Alternative food networks (AFNs) are growing in number and relevance in Germany. Those networks include new models of production and distribution, such as food cooperatives (FoodCoops), self-harvest gardens or community-supported agriculture (CSA) schemes. AFNs, as an alternative to conventional food supply systems, are characterized by a close producer-consumer interaction.They are typically located within urban or peri-urban areas. The study aims to identify the rationale and motivation of urban residents in participating in AFNs and developing a consumer typology.We also assess whether AFNs potentially lead to collective action with societal impact. Therefore, we conducted a qualitative content analysis based on 18 interviews with members of existing AFN projects in three German metropolitan regions. Our results revealed that the willingness of urban consumers to participate in AFNs is driven by a broad range of motives. They include personal desire for high-quality food (in terms of taste or freshness) and health reasons, but also political or environmental motives (opposition to conventional agriculture or short transport distances).Furthermore, consumers often want to support a certain farmer and his/her philosophy or they appreciate the community-building aspect. Three different consumer types were derived from the motive combinations. Many consumers communicated a sense of belonging to a societal movement, however, our study revealed a lack of organization and collective action. Although AFNs can influence the consumption patterns of individuals, their potential to induce social change and to challenge traditional models of consumption in the near future does not appear to be high. K E Y W O R D Salternative food supply, consumer motivation, consumer typology, local food, qualitative research, societal change

Global challenges such as climate change, increasing urbanization and a lack of transparency of food chains, have led to the development of innovative urban food production approaches, such as rooftop greenhouses, vertical farms, indoor farms, aquaponics as well as production sites for edible insects or micro-algae. Those approaches are still at an early stage of development and partly unknown among the public. The aim of our study was to identify the perception of sustainability, social acceptability and ethical aspects of these new approaches and products in urban food production. We conducted 19 qualitative expert interviews and applied qualitative content analysis. Our results revealed that major perceived benefits are educational effects, revaluation of city districts, efficient resource use, exploitation of new protein sources or strengthening of local economies. Major perceived conflicts concern negative side-effects, legal constraints or high investment costs. The extracted acceptance factors deal significantly with the "unknown". A lack of understanding of the new approaches, uncertainty about their benefits, concerns about health risks, a lack of familiarity with the food products, and ethical doubts about animal welfare represent possible barriers. We conclude that adaptation of the unsuitable regulatory framework, which discourages investors, is an important first step to foster dissemination of the urban food production approaches.

No abstract

The paper offers insights into the acceptability of ethical issues in poultry production and how this situation provides an opportunity to transform the prevailing system into a more sustainable one. The survey among German consumers reveals that killing day-old chicks is a well-known practice and is rated as "very problematic". In contrast, dual-purpose chickens are mostly unknown but are considered a positive alternative to killing day-old chicks (after the concept has been explained). Consumer clusters were identified regarding purchasing criteria for dual-purpose chickens, purchasing routines and socioeconomic factors. Three of the five clusters-the perfectionists, idealists, and realists-turned out to be potential buyers. To develop a suitable marketing strategy, it is recommended that the added value of dual-purpose chickens be comprehensibly communicated. From a multi-level perspective, rearing dual-purpose chickens has a competitive disadvantage compared to system-compliant alternatives (in-ovo sexing, "lay hen brothers"). Through increasing external pressure, the different alternatives can jointly contribute to a regime shift.