footprint family approach utilized allows measuring overall biophysical loads for the studied region. We quantified regional rates of reliance on imported biophysical services; measured the performances of specific food products grown locally in comparison with their imported counterparts; and identified those commodities that have better and worse local biophysical performances. For the SWBC bioregion, only 35% of the food consumed in the region is locally produced. Supplying the region's food demands requires 2 million hectares of land and 3 billion m3 of water, generating approximately 2.8 million tons of CO2e, with an eco-footprint of 2.5 million gha. Examining a large number of commodities grown and consumed in the bioregion revealed that only some commodities grown locally have absolute or significant biophysical advantages, while the rest have very little to no local advantage. Our analysis challenges the notion that local food systems are necessarily more environmentally sustainable from a biophysical resource use perspective and therefore may not represent the most compelling argument(s) for food system localization. We call for better and more comprehensive comparative analysis of existing and desired food systems as a mean to advance sustainability.

Keywords

Biophysical indicatorsfootprint familylocal food systemssustainability
Type
Research Paper
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 34 , Issue 6 , December 2019 , pp. 523 - 533
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman-Leist, P (2013) Rebuilding the Foodshed: How to Create Local, Sustainable, and Secure Food Systems. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green.Google Scholar
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (1999) Canadian Economic and Emissions Model for Agriculture.Google Scholar
Barrett, J, Vallack, H, Jones, A and Haq, G (2002) A Material Flow Analysis and Ecological Footprint of York. York, UK: Stockholm Environment Institute.Google Scholar
BC MAL (2010) Integrated Fruit Production Guide 2010 for Tree Fruit Growers.Google Scholar
Borucke, M, Moore, D, Cranston, G, Gracey, K, Iha, K, Larson, J and Galli, A (2013) Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere's regenerative capacity: The national footprint accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecological Indicators, 24, 518–533.Google Scholar
Brown, LR (2012) Full Planet, Empty Plates: The New Geopolitics of Food Security. New York, New York: The Earth Policy Institute, WW. Norton & Company Inc.Google Scholar
Colasanti, K and Hamm, MW (2010) Assessing the local food supply capacity of Detroit, Michigan. Journal of Food Systems Community Development 31;1(2), 41–58.Google Scholar
Coley, D, Howard, M and Winter, M (2009) Local food, food miles and carbon emissions: A comparison of farm shop and mass distribution approaches. Food Policy. Elsevier Ltd; 34(2), 150–155.Google Scholar
Dorward, C, Smukler, SM and Mullinix, K (2016) A novel methodology to assess land-based food self-reliance in the Southwest British Columbia bioregion. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 32(2) 1–19.Google Scholar
Eaton, RL, Hammond, GP and Laurie, J (2007) Footprints on the landscape: An environmental appraisal of urban and rural living in the developed world. Landscape and Urban Planning 83(1), 13–28.Google Scholar
Edwards-Jones, G (2010) Does eating local food reduce the environmental impact of food production and enhance consumer health? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 69, 582–591.Google Scholar
European Commission (2011) Roadmap to A Resource Efficient Europe. European Commission, Brussels.Google Scholar
Ewing, B, Moore, D, Goldfinger, S, Oursler, A, Reed, A and Wackernagel, M (2010) Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010. Global Footprint Network, Oakland.Google Scholar
Fang, K, Heijungs, R and de Snoo, GR (2014) Theoretical exploration for the combination of the ecological, energy, carbon, and water footprints: Overview of a footprint family. Ecological Indicators 36, 508–518.10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.08.017Google Scholar
Food and Agricultural Organization Statistics (FAOSTAT) (2016). @ http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/Google Scholar
Galli, A, Wiedmann, T, Ercin, E, Knoblauch, D, Ewing, B and Giljum, S (2012) Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint into a “footprint family” of indicators: Definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet. Ecological Indicators 16, 100–112.10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.017Google Scholar
Getz, A (1991) Urban Foodsheds. The Permaculture Activist, 24(October), pp. 26–27.Google Scholar
Giljum, S, Burger, E, Hinterberger, F, Lutter, S and Bruckner, M (2011) A comprehensive set of resource use indicators from the micro to the macro level. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 55(3), 300–308.10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.09.009Google Scholar
Government of British Columbia-Ministry of Agriculture and Lands (2006). BCs Food Self-Reliance: Can BCs Farmers Feed Our Growing Population? Abbotsford, BC: Government of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Government of British Columbia-Ministry of Agriculture Statistics and Research (2013). Sector Snapshot: B.C. Agriculture-2011. Victoria, BC: Government of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Government of British Columbia – Ministry of Agriculture (2011) Land Use Inventory Report: District of Mission Summer 2011. Abbotsford, British Columbia.Google Scholar
Government of British Columbia – Ministry of Agriculture (2014) News Release: Improvements to ALC Protect Farmland, Support Farmers. Victoria, BC.Google Scholar
Greer, JM (2009) The Ecotechnic Future: Envisioning A Post Peak World. Gabriola Island, BC: New Societies Publishers.Google Scholar
Harris, G, Nixon, D, Newman, L and Mullinix, K (2016) Delineating the southwest British Columbia bioregion for food system design and planning: A practical approach. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 1-16. Advance online publication.Google Scholar
Heinberg, R (2003) The Party's Over: Oil, war and the Fate of Industrial Societies. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
Hofmann, N and Beaulieu, MS (2001) A geographical profile of Manure production in Canada-2001. Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
Horst, M and Gaolach, B (2015) The potential of local food systems in North America: A review of foodshed analyses. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 30(5), 399–407.Google Scholar
International Fertilizers association – IFA (2002) Fertilizer use by crop.Google Scholar
Heller, MC and Keoleian, GA (2015) Greenhouse gas emission estimates of US dietary choices and food loss. Journal of Industrial Ecology 19(3), 391–401.10.1111/jiec.12174Google Scholar
Kastner, T, Erb, KH and Haberl, H (2014) Rapid growth in agricultural trade: Effects on global area efficiency and the role of management. Environmental Research Letters 9(3), 034015.Google Scholar
Kissinger, M and Rees, WE (2009) Footprints on the prairies: Degradation and sustainability of Canadian agricultural land in a globalizing world. Ecological Economics 68(8): 2309–2315.Google Scholar
Kissinger, M (2012) International trade related food miles – the case of Canada. Food Policy 37(2), 171–178.Google Scholar
Kissinger, M (2013) Approaches for calculating a nation's food ecological footprint, the case of Canada. Ecological Indicators 24, 366–374.Google Scholar
Kissinger, M and Dickler, S (2016) Interregional bio-physical connections—A ‘footprint family’ analysis of Israel's beef supply system. Ecological Indicators, 69, 882–891.10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.05.024Google Scholar
Kissinger, M and Haim, A (2008) Urban hinterlands—the case of an Israeli town ecological footprint. Environment, Development and Sustainability 10(4), 391–405.10.1007/s10668-006-9071-2Google Scholar
Kloppenburg, J Jr, Hendrickson, J and Stevenson, GW (1996) Coming in to the foodshed. Agriculture and Human Values, 13(3), 33–42.10.1007/BF01538225Google Scholar
Kloppenburg, J, Lezberg, S Jr, De Master, K, Stevenson, GW and Hendrickson, J (2000) Tasting food, tasting sustainability: Defining the attributes of an alternative food system with competent, ordinary people. Human Organization 59(2), 177–186.10.17730/humo.59.2.8681677127123543Google Scholar
Lea, E (2005) Food, health, the environment and consumers’ dietary choices. Nutrition & Dietetics 62, 21–25.Google Scholar
Mekonnen, MM and Hoekstra, AY (2012) A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products. Ecosystems 15(3), 401–415.Google Scholar
Metcalf, SS and Widener, MJ (2011) Growing buffalo's capacity for local food: A systems framework for sustainable agriculture. Applied Geography 31(4), 1242–1251.10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.01.008Google Scholar
Milài Canals, L, Cowell, SJ, Sim, S and Basson, L (2007) Comparing domestic versus imported apples: A focus on energy use. Environmental Science & Pollution Research International 14(5), 338–344.Google Scholar
Moore, J, Kissinger, M and Rees, WE (2013) An urban metabolism and ecological footprint assessment of metro vancouver. Journal of Environmental Management 124, 51–61.Google Scholar
Moreau, TL, Moore, J and Mullinix, K (2012) Planning and policy for climate action in British Columbia, Canada: Putting agricultural greenhouse gas mitigation on local government agendas. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development 2(02), 247–259.Google Scholar
Mullinix, K, Dorward, C, Sussmann, C, Polasub, W, Smukler, S, Chiu, C, Rallings, A, Feeney, C and Kissinger, M (2016) The Future of our Food System: Report on the Southwest BC Bioregional Food System Design Project. British Columbia, Canada: Institute for Sustainable Food Systems, Kwantlen Polytechnic University.Google Scholar
Ominski, KH, Boadi, DA, Wittenberg, KM, Fulawka, DL and Basarab, J (2007) Estimates of enteric methane emissions from cattle in Canada using the IPCC Tier-2 methodology. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 87(3), 459–467.Google Scholar
Pelletier, N, Arsenault, N and Tyedmers, P (2008) Scenario modeling potential Eco-efficiency gains from a transition to organic agriculture: Life cycle perspectives on Canadian canola, corn, soy, and wheat production. Environmental Management 42, 989–1001.10.1007/s00267-008-9155-xGoogle Scholar
Pelletier, N, Audsley, E, Brodt, S, Garnett, G, Henriksson, P, Kendall, K, Kramer, K, Murphy, D, Nemecek, T, Troell, M. (2011) Energy intensity of agriculture and food systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 36(July), 223–246.Google Scholar
Peters, CJ, Bills, NL, Lembo, AJ, Wilkins, JL and Fick, GW (2009a) Mapping potential foodsheds in New York state: A spatial model for evaluating the capacity to localize food production. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24(01), 72–84.Google Scholar
Peters, CJ, Bills, NL, Wilkins, JL and Fick, GW (2009b) Foodshed analysis and its relevance to sustainability. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24(01), 1–7.Google Scholar
Peters, CJ, Bills, NL, Lembo, AJ, Wilkins, JL and Fick, GW (2012) Mapping potential foodsheds in New York state by food group: An approach for prioritizing which foods to grow locally. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 27(02), 125–137.Google Scholar
Pimental (2008) Food energy and Society.Google Scholar
Rees, WE (1992) Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban economics leaves out. Environment and Urbanization 4(2), 121–130.10.1177/095624789200400212Google Scholar
Rees, WE (1997) Urban ecosystems: The human dimension. Urban Ecosystems 1(1), 63–75.Google Scholar
Selfa, T and Qazi, J (2005) Place, taste, or face-to-face? Understanding producer-consumer networks in ‘local’ food systems in Washington State. Agriculture and Human Values 22, 451.10.1007/s10460-005-3401-0Google Scholar
Smith, A and MacKinnon, JB. (2007) The 100 Mile Diet. Canada: Random House.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada (2011) 2011 Census of Agriculture. Available at Web site http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ca-ra2011/Google Scholar
Statistics Canada (2003a) Manure Storage in BC, Farm Environmental Management in Canada, Article 1 in Manure Storage in Canada (catalogue No. 21-021 MIE).Google Scholar
Statistics Canada (2003b) Livestock Feed Requirements Study 1999–2001.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada (2014) CANSIM (Database) Agriculture [Internet]. Accessed 2014. Available at: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a33?lang=eng&spMode=master&themeID=920&RT=TABLEGoogle Scholar
Statistics Canada (2016) The Canadian CHASS (Computing in Humanities and Social Science) ‘Trade Analyser Database’. Available at http://datacentre.chass.utoronto.ca/t.rade/Google Scholar
Steen-Olsen, K, Weinzettel, J, Cranston, G, Ercin, AE and Hertwich, EG (2012) Carbon, land, and water footprint accounts for the European Union: Consumption, production, and displacements through international trade. Environmental Science & Technology 46(20), 10883–10891.Google Scholar
Stossel, Z, Kissinger, M and Meir, A (2014) Multi scale approach for analyzing urban sustainability. Land Use Policy 41, 498–505.Google Scholar
Tukker, A, Bulavskaya, T, Giljum, S, de Koning, A, Lutter, S, Simas, M, Stadler, K and Wood, R (2014) The Global Resource Footprint of Nations. Carbon, water, land and materials embodied in trade and final consumption, Leiden/Delft/Vienna/Trondheim.Google Scholar
University of California Davis – UCDavis (2017) Agricultural and Resources Economics. Available at https://coststudies.ucdavis.edu/current/Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture USDA- NASS (2000) Agricultural Chemical Usage 1999 fruits and nuts Summary.Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture USDA- NASS (2005a) Agricultural Chemical Usage 2004 Field Crops Summary.Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture USDA (2005b) National Agricultural Statistics Service. Agricultural Chemical Usage 2005 Fruit Summary.Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture – USDA (2006) National Agricultural Statistics Service Agricultural Chemical Usage Field Crops Summary.Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture USDA- NASS (2007) Agricultural Chemical Usage 2006 vegetables Summary.Google Scholar
US Department of Agriculture USDA –ERS (2011) Available at http://quickstats.nass.usda.govGoogle Scholar
US Department of Agriculture USDA-ERS (2008a) Field crops fuel use survey.Google Scholar
USDA-ERS (2008b) Field crops fuel use survey (personal correspondence with Mr Bill McBride USDA).Google Scholar
Vogt, RA and Kaiser, LL (2008) Still a time to act: A review of institutional marketing of regionally-grown food. Agriculture and Human Values 25, 241.Google Scholar
Wackernagel, M (1998) The ecological footprint of Santiago de Chile. Local Environment 3(1), 7–25.Google Scholar
Wackernagel, M and Rees, W (1998) Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth (No. 9), British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
Webb, J, Williams, AG, Hope, E, Evans, D and Moorhouse, E (2013) Do foods imported into the UK have a greater environmental impact than the same foods produced within the UK? The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18(7), 1325–1343.10.1007/s11367-013-0576-2Google Scholar
Weber, CL and Matthews, HS (2008) Food-miles and the relative climate impacts of food choices in the United States. Environmental Science and Technology 15;42(10), 3508–3513.Google Scholar
Wood, S and Cowie, A (2004) A Review of Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors for Fertiliser Production (Cooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse Accounting). Available at www.ieabioenergy-task38.org/publications/GHG_Emission_Fertilizer%20Production_July2004.pdfGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Kissinger et al. supplementary material

Kissinger et al. supplementary material
Download Kissinger et al. supplementary material(File)
File 75.6 KB