La route des paniers

Abstract

Tous droits réservés © Cahiers de géographie du Québec, 2012 Cahiers de géographie du Québec Mots-clésCircuits de proximité, mode de transport, bilan énergétique, organisation locale, pratiques spatiales. AbstractConsumers, producers and local communities are showing increasing interest in local food distribution systems (LFS) because they are seen as contributing to the three interrelated dimensions of sustainable development: social, economic and environmental. However, some recent studies strongly question the environmental benefits of LFS in terms of energy efficiency. These same research papers use schematic simulations and analysis to demonstrate that methods of transport have a greater influence than the food miles travelled. They also argue that, due to economies of scale, better energy efficiency is achieved through mass distribution of industrial products. From measurements made in a variety of local food systems that deliver fruit and vegetable boxes, our own analysis shows that the energy efficiency of these local distribution systems is in fact comparable with those used for mass distribution. Furthermore, the food delivery systems we studied are characterized by local level or small-scale delivery networks, neither of which are taken into account in studies based on averages that ignore real everyday spatial practices of producers and consumers. KeywordsLocal food systems, method of transport, energy efficiency balance, organization of local systems, spatial practices. ResumenLos circuitos alimenticios de proximidad, puesto que participan al desarrollo durable en sus tres dimensiones -social, económica y ambiental -son objeto del interés progresivo de consumidores, de productores agrícolas y de colectividades territoriales. Sin embargo, varios trabajos recientes impugnan las supuestas virtudes de los circuitos próximos : su contribución a un menor gasto energético en su distribución. Brevemente, esas investigaciones muestran que el medio de transporte importa más que los kilómetros recorridos y que la distribución alimentaria de masa en circuitos largos a escala económica -presenta mejores balances energéticos que los circuitos próximos. Mostramos en este artículo, sobre la base de medidas efectuadas de los diversos modos de distribución de canastas de frutas y de legumbres que, en términos de eficiencia energética, el rendimiento de los circuitos cortos es comparable al de los más largos. Efectivamente, los circuitos próximos estudiados se traducen en esfuerzos de organización local, o a escala de pequeñas redes territoriales, de lo que no pueden testimoniar los estudios hechos sobre medianas que ignoran las prácticas espaciales concretas de los actores, ya sean estos agricultores o consumidores. Palabras clavesCircuitos próximos, medio de transporte, balance energético, organización local, prácticas espaciales.

Foodmiles: The Logistics of Food Chains Applied to Food Quality Schemes

“…Furthermore, there is a lack of consensus in the literature about the environmental impact of Short Food Supply Chains (SFSC), and of short-distance value chains more generally. Schlich and Fleissner (2005) pointed out the role of value chain organization and found a larger carbon impact of SFSC compared to conventional value chains, while Pimentel et al (2008) and Mundler and Rumpus (2012) supported the lower carbon impact of SFSC. Coley et al (2009) defined threshold distances between producer and consumer above which the carbon impact of SFSC products exceeds that of conventional ones.…”

Territory in urban food policies: the case of Spain

“…As for nutrition, there are scales of minimums related to the physical and social fact, as well as others with a wider range of characteristics from the spheres in which the production, distribution and consumption of food take place (Tecco et al, 2017). At the same time, the properties of the food space can be understood as the distance covered by the food from its place of production to its place of consumption (Mundier and Rumpus, 2012;Timpanaro et al, 2018); as the direction and intensity of the flow of material and energy that is activated by food (Hedberg, 2020); as the area of supply from which food is obtained (Peters et al, 2009;Galzki et al, 2017;Zasada et al, 2019;Miller and Mann, 2020); or as the sphere bounded by the relations that coalesce around the food systems (Goodman, 2015;Blay-Palmer et al, 2018).…”

Vers une complémentarité des alternatives alimentaires : relocalisation des activités et écologisation des pratiques au sein de trois alternatives de distribution à Bruxelles

“…Au niveau socio-économique, la réduction du nombre d'intermédiaires serait génératrice d'une meilleure répartition de la valeur ajoutée et d'un mieux vivre pour les petits producteurs, d'une part. D'autre part, la proximité relationnelle liée aux pratiques de vente directe serait créatrice de liens sociaux et d'une plus grande transparence sur la qualité des produits, permettant le maintien de la confiance entre les acteurs de la chaîne alimentaire (Mundler et Rumpus, 2012 ;Praly et al, 2014 ;Forssell et Lankoski, 2015 ;Lamine, 2015 ;Boutry et Ferru, 2016). À nouveau, des analyses ont relativisé la capacité des circuits courts et de proximité à répondre au problème de la rentabilité (Ilbery et Maye, 2005 ;Jarosz, 2008) ou soulignent les difficultés de ces systèmes à résoudre la tension entre subsistance des producteurs et accessibilité des produits (Guthman et al, 2006).…”