chapter 3 inventory of local food systems

Project CP/59 - “Instruments and institutions to develop local food systems”
farmers markets have different histories: either they are governed by a local
action group, connected to the village whereas in other cases farmers themselves
rule the market. Part of them is really strict on selling only own produce, while in
other cases, the difference with a conventional market is hardly noticeable.
Classic farmers markets give producers the opportunity to sell directly to the
consumer without any middlemen, being in direct contact with consumers and
other producers. We selected three fruit producers, selling altogether on eight
different markets, representative for the different present properties on farmers
markets.
Fourth, to get data from LFS, we choose for a multiple case study approach, combining
in-depth interviews and questionnaires. The list of interview questions was composed in
relation to the selected parameters. In a team of two researchers, in-depth interviews
where done on location. Throughout those interviews, a space of trust evolved: a
resulting open dialogue provided additional information. As the addressed individuals
were given free space to talk, the generated information has been handled as essential in
the data processing, especially with regard to social impacts. Additionally, network
mapping was performed with all members of the different case studies.
Besides the four cases of LFS, an MFS was addressed to enable the comparison of
indicators between both systems. Within the MFS, we had contacts with the responsible
persons at supermarket level and we could track some of the producers for meat,
vegetables and fruits thanks to information given at auction level and knowledge of the
producers in Flanders. Data and assumptions on price and income values, energy uses
and carbon dioxide emissions, transportation distances and other parameters were
besides those interviews collected from an additional variety of sources: suppliers of
food transport and storage techniques, literature, internet, experts, etc.
Fifth, through calculations for the different studied food systems, the selected indicators
have been tested on their validity and practicability. In the discussion we address issues
on data collection and on the calculation of the different impact indicators in relation to
their practical use. For the case studies we also address the observed differences and
similarities between LFS and MFS.
2.3. Economic indicators
2.3.1. Economic indicator I: the local multiplier 3 effect
Sacks (2002) states that local spending strengthens rural economies by increasing their
resilience to external shocks, diversifying their income basis and increasing internal
economic linkages. The local multiplier 3 (LM3) effect measures money expenditure,
describing where the money goes to at the same time. It is local because it is for local,
microeconomic use. Three stands for the first three rounds of spending being measured.
First, the initial incomes are measured, then how this income is spent, and in round 3
one measures how much of the local spending is re-spent locally. Summing the amount
of money from all three rounds, and dividing it by the initial income then makes up the
SPSD II - Part I - Sustainable production and consumption patterns - Agro-Food 27