Argumentary

Argumentaire
Argumentary / Argumentario
En faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit
ANATOL
E
ARGUMENTAIRE en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit
Remerciements
Prface
Remerciements
Cet ouvrage a t conduit sous la direction de Pascal DAGRON, charg de mission lAssociation des Chambres dAgriculture de lArc Atlantique et Henrique ALBERGARIA, professeur lUniversit de Coimbra.
Auteurs :
> Henrique ALBERGARIA (rdacteur en chef) > Maria JOO MORGADO > Alfredo SIMES > Ana MADALENO > Tamara GUIRAO > Pascal DAGRON > Elisabeth UMINSKI
Expert associ :
> Rmi MER, consultant
Avec la collaboration de :
> Laurent MAGOT > Sylvie GUILLO
Traduction :
> Version anglaise : Sarah BEIGEL > Version espagnole : Christina MAIDAGAN
Cofinanc avec lappui de lUnion europenne FEDER - Programme Espace Atlantique
INVESTIR DANS NOTRE FUTUR COMMUN
Prface
Prface
vec des populations de plus en plus vigilantes sur leur alimentation, les collectivits ont relay cette demande des consommateurs de produire local ou de consommer local. Les collectivits nont pas comptence organiser les producteurs, les transformateurs ou les distributeurs, ni le savoir-faire (voir Guide des bonnes Pratiques) qui conditionne le bon fonctionnement de cette nouvelle conomie de proximit. Le projet ANATOLE a dmontr que les rouages ncessaires au dveloppement de lconomie de proximit passaient par la rencontre entre les reprsentants des gouvernements locaux avec les reprsentants dorganismes de dveloppement. Dans ce creuset cratif, comment installer une gouvernance o les diffrents acteurs aient la possibilit de sy retrouver ? Comment fabriquer cette bonne gouvernance sachant que les Rgions atlantiques ont des cadres politiques varis ? Comment cette bonne gouvernance peut tre dmontre sachant que les acteurs de lconomie de proximit comptent davantage sur eux-mmes et quil est parfois difficile de les faire entrer dans le creuset ? Comment les gouvernements locaux peuvent user de leur force stratgique - travers les politiques publiques- pour accompagner le dveloppement de lconomie de proximit ? Comment les Rgions atlantiques peuventelles devenir un espace o les ressources naturelles locales soient valorises localement ? Comment les instances europennes peuvent introduire, grce cette conomie mergente, des moyens dquilibrage entre des productions destines lexportation, tout en dveloppant une conomie aux approches autarciques ? Toutes ces questions sont poses aux diffrentes instances qui auront se lancer dans le dveloppement ou laccompagnement de lconomie de proximit. Louvrage ci-aprs ne rpond qu certaines de ces questions, car lconomie de proximit est encore mergente dans les Rgions atlantiques. Il a cependant lintrt de les poser, sachant que chaque territoire pourra y rpondre avec les moyens qui sont les siens. LEurope a des atouts jouer dans cette nouvelle conomie pour en faire profiter les territoires. Pascal Dagron, Chef du projet ANATOLE
Sommaire
Plan
Argumentaire - Version franaise Argumentary English version Argumentario Versin en Espaol Le projet ANATOLE 10 67 122 180
Sommaire
Introduction 11 12 68 69 123 124
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Quest-ce que lconomie de proximit ? Quels bnfices apporte lconomie de proximit au dveloppement des territoires ? Qui sont les stakeholders de lconomie de proximit ? La demande et le comportement des consommateurs Loffre de produits agricoles de proximit Le rle des associations issues de la socit Lintervention de lUE et des gouvernements sociaux Gouvernance au niveau local et conomie de proximit Perspectives pour lconomie de proximit lhorizon 2020
16 21 24 34 38 42 48 57
73 78 81 91 95 99 105 113 118 121
128 133 136 146 150 154 160 169 175 178
Lenjeu de lconomie de proximit pour les villes de lArc Atlantique 62 Conclusion 65
Chapitre 1 : Les politiques publiques des collectivits
ANG.
Political argumentary
for the Economy of proximity development
Introduction ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
Introduction
This document is one of the outcomes of the ANATOLE project. It targets councillors from all local and regional authorities and it presents the mechanisms which promote the Economy of Proximity. This report is compiled using published information on this subject, but also experiences drawn from the activities of the ANATOLE project, which can also be found in the Good practices Guide. This report, which promotes a type of governance for the development of the Economy of Proximity, has two objectives: To show that political influence can facilitate its development, because taking into account the needs of local citizens who increasingly demand local products will have a multiplier effect (social, economic and political). To support the local authorities who wish to develop the Economy of Proximity by providing a collection of innovative and successful practical experiments. This report is directed at local and regional authorities who are able to use the Economy of Proximity in their local area for school meals, food services (hospitals, universities, prisons ...). This report demonstrates that local and regional authorities are excellent initiators of the Economy of Proximity. It is also important to note that the joint efforts by public and private initiatives in favour of a consumption based on the Economy of Proximity are essential. The implication of existing agents (food manufacturers, logistics systems, storage platforms) in the Economy of Proximity is essential for its success with regards to optimal conditions in terms of product cost, compliance with hygiene conditions, traceability, commercial transparency and respect of the commercial Procurement Code. These conditions are necessary so that the Economy of Proximity can become an increasing and more significant activity in different communities. Without the use of tested and efficient means, local and regional authorities would have to make significant financial investments in order to set up the Economy of Proximity. Without this, short supply chains would be able to meet these needs, but they would only be able to handle a small part of what the local population consumes in terms of local products, particularly food. Therefore, the challenge is to create conditions for a public-private governance in the spirit of sustainable development, in order to instate a new local economic, environmental and social value chain. Only the political power of local and regional authorities can help achieve this.
68
ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit
ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
1. What is the Economy of Proximity?

When speaking of the Economy of Proximity, one refers to an activity which relies on the proximity between producers and consumers. But what specifically characterises this proximity? The concept .G N A of proximity is usually associated with geographical distance and physical space. However, proximity is a more complex concept which refers to both the mathematical notion of space and the daily routines of the local inhabitants and the relationships between individuals in society. These multiple interpretations of the notion of proximity are also present in its application to a local area, and this diversity of content is highlighted by forms that identify ways in which this concept is set out.
yratnemugra lacitiloP
y tGeographical imixoproximity rp fo moproximity nocE eht rof 1.1. andy organised tnempoleved
Producer Functional proximity Geographic proximity Organised proximity Relational proximity
Considering, for example, the relationship between producers and consumers, two types of proximity can be identified: geographic proximity (coupled with physical space) and organised proximity (social and relational) (Figure 1).
Figure 1 : Geographical proximity and organised proximity
Organisational system
Cognitive resources Mediation system
Consumer
Source: N. Bon (2009)
Geographical proximity takes account of metric distance or time and the specificities of the local area to which it is applied. Organised proximity refers to the relational distance between two people in terms of the potential for coordination and can be defined as the capacity for interaction which an organisation gives to its members. (Rallet and Torre 2004). Two people are said to be close when they have certain similarities, that is to say, they share a common representational system, which facilitates their ability to interact (Rallet and Torre 2004).
1.2. Economy of Proximity, flow and identity

More specifically, the concept of the Economy of Proximity can be broken down according to the following typology: >G eographical Economy of Proximity (GEP): for GEP, all production and the consumption associated with it, must take place within a small area (ie. within a radius of several tens of kilometres). Within GEP, the main criterion is the distance between the place of production and place of consumption. >E conomy of Proximity of Flows (EPF): EPF takes into account the number of intermediaries between the producer of the product (from land or sea) and the consumer. EPF should generally be limited to two parties: the producer and the consumer. The facilitator or mediator who sometimes intervenes between producers and consumers but does not play a commercial role is not usually considered as an intermediary.
ARGUMENTAIRY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit
69
> Economy of Proximity of Identity (EPI): EPI is based on a recognition mechanism through which the consumer emphasises and gives value to a particular product. This works well with product labels or trademarks (with or without an indication of the geographical origin). In EPI, it is the consumer or intermediary who gives the identity to the product and thus defines a form of Economy of Proximity which is different from the other two.
Figure 2 : Different approaches to the Economy of Proximity
ANG.
Identity Proximity Geography Flow
Economy of Proximity and the local economy The term Economy of Proximity includes that which is produced locally, processed locally and consumed locally. Within this framework, production and the associated consumption must take place within a small area (ie. within a radius of several tens of kilometres). The term local economy refers to what is produced locally, but not necessarily consumed locally. So, an industrial process can be local but not represent the Economy of Proximity. For example, a canning plant that employs several hundred people in a local factory and sells canned goods throughout Europe is a player in the local economy but not in the Economy of Proximity. The local economy includes the Economy of Proximity but is not limited to it.
1.3. Short supply chains: what is their relationship with the Economy of Proximity?
There is a strong relationship between the concept of short supply chains and the concept of the Economy of Proximity. Short supply chains are a selling system based limiting the number of intermediaries between the producers and the consumers (with a maximum of one intermediary) (Francis et al. 2000; ANDA, 2001). Often, the constraint of geographical proximity is also present in this, although there are some exceptions such as sales over the internet. So people speak about localised food systems where the short supply chains are defined taking into account the scale of proximity. This means that the production and the consumption occur in the same area (Marchal, 2008). In addition, short supply chains are set up as a response to a growing demand for local products, for tradition and authenticity, restoring the social links between consumer and producer, highlighting the fresh, innovative
70
.GNA
and nutritional qualities of the products in question as well as a better understanding of the products and how they were produced valorisant les qualits de fracheur, dinnovation et de qualit nutritionnelle des productions en question ainsi que la connaissance des produits et de leurs modes de production (http://agriculture.gouv.fr/ Circuits-courts,11905).
Figure 3 : Setting up a direct link between producer and consumer.
ytimixorp fo ymonocE eht rof tnempoleved

In France, the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries gives the following definition of short supply chains: a method for the commercialisation of agricultural products which is carried out either by direct selling from producer to consumer or through indirect selling providing there is only one intermediary http://alimentation. gouv.fr/circuit-court . http://alimentation.gouv.fr/circuit-court .
Figure 4 : Types of commercialisation in short supply chains
Direct sellings
Producer sells to the consumer
Indirect sellings
Producer sells to an intermediary
- Direct selling at the farms (vegetables boxes, shops in the farms etc) - Home sales. - Sales in farmers markets. - Internet sales.
- Selling to a retail outlet. - Selling to public catering (school canteen) - Selling to private catering -
Source : http://agriculture.gouv.fr
71
All of these sales, direct and indirect, can be centralised through a collective sales outlet or a collective platform that brings together produce from several producers, enabling them to increase the volume and variety of products offered to customers. The development of new forms of marketing for short supply chains (the use of the internet, producer networks) represent various producer responses towards changing consumer preference for products and related services, including online orders and home delivery.
ANG.
For more information ...
>A ubry, C. ; Chiffoleau, Y. (2009), Le dveloppement des circuits courts et lagriculture priurbaine : histoire, volution et questions actuelles, Innovation agronomiques, n 5, p. 53-67. >H olt (2005), Local foods and local markets: Strategies to grow the local sector in the UK, Anthropology of Food (online).
>M archal, G. eds. (2008), Les circuits courts agroalimentaires, Bien Manger sur les Territoires, Educagri Editions. >M inistre de lAgriculture et de la Pche (2009), Renforcer le lien entre agriculteurs et consommateurs. Plan daction pour dvelopper les circuits courts. www.agriculture.gouv.pt >B on, N. (2009), Les circuits courts : des systmes localiss ? Le cas de la vente en circuits courts par Internet en Rhne Alpes, Mmoire de Fin dtudes, sous la direction de Carole Chazoule et Ccile Praly, ISARA-Lyon. >R allet A., Torre A. (2004), Proximit et localisation, conomie Rurale, n 280, pp. 25-41 >T orre A. (2004), Introduction : proximit et territoires, conomie Rurale, no. 280, pp. 2-7. >M inistre de lAgriculture, de lAlimentation, de la Ruralit et de lAmnagement du Territoire, http://agriculture.gouv.fr/types-de-circuits-courts,11911
72
ENGLISH > Chapter 2 : What are the benefits of the Economy of Proximity? ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
2. What are the benefits of the Economy of Proximity?

Above all, the question may be asked what the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products can bring to regional development. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to adopt a wider view-point, to look at food as part of a more complex system (the food system) consisting of all the activities and agents implicated in the food chain, from farm to consumption. Figure 5 : The food system
.GNA
Food system Socio-cultural system

Production Waste recycling
Persons
Environmental and natural resources system
Food retailing
Consumption
Political systems Economical systems
Source: San Francisco Food Systems (San Francisco Department of Public Health, 2005)
With this approach, promoting the Economy of Proximity essentially means promoting the close connection between producers and consumers, in terms of geographical proximity, flow and identity. This process has several direct effects on the local area: The re-localisation of economic flows, especially concerning agriculture and food production. A positive impact on the environment for ecosystems and the protection of biodiversity, water quality and landscapes, resulting from an increasing dialogue between producers and consumers. An impact in terms of land use, by balancing the different activities of the local area: economic activities, food production, housing, the environment (ecosystem). A new equilibrium may increase the attractiveness of an area. An answer to the expectations and needs of the population, not only in terms of quality, taste and safety of the products, but also in terms of social perception, the image of farmers and their quality of life. The Economy of Proximity here plays a social role. (Bertin, Dcima, & Nicolas, 2010)
2.1. The re-localisation of economic flows

These effects are mainly concerned with agriculture and food production, but they also concern the tourism industry and the forest product industry which have many permanent activities and provide stable local jobs. > The multiplying effect on spending and employment The increase in sales by agricultural producers has a direct economic effect which corresponds to an increase of their income, but it also has an indirect effect brought about by the farmers additional consumption of goods and services from other sectors, thanks to the additional income received. Therefore, this increase in the capacity of
73
ENGLISH > Chapter 2 : What are the benefits of the Economy of Proximity?
consumption and investment by farmers results in an increase of income for other activities. This process does have a few more iterations because, in turn, these activities also consume, invest and pay wages. This indirect effect is linked to the notion of a leverage effect on expenses: the increase in spending on local products will have an impact on the local economy which is more than proportional to the increases in income. This multiplier effect is all the more significant because the part played by local services and capital and consumer goods increases, leading to an increased proportion of income circulating in the local economy.
Figure 6 : The multiplier effect of spending
ANG.
+ $1

+ $1,47
Produtor Local
A study in Iowa, USA, found that for every additional dollar spent with local producers, an increase in their sales of $1.58 occurs and for every additional dollar earned, an additional income of $1.47 dollars occurs for other local activities (Otto & Varner, 2005). There is also a leverage effect on employment as additional jobs are created to meet the increasing demand for agricultural products. The increase in consumption by farming households and the consumption of intermediate products derived from the agricultural sector, promotes the creation of indirect jobs in non-agricultural activities.
Figure 7: The multiplier effect of employment
Agricultural employment
Employment in other sectors
Source: Otto & Varner, 2005
A study in Illinois, USA, evaluates this multiplier of employment at 1.67, meaning that for every ten jobs created at farm level, six to seven additional jobs are created in other local economic activities (Swenson, 2010). Moreover, when the share of the local component in an areas overall consumption increases, that is to say, when products coming from elsewhere are substituted with local products purchased from local enterprises, this has a positive effect on the balance of local trade.
74
Figure 8: Substituting importations
.GNA
or

Source : Otto & Varner, 2005
A study by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, estimates that the proportion of income that stays in the area where products are produced is three times higher when they are sold by local businesses owned by local residents, than by corporate chains (Institute for Local Self-Reliance, 2003).
2.2. positive impact on the environment

The agricultural sector is highly dependent on limited resources such as water, oil, and energy. Moreover, the heavy use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides causes the contamination of water channels which is very worrying. Intensive agriculture is highly mechanised and inevitably consumes a lot of fuel and energy, it pollutes more and generates more greenhouse gas emissions. Small farms however, use more traditional techniques which are more labour-intensive. Note that organic systems are currently split between short and long supply chains. In addition, the increasing sustainability of agricultural systems has a beneficial effect on biodiversity, as it leads to a greater preservation of native species and a greater diversity of crops. However, the lack of organisation of the Economy of Proximity does generate energy consumption in the transport of the food products. Essentially because of a lack of organisation, the Economy of Proximity has a carbon footprint (from soil to plate) which is on average higher than longer channels (Grenelle de lEnvironnementFrench government initiative).
Figure 9: The impact on the environment
A truck consumes 71 litters of fuel for 1000km per ton and rejects 302kg of CO2 in the atmosphere A plane consumes 385 litters of fuel for 1000km per ton and rejects 1840kg of CO2 in the atmosphere A train consumes 16 litters of fuel for 1000km per ton and rejects 60kg of CO2 in the atmosphere
Source : Pirog, Van Pelt, Enshayan, & Cook, 2001
75
ENGLISH > Chapter 2 : What are the benefits of the Economy of Proximity?
2.3. The impact on land use

Land use and spatial planning can have an effect on the rapid development of the Economy of Proximity, and, conversely the development of an Economy of Proximity can contribute to establishing a new local balance between economic activities, food production, housing and the environment (protecting ecosystems). It can be stated, therefore, that there is a dialectical relationship between the Economy of Proximity and land use which highlights the importance of public policy in this field. The development of the Economy of Proximity can help ensure that a local area is seen as a place where there is a better quality of consumption (in terms of food quality and health of the population) and as an area whose residents have greater social and environmental responsibility. This positive image is an additional factor which adds to the attractiveness of an area for businesses and families alike. Moreover, spatial planning deals with finding a balance between different land uses, some for urban activities, others for the preservation of natural areas and agricultural zones. This management of land use has an important role in developing community relationships, especially in the context of rural development which is often presented as a means of taking back control of land by its inhabitants and local stakeholders. For this reason, access to agricultural land by farmers who do not have any land themselves and leaving agricultural land fallow become particularly important instruments for local planning. Some farmers do not have enough land, and without state intervention they are not able, for various reasons, to gain access to the land they need. Moreover, agricultural land continues to be lost: in France alone, 66,000 hectares of farmland are urbanised each year. Maintaining the balance between agricultural use (as an economic activity) and other land uses, is normally the responsibility of local authorities. This balance can be put it into practice in order to deal with land pressures and the uncontrollable growth of urbanisation. This definitely works in favour of the Economy of Proximity and environmental services (water, biodiversity), social services (leisure activities, landscapes, short supply chains ...) and civil protection services (soil erosion and landslides, fire protection ...).
ANG.
2.4. An answer to the expectations and needs of the population

Over the past 20 years, there has been a gradual shift in consumer preference concerning local agricultural products. This development is based on several factors: >F irst, the search for alternatives which can guarantee better food safety following the consecutive food crises in recent years. This search for safety has led consumers to give more value to the relationships of trust they can have with local producers, particularly concerning the quality and freshness of the food offered. >S econd, people are now more aware of the major impact that farming has on the environment, especially regarding climate change and the frequency of extreme weather conditions. >F inally, people are becoming progressively more aware of the social role played by proximity consumption on a local level and by fairly traded and socially responsible products. In this new context, farmers acquire a new role in societys eyes which helps to improve both their image and their lives in general. Even if it responds directly to consumer preference, the development of the Economy of Proximity is often limited due to the lack of control mechanisms between the demand (when there is a demand, but it is not fulfilled) and the supply (which has the capacity to produce more but cannot find outlets). In short, despite the positive image that the Economy of Proximity currently has, its successful development depends largely on the establishment of mechanisms that can facilitate the adjustment between supply and demand, these two levers can be put into place or stimulated by the local authorities in particular.
76
For more information ...

M. D. (2007). The Case for Local and Regional Food Marketing. Farm > Anderson, and Food Policy Project. C. E., Dcima, M., & Nicolas, J. (2010). Explorez le dveloppement > Bertin, territorial durable avec les circuits courts alimentaires. Loos-en-Gohelle: CERDD - Centre Ressource du Dveloppement Durable. Economics. (2008). LOCAL WORKS! Examining the impact of local business > Civic on the West Michigan economy. Austin : Civic Economics. D., & Varner, T. (2005). Consumers, Vendors, and the Economic Importance > Otto, of Iowa Farmers Markets: An Economic Impact Survey. Iowa: Regional Food Systems Working Group; Value Chain Partnerships for a Sustainable Agriculture. R., Van Pelt, T., Enshayan, K., & Cook, E. (2001). Food, Fuel, and Freeways: > Pirog, An Iowa perspective on how far food travels, fuel usage, and greenhouse gas emissions. Ames, Iowa: Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture - Iowa State University. Francisco Food Systems; San Francisco Foundation Community Initiative > San Funds; San Francisco Department of Public Health. (2005). 2005 San Francisco Colaborative Food System Assessment. San Francisco: San Francisco Food System. http://www.sffoodsystems.org/pdf/FSA-online.pdf D. (2010 Maro). Selected Measures of the Economic > Swenson, Values of Increased Fruit and Vegetable Production and Consumption in the Upper Midwest. From Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture: www.leopold.iastate.edu/
.GNA
77
ENGLISH > Chapter 3 : Who are the stakeholders of the Economy of Proximity?
3. Who are the stakeholders of the Economy of Proximity?

Who are the stakeholders of the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products? What kind of relationships do they have with one another? To answer these questions, this section will begin with an illustration of the Economy of Proximity (see Figure 10) which is seen as the result of the interaction between several individual or collective agents, such as the State, farmers, individual consumers, institutions from the community, etc..
Figure 10 :The stakeholders of the Economy of Proximity
Farmers Producers associations
ANG.

Offer
European Union Central Governments
Local governments
Local market
Community institutions
Public catering
Demand
Private catering
Final consumer
Commerce
3.1. Local governments and authorities

State intervention applies to economic and social fields, along with others. However, these state functions are no longer managed only by the central state. They also concern either regional and local levels of government and/ or the EU with the implementation of economic policies devised by the member states. But the State in particular is called upon to play a very important role in the Economy of Proximity. First, as legislator the State determines organisation systems and how local markets function: health, food safety, marketing, taxation. These are, amongst others, areas where the State establishes the rules that determine the dynamics of the market that the different agents must follow. Then, the authorities, especially at local level, are often involved as promoters, mediators, partners or backers of such initiatives as the Economy of Proximity.
78
ENGLISH > Chapter 3 : Who are the stakeholders of the Economy of Proximity? ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
Finally, the State and local authorities may themselves be a final consumer of the agricultural products produced by the Economy of Proximity, for example the products bought for public catering (schools, hospitals...). The vast .G N Amajority of farmers who take part in the Economy of Proximity are small-scale producers. These farmers
3.2. Farmers
do not have particular negotiating or organisational skills and so they only have access to short supply chains; they are limited to seasonal production which tends to lack diversity, owing to the nature of local agriculture. Furthermore, given that they are subject to specific legislation (social security, tax, etc.) that drastically restrict their range of outlets, these producers are in reality excluded from all organised sales channels. They are left with the option of direct selling either on stalls on the farm or roadside, at food fairs, farmers markets, etc. Therefore, currently, sales of agricultural products through short supply chains are actually quite low, even though in the case of fruit and vegetables in France, for example, this proportion can reach 7% of total sales. This largely explains why short supply chains, and in particular direct selling, are not very attractive for medium and large producers. There is no real competition among producers of different sizes, they are in fact rather complementary (local markets and global markets). Therefore, grouping smaller producers together is a particularly advantageous form of organisation to boost the Economy of Proximity. Together they have the capacity to produce on a scale that is sufficient enough to supply the market regularly with the necessary quantities to meet the demand. This system also encourages the establishment of more efficient distribution channels and makes it easier to meet hygiene and food safety certification requirements. Finally, grouping producers together gives them access to more organised selling channels (ie. supermarkets).
3.3. Consumers
The different consumer groups in local markets are very diverse, but they all have one thing in common- they get a very small proportion of products from these markets. They buy the majority of their food and agricultural products elsewhere, mainly in supermarkets. The individual consumer, for example, generally associates local products with fresh, better tasting and better quality products, made using traditional, more environmentally friendly methods. They also consider that the consumption of these products supports the local economy and the families of farmers (social aspect). Nevertheless, the individual consumer very often goes for other options because they consider this type of product more expensive, or they do not know where to purchase these goods, or they feel that the place of sale is too far away, or, finally, because they feel that the diversity of products available is not sufficient enough. To sum up, other systems for buying products offer greater variety, they are easier, faster and cheaper. In short, there is more variety, it is more convenient, faster and cheaper to buy goods through systems other than short supply chain systems. For public and private canteens and small businesses, buying their ingredients through local short supply chains is restricted due to the fact that the suppliers (small-scale farms) are not able to ensure a regular supply of agricultural products in terms of quantity and variety, and they have difficulty meeting regulatory requirements, especially regarding hygiene and safety standards. Public catering (school canteens, hospitals, etc.), is a particularly interesting case because it represents potentially a very large volume of sales that ultimately depends solely on political and economic decisions made by the local authority. However, the price of products is sometimes restricting and does not match the authorities budgetary specifications.
79
ENGLISH > Chapter 3 : Who are the stakeholders of the Economy of Proximity?
Figure 11 : Different types of consumers
ANG.
Private canteens Families
Small businesses School canteens
3.4. Community institutions
In recent years, there has been creation and growth of community organisations which aim to increase economic and social cohesion by contributing to the development of the Economy of Proximity. Most of these organisations are producer and consumer associations or partnerships between private sector and public sector entities. Their work often results in the creation of innovative commercialisation channels that aim to bring consumers and producers closer together. Studies and personal experiences suggest that the role of these organisations goes beyond the buying and selling of agricultural products because their existence relies on an awareness of societys real needs, and this creates favourable conditions for development of a sustainable Economy of Proximity.
Figure 12 : Different types of community institutions
Urban garden
Producers associations
Vegetables boxes
For more information

> Veenhuizen, E. R. (2006). Cities farming for the future: Urban Agriculture for Green and Productive Cities. IDRC. http://web.idrc.ca/ > Rallet A., Torre A. (2004), Proximit et localisation, conomie Rurale, 280. > Rpublique Franaise, Avis et Rapports du Conseil conomique, Social et Environnemental. > Lconomie de proximit : Une rponse aux dfis majeurs de la socit franaise, 2010, Rapport prsent par M. Pierre Martin. > Report of the Working Group on Local Food, Local Food, a Snapshot of the Sector, March 2003.
80
ENGLISH > Chapter 4 : Consumer demand and behaviour
4. Consumer demand and behaviour

The dynamic of the local food system can be seen through the operation of the market as a meeting place between supply and demand. And, like any other market, it is important to understand the behaviour of the demand, that is to say the attitude of the consumers towards the local products.
.GNA
4.1. Local products: consumer views
y or palways foable ym onlocal oc E eht rof >t Consumers imix are not to identify products tnempoleved
This consumer behaviour has been the subject of numerous studies which enable us to better understand what is happening in the market for local products.
The first issue is understanding exactly what the consumers associate with the term local products. This question was asked as part of an Irish study in which consumers were asked to say what they associated spontaneously with the term local products. The most frequent responses concerned agriculture and livestock products such as fruit, vegetables, meat and milk, and some processed foods such as dairy products, preserves, jams and meats. But the consumers also mentioned activities such as bakeries, delicatessens and gave the names of local businesses, even some which are in fact quite large and whose target market goes way beyond regional borders (Bord Bia - Irish Food Board , 2010).
Figure 13 : What do consumers associate with the term local products?
Also, when consumers are asked if they know the local products available in their area, a large majority say yes. This was demonstrated by a Canadian study in which 67% of those surveyed said they knew well (28%) or quite well (41%) the local products (Ipsos Reid, 2006).
81
Figura 14 : Do consumers know the local agricultural products available?

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 26% 41%
ANG.
22% 11%

Well Quite well A little No
Source : Ipsos Reid, 2006.
However, the same study found that even if consumers are aware of the existence of local agricultural products, they are not always able to recognise them. Even though many consumers can usually identify the origin of local agricultural products and differentiate them from products from a different origin, there is still a very significant proportion of consumers who do not notice the origin. About 49% of people surveyed say they normally know how to identify local agricultural products. However, 38% of consumers can rarely (33%) or never (5%) distinguish between products by identifying their place of production (Ipsos Reid, 2006).. Several other studies show that the usual methods used by consumers for identifying the origins of products are the label and the information displayed at the place of sale. Approximately 66% of people surveyed look for information on product labels and 32% look on the notices at the place of sale. Only 6% know the brand or supplier of local agricultural products without having to these other sources of information (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005). According to a Belgian study, around 69% of people surveyed said that at direct selling outlets, the information on labels is critical when making the decision to buy a product (Vandercammen, 2010). Fruit, vegetables, cheese and baked goods sold directly by their producers, without packaging and without tags are generally associated with local products (Bord Bia - Irish Food Board, 2010). This being said, most consumers have a strongly regionalised view of local products usually seeing the local area or region as the geographical origin of production. Older, more highly educated consumers with higher incomes are those who most often associate the local area or region with local products. However, consumers with a lower income associate local products more frequently with national production. (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005)..
82
> Fresh, good quality and better tasting products

According to an interesting Irish study, consumers consider that the most distinctive factors of local products are, on the one hand, the type of producer and on the other hand, the production techniques used during its preparation (Edge Bia - Irish Food Board, 2010). But in reality, the differences perceived by consumers between local products and other products are extensive and cover several aspects. Therefore, in the eyes of consumers, local products have a better reputation and a better taste than products from other origins. Consumers also consider that local products are better quality and are fresher than others. Moreover, most consumers believe that local agricultural products can guarantee better food safety, a concern that is becoming increasingly more important.
Figure 15 : Local products qualitative aspect
.GNA
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Traditional flavour better quality fresher better food safety

79% 67% 44% 65% 60%
53% 44%
fewer preservatives and artificial ingredients
better reputation
better taste
In the Irish study, 79% of people surveyed associate local products with traditional flavours that they knew as a child. In the same study, 67% of the consumers feel local products are better quality and 44% feel they are fresher (Bord Bia - Irish Food Board, 2010). Also in the Irish study, 65% of the consumers surveyed said that local products can guarantee better food safety and 60% believe they use fewer preservatives and artificial ingredients. In another study, 53% of people said that local products have a better reputation than those from other origins and 44% think they taste better (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005). The Belgian study analysed consumer behaviour in short supply chains and presents the following factors which determine the decision to use direct selling: the freshness (87%), taste (84%), proximity (80%) and quality (78%) of the products (Vandercammen, 2010).
> Environmentally friendly products

LThe environment is increasingly becoming a major concern of consumers which tends to be reflected in their buying habits with regards to agricultural products. Concepts such as foodmiles are often set up in response to the carbon footprint left by the food production and consumption systems.
83
In general, consumers feel that local products are more environmentally friendly than other types. The basis of this opinion comes from methods of production and distribution of local products.
Figure 16 :Are local products environmentally friendly?
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 72% 69%
ANG.
45%

A shorter distance to the point of sale Moins de fewer pesticides Better respect of the environment
About 72% of people surveyed said that local products are more friendly to the environment and travel a shorter distance to the point of sale than other products. (Bord Bia - Irish Food Board, 2010) Similarly, the study by Ipsos Reid found that 45% of consumers believe that locally produced vegetables and fruit use no chemical fertilisers or pesticides. 43% think they are more environmentally friendly than those from other origins. (Ipsos Reid, 2006). In the Vandercammen study, about 69% of people said that respect for the environment is a decisive factor in what motivates them to buy local products through direct selling. (Vandercammen, 2010)
> The social role of local products

To consumers, a distinctive trait of local agricultural products in relation to other products is their positive social contribution to the local economy and the support of local producers.
Figure 17 : Buying local products is also an act of social solidarity
For consumers, the main benefits associated with the consumption of local products, are linked to the fact that it directly benefits the local economy (71%) and more particularly the families of local agricultural producers (71%) (Ipsos Reid, 2006).
84
.GNA
The social or ethical aspect that the consumer associates with the consumption of local products is in part related to the image they have of the farmer and the type of agricultural system used. In the eyes of the consumers, there are two professional images of farmers which correspond to their subjective conceptions of, on the one hand, the traditional production system and on the other hand, agro-industry (Eider Arrieta - IKT, 2009). Therefore, in association with traditional production systems, the typical image of farmers refers to a professional class with few resources, poor living conditions and resulting in subsistence agriculture on farms with low productivity. This image, which is linked to childhood memories, often explains the positive social image that consumers have of consuming local products.
Figure 18 : Typical image of agricultural production
In contrast, the image associated with agro-industrial producers is an entrepreneurial vision of farming, where the producers work at the same rate as the market and are geared towards making a profit. The agro-industrial producer is responsible, almost exclusively, for providing the market with agricultural products. At the same time, the agro-industrial producer is subject to a lack of trust from the consumers and is associated with food safety problems, which is largely the result of a lack of visibility for consumers.
Figure 19 : Image of agro-industry
Consumers generally associate the term local products with fresh fruit and vegetables, but also with some processed foods such as cheese, jam, bread and pastries, provided they are produced in their local area or region by local producers and using a traditional production system. Consumers often consider that local products are fresher, higher in quality and taste better than products from other origins. They also consider that local products are more environmentally friendly. One of the main benefits linked to the consumption of local products is their social role in supporting the local economy and local producers in particular. However, a significant proportion of consumers cannot usually distinguish between local products and those from other origins.
85
4.2. Local products: consumer buying behaviour

Statistics and opinion polls are used to find out who the consumers of local products are and how much they buy. They also reveal why the buying of these products remains relatively modest.
> Which local products are most in demand?
Several studies can show us the local agricultural products which are most in demand by consumers and their motivations for making these purchases. In the Bord Bia study, the people surveyed said they bought mostly local vegetables, fruits and fish because in their opinion, when these products are local, they are fresher and better quality than products from other origins (Bord Bia - Irish Food Board, 2010). The Vandercammen study gives a more precise definition of these preferences. In all the direct selling systems analysed in this study (markets, local grocers, selling from the farm, etc..), the results showed that vegetables (57% to 97% depending on the type of supply chain) and dairy products (between 20% and 40%, excluding the sale of vegetable boxes and door to door selling) are the most popular products (Vandercammen, 2010).
ANG.
Figure 20 : Which local products do the consumers buy?

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Fruits and vegetables Fresh fish Fresh fruit Milk products Chicken Meat
80% 69% 64% 59% 53% 43%
The most frequently bought local products are vegetables (80%), fish (69%) and fruit (64%), because consumers feel that they are higher (53 % of people surveyed) or identical (41%) in quality compared to products from other origins. Only 1% of people surveyed said that local products are lower in quality (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005).
> A reduced sized market

It is important to look at the size of the market for local products, because this indicator shows, in an objective manner, the buying behaviour of consumers. It shows to what extent the generally positive image that local products have is reflected in the consumers buying habits. In fact, it can be noted that in all European countries, the amount of local agricultural products bought compared to the total amount of agricultural products bought by consumers remains relatively low (always below 10%). This remains true even when taking each of the most popular local agricultural products individually and comparing them to the total amount of sales of these products from all origins.
86
.GNA
France is the largest agricultural producer in Europe. In France, short supply chains are present in all agro-food sectors, especially fruit and vegetables where they represent 7% of the total of sales from all sources (including 4% from direct selling). Approximately 47% of farms process certain products and 16.3% use short supply chains for commercialisation (http://agriculture.gouv.fr).
> Why dont consumers buy local products ?

Figure 21: Reasons for not buying local products
35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
Disponibilit Prix plus lev L'origine ne compte pas Manque de temps
17% 14% 32%
These significant results which are perhaps a little surprising, raise questions about the reasons which lead consumers to give preference to products from other origins over local products. Many studies have examined consumer buying behaviour and very often they find that the main reasons why consumers do not buy local products is because they are not available where they normally buy their food, and also because they are higher in price compared to products from other origins.
7%
5%
5%
Prfrence
N'y pensent mme pas
Approximately 32% of people surveyed said they do not buy local products because they are not available from where they usually buy their food and 17% because local products are more expensive than other ones (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005). For about 14% of people surveyed, the origin of products (local production or other origins) does not influence their choice (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005). Only 5% of consumers surveyed do not buy local products because they prefer products from other origins (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005). About 64% of people surveyed said that they usually buy their food from a supermarket chain, and indicate that the main reasons for this are: location (38% of people surveyed), followed by price (33%) and diversity (21%). The quality of products is only mentioned by about 8% of people surveyed (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005).
> Price
Price is often seen as a contradictory element in the analysis. But the divide is mainly due to the distinction between consumers who often buy local products and those who do not buy them regularly. In the Belgian study, 77% of consumers who buy local agricultural products believe that the prices of these products are lower than others (Vandercammen, 2010).
87
However, when the same question is asked to consumers who do not buy local products, the results show that 17% said the price of local agricultural products is higher (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005). These results indicate that consumers often have a false perception of prices of local products sold through direct selling systems, compared to the prices of other products. Moreover, the price factor does not have a large direct impact on the buying behaviour of the consumers who usually buy local agricultural products because most consumers surveyed said they would continue to buy local products even if the prices increased.
ANG.
Figure 22 : Local products: the price factor
51%
60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Regularly

16% 19%
6%
7%
Most of the time
Rarely
Never
Depends on the price
Even if the price of local products increased, consumers of these products said they would continue to buy the same local products regularly (16%) or most of the time (51%) (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005). Moreover, when only considering the quality factor, 14% of consumers surveyed said they would continue to buy local products rather than buying products from other origins which are better quality but more expensive. In contrast, nearly 15% of people surveyed would never choose a local product if they have the alternative of choosing a better quality product, even if it is more expensive and from a different origin (Corporate Research Associates, Inc., 2005)
> Why is the demand for local products still relatively limited?
Price and availability are not the only important factors that explain the very low demand for local products compared to the demand for products from other origins. The results of many studies show a set of five factors that usually explain consumer behaviour (see Figure 23): T he first reason, already mentioned above, is that consumers often believe that products sold through short supply chains are more expensive than the same products purchased elsewhere. This is not always the case in reality, but it is often true. T he second reason is that the supply of local agricultural products is often considered as being poorly diversified and consumers are very reluctant to change their habits and change to only buying products that are in season. I n addition, many consumers overestimate the distance to get the farms or points of sale, especially if they are located in rural areas.
88
.GNA
F urthermore, consumers are unfamiliar with the short supply chains that exist in their region and believe that in general that they are only for higher-level professionals. F inally, consumers do not value highly enough the fact that buying a product from a short supply chain system brings producer and consumer closer together in terms of trust.
Unfamiliar with the short supply chains
Local products are more expensive
Figure 23 : Why do consumers not buy many local products?

Consumers Supply of local agricultural products is poorly diversified
Overestimate distance as far as the point of sale
> Would consumers like to buy local products?

As well as identifying the factors which explain the low consumer demand for local products, it is also important to know their willingness to buy more local products. It appears that most consumers would like to consume local products more often, but only if the constraints that normally lead them to buy agricultural products from other origins could be reduced. In a survey conducted as part of the Corporate Research Associates Inc. study, 82% of consumers surveyed said they usually buy the same brand, regardless of its origin. However, 71% of people said that if they could, they would buy local products rather than their usual brand. Moreover, when consumers were asked what was the best way to promote local products, most people surveyed said that they would see this as either the role of farmers (42%) or the role of the retailer (27%) (Corporate Research Associates, Inc.). 19% of people surveyed said there that there is a need for health experts to certify product quality. 3% of consumers would like government institutions to guarantee food safety (Corporate Research Associates, Inc.).
89
In summary :
Despite the fact that consumers have a generally positive image of local agricultural products (fresher, better quality and more environmentally friendly, etc.), they only represent a small proportion of total food product sales. Consumers buy a relatively small amount of local agricultural products, this is because they are generally not available where they usually buy their food, they are more expensive and are restricted to only seasonal products. Consumers, however, do show some willingness to change their habits and show that they would like to buy more local products but only if the constraints which make selling local products difficult, could be reduced.
ANG.
>A rrieta, Eider (2009). Los profesionales agrcolas de la CAE: Percepciones urbanas Informe Ejecutivo. IKT. >B ord Bia - Irish Food Board. (2010). Consumer Attitudes to Local Food Qualitative Research. Repblica da Irlanda http://www.bordbia.ie/ > Bord Bia - Irish Food Board. (2008). Irish consumers & their food. >B ord Bia - Irish Food Board. (2010). Periscope - Continental Consumers and their Food - Understanding attitudes in France, Germany, Spain, The Netherlands and Sweeden. Repblica da Irlanda: Bord Bia - Irish Food Board. >C orporate Research Associates, Inc. (2005). Atlantic Canada Food Consumer Study. http://www.cap-cpma.ca/ >I psos Reid. (1/10/2006). Ipsos Reid. 3 /10/ 2010, www.ipsos.ca/ >V andercammen, M. (2010). Circuits Courts. Bruxelas: CRIOC - Centre de Recherche et dInformation des Organisations de Consommateurs.
90
ENGLISH > Chapter 5 : The supply of local agricultural products
5. The supply of local agricultural products

To increase sales of local products, the conditions of access to these products need to be changed or improved. It would need to be considered whether these conditions could be changed in the short term or if the structural conditions are specific to local markets and therefore would be very difficult to alter. Therefore it is important to look at the situation from the supply side (the local producers) so as to analyse the constraints which restrict their activities and limit their ability to find markets for their products.
.GNA
5.1. Who are the farmers involved in the Economy of Proximity?
This brings us first to the need to identify which farmers are present in Economy of Proximity markets. At first glance, size does not seem to be linked to being a Proximity producer: a large producer can sell a very small part of its products directly to the local area where the farm is located. The Economy of Proximity does not therefore exclude any producer or any production system. But it must not be forgotten that the image that consumers have of local agricultural products and producers largely determines their position in the Economy of Proximity. However, if Proximity markets almost always occur in the form of short supply chains, in practice Proximity producers are those who operate through short supply chains. The available statistics provide a clear and precise answer to this question concerning the number of farmers who are more present on Proximity markets. Therefore, according to Eurostat, 59% of farms with fewer than 10 hectares of usable farmland make over 50% of their sales through direct selling. For farms with between 5 to 10 hectares of usable farmland, the proportion of farms operating with direct selling is still considerable, but can drop to 33%.
For larger farms (more than 10 hectares of usable farmland) this falls below 5%. Finally, 12.3% of farms with an economic size of less than 1 ESU1 sell more than half of their products through direct selling. Compared with small-scale farms, this proportion seems to be fixed at a lower level than what it may be hoped. However, this percentage should be interpreted carefully because farms which are economically smaller consume more themselves and therefore can place only a small proportion of their products on the market. In any case, these statistics clearly show that the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products mostly concerns small-scale farms. In short, in order to look for the factors that affect the development of the Economy of Proximity, the characteristics associated with small-scale farmers would need to be considered.
1- ESU European Size Unit, a standard gross margin of 1200 de Margem Bruta Padro (MBP)
91
Figure 24 : Farms which make more than 50% of sales through Direct Selling
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 88% 41% 67%
ANG.
59% 33% 12%
Other supply chains Direct selling < 1 UDE < 5 ha > 5 ha e < 10 ha
for the Economy of proximity development 5.2. The importance of small-scale producers in European agriculture
Source: EUROSTAT - Farm Structure Survey
Small-scale producers are at the heart of the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products. They represent almost the totality of the supply in this market and they also are very important in European agriculture. The statistics published in the latest Eurostat Farm Structure Survey paint a revealing picture of certain structural aspects of European farming, knowing that behind these average indicator values retained, there very different realities both at international and national level. Small-scale farms: Approximately 46.6% of all farms have an economic size of less than 1 ESU. All of the farms with less than 5 hectares account for 72% of the total number of farms. Subsistence agriculture: 43% of farms consume more than 50% of their own production. Family labour: 50.4% of farm staff are related to the farmer, 23% to their spouse and 19.7% to other family members. Only 6.9% of agricultural workers do not have a family connection with the farm manager. Older agricultural population: In 2005, 51.7% of European farmers were 65 years old or older, and 70% were 55 or older. Low multi-activity: Only 11% of farms also carry out economic activities other than farming. Low levels of training: Nearly 80% of farm managers have only had practical training, 11.5% have had basic agricultural training and only 8% have been completely trained.
Figure 25 : Characteristics of farmers and farms in EU countries

Small-scale farms Family labour Low multi-activity
Farmer
Subsistence agriculture Low levels of training Older agricultural population
92
5.3. Obstacles for the growth in the supply of local products

The supply of agricultural products in local markets and its capacity to adapt to consumer demand is limited due to several important factors. These limitations are primarily due to certain characteristics of the farmers themselves, to the fact that farms tend to be relatively small in size and also due to external factors such as the way the economy works in a competitive environment.
.GNA
> Size of the farms

Furthermore, these farms are less efficient, have higher production unit costs and therefore less competitive selling prices. The small size of farms also prevents farmers from accessing larger distribution channels and also limits their access to credit and their competitiveness. A final obstacle for small producers is linked to an unintended consequence of exceptional tax regimes. Some countries created for them regimes whose main objective was to enable the survival of less productive and less efficient farming systems where the legal framework is less restrictive. But unfortunately these exemptions have turned out to restrict access to more organised sales channels as, in order to access them, producers would also have to adopt more demanding legal systems.
The first obstacle that can affect the supply of local agricultural products is the small size of farms. This seriously limits the capacity of farmers to meet the demand of individuals or public and private structures (ie. canteens) regularly and with the right volume and diversity of products.
> Characteristics of farmers

The high average age of Proximity farmers is one of the characteristics that have a negative effect on their ability to innovate and respond successfully to the specificities of the demand. In addition, the age of farmers goes hand in hand with their low level of academic qualifications. Finally, small-scale farmers have a low level of training and do not have a lot of information about the best practices they could implement on their farms or use with their consumers. They also lack information about the local support available. These characteristics make finding new organisation methods based on cooperation and adjusted to the needs of producers much more difficult.
> The conditions linked to how the economy operates

These external conditions which can hinder the growth of the Economy of Proximity primarily come from how the economy operates in general and the ongoing search for greater productivity imposed by the competitive system. This along with other factors, causes high concentration in the distribution channels and in processing factories for agricultural products. This process also adds to the disappearance of small businesses and small local infrastructure such as municipal abattoirs, cattle fairs, etc., as well as causing the gradual disappearance of the direct relationship between producer and consumer. Moreover, the loss of competitiveness associated with subsistence production systems which mainly rely on members of the family for labour and earn a lot less than non-agricultural activities, explains why younger generations move away from farming.
93
The complexity of hygiene and food safety rules makes them difficult to put into practice in small farms and production systems, applying these rules requires investments that are too high in relation to the financial capacity of small producers. Authorities will have to take into account all these barriers that farmers have to face but that they cannot overcome on their own, in order to promote the Economy of Proximity.
Figure 26 : The main barriers which slow down the growth of the supply of Proximity agricultural products
Volume / diversity of production Moving away from farming
ANG.
Local products offer
Weather
Access to credit
Tax regime

Difficulties to associate
Hygiene and food safety rules

>A ubry, C.; Chiffoleau, Y. (2009), Le dveloppement des circuits courts et lagriculture priurbaine: histoire, volution et questions actuelles, Innovation agronomiques, n5, p. 53-67. >R allet A., Torre A. (2004), Proximit et localisation, conomie Rurale, 280. http://www.idrc.ca/ >R publique Franaise, Avis et Rapports du Conseil conomique, Social et Environnemental. >L conomie de proximit : une rponse aux dfis majeurs de la socit franaise, 2010, Rapport prsent par M. Pierre Martin. >R eport of the Working Group on Local Food, Local Food, A Snapshot Of The Sector, March 2003. > Rapport du Groupe de Travail, Circuits Courts de Commercialisation, Mars 2009. http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/ms_factsheets/2011/eu_en.pdf
94
ENGLISH > Chapter 6 : The role of community institutions
6. The role of community institutions

The globalisation of markets and the industrialisation of agriculture have led to a greater specialisation of tasks and the prolongation of commercialisation channels for agricultural food products. This process has changed the balance of power between the various links in the food system, making the intermediaries stronger and farmers weaker. Currently in the EU, half a dozen major food retailers are business partners with about 13.4 million farmers and 310,000 businesses in the food industry which, individually, have a weak bargaining power. This situation leads to growing profit margins for intermediaries and distribution structures, but a great reduction in profit margins for farmers. This calls into question the economic viability of many farms, especially the smallest ones, and causes the deterioration of the Economy of Proximity of local food production systems. These changes which have occurred within the food production system have caused mixed reactions from consumers and producers. As a result, associative organisations have been created and become important stakeholders in Proximity food production systems.
.GNA
6.1. Organisations which are more market-orientated
Firstly, there is a group of organisations which are associations set up by farmers and/or consumers who share the common objective of wanting to take advantage of operating collectively in agricultural markets. The size of these organisations allows them benefit from economies of scale in terms of sales and the distribution of products, and gives them greater bargaining power vis--vis the representatives in agricultural markets. On the supply side, there is a large number of farmers organisations, profit or non-profit making, which give their members more of a competitive advantage which they would not have individually or that they would normally have at a higher cost. They also allow them access to more organised and bigger markets, to credits with better conditions and to economies of scale for distribution and for accessing equipment such as cooling systems and agricultural machinery. In Europe there are more than 45,000 farmers associations, with 10.8 million members and they account for 1.2 million jobs. These farmers associations are responsible for supplying 50% of agricultural products and represent over 60% of crop collection, processing and distribution of agricultural products. They also represent a significant number of direct jobs and are actively involved in the economic development of rural areas. Beyond its economic importance, farmers associations activities affect other local activities, especially the ones which have their respect for sustainable development in common.
Figure 27 : The role of farmers associations
Economies of scale and productive effectiveness:
- Try and collect for each product a sufficient quantity in order to access medium or large supply chains - Economies of scale obtained in the provision of technical and administrative services, and in the distribution of products. - Economies of scale in the implementation of quality control systems and labelling - The organisation of the production allows to increase the supply of products. - Innovation in the presentation and the preservation of products, which seasonality reduces - More capacity to ensure the provision of services, associated to the products packaging
Greater capacity to adapt to the market:
Greater environmental security Protecting
- Quality control system - Cold chain control - Control of the use of phytosanitary products and of the waste treatment
ARGUMENTAIRY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit - Contribute to the implementation of integrated-protection soils and productive systems
95
Greater capacity to adapt to the market:
- The organisation of the production allows to increase the supply of products. ENGLISH > Chapter 6 The role of community institutions - Innovation in the presentation and the preservation of: products, which seasonality reduces - More capacity to ensure the provision of services, associated to the products packaging
Greater environmental security Protecting soils and the environment
- Quality control system - Cold chain control - Control of the use of phytosanitary products and of the waste treatment
ANG.
- Are producers representative interlocutors for public organisms and local governments - Allow an easier identification of the beneficiaries of rural development strategies
- Contribute to the implementation of integrated-protection productive systems - Rational use of pytosanitary products and fertilizers
Political action
Farmers associations have different characteristics.

Cooperatives and small associations generally group together small-scale farmers from the same area. Usually, the partnership has a very specific aim, such as buying of fertilisers and pesticides at a lower price (in bulk) or to benefit from technical assistance in food safety or product quality control. Sometimes these organisations provide their members with access to different commercialisation channels. When it comes to professional organisations of farmers or agricultural companies, they usually play a role of representative or facilitator with various institutions and operate as a pressure group on central governments. Their activities take place mainly at political level and the image they have is often an extension of the image associated with agro-industrial producers, the image that they are associated with the global market, long supply chains and less natural products. On the demand side, some consumer organisations have been created whose main aim is to buy agricultural products directly from farmers at a decent price for both parties.
6.2.Community associations
There is a second group of associations present in Proximity food production systems. These are non-profit associations with different objectives which can integrate various community groups and can include (or not include) farmers and local authorities.
Figure 28: The different partners involved in community initiatives
Farmers
Consumers
Carrier
Research
Funders
Conservation of the rural heritage
96
Figure 29: The aims of community associations

Ethical objectives
- Fairer trade, ensuring that profits are more equitably shared between stakeholders - Improving life conditions for underprivileged population
.GNA
Sociocultural objectives
- Preserving traditions - Preserving regional characteristics created through cultural identity process - Access to training and information

Economic objectives Food safety Preserving the rural heritage
- farm landscape - Rural built heritage - Environmental heritage
- Increasing the economic sustainability of farmers - Access to other fundings - Access to technical and administrative support - Access to more organised medium or large supply chains
- Quality control systems - Control of the cold chain - Control of the use of phytosanitary products and waste treatment
For example, CSA - Community Supported Agriculture is promoted by organisations which contribute to the economic viability of farms. These structures share part of the risks with producers who, in return, give them a proportion of their production. Usually, the consumers associated with this initiative pay fees in advance, which are calculated in terms of the crop production and the money earned by the farmer and they get in return a proportion of the production during the harvest (DeMuth, 1993). AMAP - Associations pour le maintien dune agriculture paysanne associations which strive to maintain traditional farming have been developed in France since 2001. In a similar way to Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), they are based on the association between farmers and consumers.. Vegetable box schemes are another type of organisation which is becoming more and more popular. Consumers buy regularly and at a fixed price a box of agricultural products that are regularly delivered to them by the farmer. RECIPROCO- (Citizen relationships between producers and consumers) In Portugal, this programme encourages initiatives such as PROVE - Promote and sell and Terras de So Pedro do Sul which organise the distribution of vegetable boxes. ARCO - Agricultura de responsabilidad compartida In Spain, the ARCO initiative led by the Coordinadora de Organizaciones Agrarias y Ganaderas aims to establish a distribution network of fresh food grown locally using ecological and organic techniques. The products are sold through short supply chains such as farmers markets or consumer groups markets, direct selling markets or traditional specialty markets in urban areas. The members (consumers) pay in advance for a certain period to ensure a stable income for the participating farmers. http://www.coag.org/index.php?s=html&n=40a5ee9d0785b9a0cbfe683903705df1
97
Local development associations also initiate projects, set up partnerships, organise access to credit and training and they provide support for small-scale producers for administrative tasks. Members are usually agricultural producers and their organisations, environmental organisations, etc. Certain organisations such as the Food for Life partnership aim to promote healthy eating based on the consumption of local agricultural products. These organisations act as intermediaries in the supply of school canteens (public and private), and have a good reputation in consumers eyes regarding the quality of the agricultural products sold. Members of these organisations are very diverse, for example private agricultural and non-agricultural companies, loans companies, local structures, schools, etc.
Figure 30: The different types of community initiatives
ANG.

Cooperative farmers Public supplying
CSA Community Supported agriculture
vegetable boxes
In summary :
The different members of the different community initiatives all have in common the fact that they are based in the same local area and so have specific features linked to local identity. These associations group together a diverse set of entities representing the community, and so they can help to reduce a significant number of difficulties that small Proximity producers face. This is thanks to the commitment made by these entities and public authorities to create initiatives aimed at developing the Economy of Proximity. The different agents recognise that these initiatives can produce positive effects from an ethical, socio-cultural, environmental or economic point of view that go beyond the private sphere and therefore benefit the community in general.

> http://www.sustainweb.org/goodfoodpublicplate/about/ > http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/pubs/csa/csadef.shtml >R ede Portuguesa Leader +. (2007). RE.CI.PRO.CO - Relaes de Cidadania entre Produtores e Consumidores - Guia conceptual e metodolgico. Rede Portuguesa Leader +. >h ttp://www.ecomuseu-azores.org/ >h ttp://www.coag.org/ >D eMuth, S. (1993). Community supported agriculture (CSA) : an annotated bibliography and resource guide.
98
ENGLISH > Chapter 7 : The intervention of the EU and central governments ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
7. The intervention of the EU and central governments

For EU member states, the CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) serves as a framework for agricultural policies implemented by national governments. The definition of objectives and strategies, legislation and the development of action plans and funding for the agricultural sector in each European country are dictated, to a large extent, by the CAP or other European norms and directives. National governments maintain a certain flexibility, but policies defined for the agricultural sector remain heavily restricted by those defined at EU level. This being said, in recent years the EU and national governments have become increasingly interested in the questions and issues directly related to the Economy of Proximity. This interest can be explained by the following factors: >F irstly, there has been noticeable change in consumer preference; they are increasingly looking to by local products. Governments have realised this and are wanting to implement policies that respect these new preferences. >I n addition, the issue of consistency between national and European legislation when it comes to agricultural food products, makes it necessary to create specific legislation regarding new forms of commercialisation through short supply chains. >F inally, the growing awareness by politicians of the benefits of local sustainable development concerns economic, social and environmental aspects at the same time. The suitability of the Economy of Proximity for this model is a strong argument in its favour. As the section below will describe, sustainable development is already present in current agricultural policy, but will be strengthened with the CAP reform.
.GNA
7.1. The current CAP and its effects on the Economy of Proximity
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was created in 1957 and implemented in 1962. It is a policy that concerns all EU member states and is based on two pillars. The first pillar aims in general at developing and modernising European agriculture and introduces price control measures and the granting of subsidies. For a long time, the CAP consisted almost exclusively of this set of actions and objectives which were grouped within what is now called the first pillar of the CAP. It turned out that this vision of agriculture and the rural world was too narrow. The European Council in Berlin in March 1999 decided to reform the CAP by adding another dimension through the creation of a second pillar which concerns rural development. The combination of these two pillars caused the Economy of Proximity to develop in two opposite directions... On the one hand, the Single Market, which leads to an increase in the scale of production, crop intensification and the liberalisation of agricultural trade in the EU. This increases competition and favours larger producers as they are more able to have competitive prices. On the other hand, a policy which is relatively protectionist towards countries outside of the EU and artificially keeps prices low thanks to production, operational and rural development subsidies by removing market surplus. Ultimately, this promotes the economic viability of farms with higher productivity and lower production efficiency. The 1992 and 1999 reforms sought to reduce government intervention in the market and replace guaranteed prices with direct aid. The 2003 reform sought the same thing. Currently, the subsidies are no longer linked to production. Farmers receive a single payment per hectare subject to compliance with European environmental and food safety standards. The 2009 intermediate reform confirmed this orientation.
99
ENGLISH > Chapter 7 : The intervention of the EU and central governments
Figure 31: The current Common Agricultural Policy

A deeply reformed policy ...more powerful
A common policy based on two pillars Assistances with the farmers dissociated of the production Significant reduction of the mechanisms of intervention on the markets A rural development policy reinforced thanks to funds and new instruments
No Agricultural surpluses An agricultural sector more competitive Agriculture more sustainable
ANG.
An integrated perspective of the rural areas
and allowing the development of a European agriculture balanced at the territorial and environmental levels
Source : La PAC lhorizon 2020 : alimentation, ressources naturelles et territoire relever les dfis de lavenir, DG for Agriculture and rural development, European Comission.
The Rural Development Policy for 2007-2013 focuses on three main areas: improving the competitiveness of agriculture and forestry, improving the environment and rural areas, and improving the quality of life and diversifying the economy in rural areas. A fourth area: LEADER, builds on the experience gained through the Community initiative LEADER. It aims at implementing local strategies for rural development through the creation of public-private partnerships at local level which is the basis for the creation of LAG (Local Action Groups). In the Rural Development Policy, the emphasis is on the land, especially in areas where the LAG initiative has been implemented. This leads to the enhancement of the activities led by local producers and the enhancement of the relationships with other partners and activities aimed at promotion of local markets. In addition, as the next section will explain, given its relevance to the objectives of Europe 2020, the aims of the new CAP are very favourable to the implementation of actions for the development the Economy of Proximity at the local level.
Figure 32: Rural development 2007-2013
Rural development 2007-2013 ! Area : LEADER
Area 1 Competitiveness
Area 2 Environment and rural areas
Area 3 Economic diversification and quality of life
Programming and financial rules, control and audit A unique Rural development fund !
Source : http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/fact/rurdev2007/pt_2007.pdf
10 0
7.2. The intervention of central governments in the Economy of Proximity

In recent decades, European member states national policies (in accordance with the guidelines defined in the CAP) have privileged the increase in efficiency and competitiveness of productive agricultural structures on the assumption that efficiency would indirectly have a positive effect on rural development. For years, the policies associated with this process have favoured the diversification of activities in rural areas, which has contributed to the abandonment of small, inefficient farms with low productivity. However, in recent years, the political powers have realised that sustainability objectives for the agricultural sector should take into account a new context: >R ural areas are not homogeneous and this diversity must be taken into account, otherwise the disparities, and therefore potential conflicts, could get worse. >P roducing food products in a sustainable manner, in the right quantity and making them accessible enough is not yet possible for all producers. >I n a climate of great uncertainty, the evolution of prices in global markets is very volatile and unpredictable. >T he use of fossil fuels leads to profound changes in economic systems. >N ew competitors are emerging who use limited natural resources. >C hronic diseases from food are on the rise due to a lack of food quality, lack of hygiene and other food safety problems. >C hanges in the environment continue to get worse, they are causing people to become more aware of human responsibility in the protection of ecosystems. National governments are best placed to evaluate the different national situations and to determine the extent to which agriculture and farming systems together, can help build a model for sustainable development. Based on this evaluation, it would be possible to define the objectives and the means to achieve them. Generally, central governments do not have specific policies for promoting the development of the Economy of Proximity. However, the increasing importance of this concept because of its impact on social cohesion, the environment, food safety and also in view of changing consumer preference, leads national governments to reconsider the place of the Economy of Proximity as an instrument of rural development. The regional aspects of economic and social processes which are associated with the Economy of Proximity require policies to create positive discrimination in favour of local agricultural products. However, given the way EU countries define their sectoral policies and the existence of several international treaties relating to international trade which do not allow states to introduce protectionist measures, policies promoting the Economy of Proximity are often associated with social and public health issues. Given their contribution to the definition, coordination and implementation of agricultural, food, forestry, rural development, environmental and land use policies, even if they do not have a direct effect on Proximity markets, the central government has an important impact on how the Economy of Proximity operates. Moreover, national governments are generally in charge of the planning and coordination of national and EU funding for the benefit of agriculture, forestry, rural development, the environment and spatial planning. However, if it is true that there is some flexibility in the definition of national strategies, it is equally true that the obligation to transpose EU directives into national legislation and the obligation to respect criteria for granting Community funding severely limits what central governments can do. The policy instruments are defined in particular by agricultural, food and nutrition and rural development policies. These instruments that claim they can change the behaviour of consumers and producers aim at building sustainable food systems and increasing social cohesion, the development and resilience of local areas. Policies for agriculture and rural areas are not entirely homogeneous in the different member states. They are sometimes more or less explicit, more market-oriented (supply and demand), more concentrated on how the supply of products is organised or very focused on rural development and diversification of agricultural activities which recalls the two sides of the CAP. In some countries such as France where short supply chains represent a significant percentage of sales of certain agricultural products (fruit, vegetables, etc..), national strategies give clear signs that they want to
.GNA
101
support the Economy of Proximity through measures such as facilitating access to more organised markets (ie. public catering) for small producers. Therefore, it is increasingly common that calls for proposals for the supply of food products or the provision of meals, include conditions regarding the environment or other measures that facilitate access to local producers. The policy instruments which governments use the most include the dissemination of information on products, seasonal production and the development and dissemination of studies on the benefits associated with the consumption of local products. They also include the distribution of subsidies and legislation, the definition of training programmes aimed primarily at small-scale farmers and other activities related to the functioning of local markets. Information and communication technology is an essential tool which must be widely used to promote the Economy of Proximity. This technology has a lot of potential, for example, to organise sales over the internet, to reach new audiences, especially younger ones and to disseminate, at very low cost, information on the economic, social and health benefits of local products. A wider and more adequate use of these tools could help to change consumer behaviour more often and more rapidly in favour of local agricultural products. In short, the policies which promote the use of information and communication technology by agricultural producers should be encouraged as they are an important tool for promoting the Economy of Proximity.
ANG.
Figure 33: Information and Communication Technology
Source : http://localdirt.com/
10 2
7.3. A few examples of national policies which promote the Economy of Proximity
National policies on the Economy of Proximity are very often linked to social and public health issues. Policy instruments are defined in agricultural, food and nutrition policies. In France, for example, the national programme for food (PNA) and more specifically its second objective which aims to improve supply systems, recognises the need to promote closer links between producers and consumers through the promotion of sustainable production methods and the development of short supply chains. The national action plan established for short supply chains is organised into four areas: organising and developing knowledge of short supply chains, focussing agricultural training on the specifics of these commercialisation channels and encouraging the presence of farmers in short supply chains. (http://agriculture.gouv.fr/Circuitscourts, 11905) There are several websites which present information on the French national policy on the development of the Economy of Proximity. For example, the website on food http://alimentation.gouv.fr/ collects information about French food policies and presents a favourable attitude towards the development of Proximity food systems.
.GNA

Figure 34: Image from the French food website
In the United Kingdom, the DEFRA- Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, defines the strategies
for the sustainability of agriculture and the establishment of sustainable food systems: >T he main objective of these strategies is to promote an agriculture and food industry which is competitive, efficient, which contributes to the protection and development of rural areas and also helps to improve health issues and the prosperity of communities. Our overarching aim is to promote a competitive and efficient farming and food sector which protects and enhances our countryside and wider environment, and contributes to the health and prosperity of all our communities.(Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2002) >A dding value, particularly through the promotion of local and regional food products and farmers markets; Farmers markets are certified by the Soil Association or the National Farmers Retail & Markets Association which make sure that the products sold come directly from the local producer. >U sing a system of certifications (quality, food safety and production methods) as a way to restore consumer confidence. According to DEFRA, in 2008 about 75% of fruit and vegetable producers, more than 90% of dairy farms and 90 to 95% of chicken and pork production had some kind of production certification (organic, integrated protection, etc.).
103
>M aking it easier for small and medium scale producers to access local calls for proposals for the provision of meals and food products. LeDEFRA has implemented the governments strategy to integrate sustainability criteria into public procurement (Public Sector Food Procurement Initiative). Under this initiative, a guide was developed for action and for the preparation of specification guidelines with conditions that encourage and facilitate the participation of local producers. Although the legislation does not allow references to geographical distance, it is possible to include the requirement of products which are certified under the Protected Geographical Indication, the Protected Origin Indication or the Organic Products certification. In addition, indicating certain specifications such as fresh carrots with stems or fresh fruit with stems can help promote the sale of local products. http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/policy/publicsectorfood/toolkit/documents/index.htm
ANG.

>h ttp://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/index_pt.htm >h ttp://europa.eu/pol/agr/index_pt.htm > http://www.leader.pt/ >W atts, D.C.H.; Ilbery, B.; Maye, D., Making Reconnections in Agro-Food Geography: Alternative Systems of Food Provision, Geography Subject Group, School of Science and the Environment, Coventry University, Priory Street, Coventry, CV1 5FB, UK. >h ttp://www.bordbia.ie/aboutfood/ >h ttp://www.agriculture.gov.ie/ >M inistrio da Agricultura, Desenvolvimento Rural e das Pescas. (Reviso de 2009). Plano Estratgico Nacional de Desenvolvimento Rural 2007 - 2013. Lisboa, Portugal: GPP - Gabinete de Planeamento e Polticas. http://www.gpp.pt/ >h ttp://portal.min-agricultura.pt/portal/page/portal/MADRP/PT/ >h ttp://www.coag.org/ >h ttp://agriculture.gouv.fr/ >h ttp://alimentation.gouv.fr/ >h ttp://www.defra.gov.uk/ >h ttp://www.london.gov.uk/londonfood/
10 4
ENGLISH > Chapter 8 : Local governance and the Economy of ProximityENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
8. Local governance and the Economy of Proximity

Local authorities represent the government at the closest level to the citizens. They are the representative administrative structures and voted through elections. Through their activities, local authorities are expected to pursue the interests of the people that they represent. Despite significant differences between countries, the powers of local authorities and governments cover many areas: social welfare, health, education, culture, community facilities, housing, urban planning, transport, spatial planning, etc. It goes without saying that the practical application of these powers and the hierarchy of priorities vary, not only because of the characteristics of the areas concerned, but also depending on the opinions of the political party in power or the personality of the elected person (ie. the Mayor). Today, it can be stated that a vast majority of local authorities would gladly accept a framework guided by the principles of sustainable development. That is to say, a development model in which economic, social and environmental issues are all taken into account and are implemented for the benefit of the whole community. But the Economy of Proximity naturally falls entirely within the paradigm of sustainable development, due particularly to the effects it can have on the local area and society. In this sense, this justifies and even makes it compulsory for local authorities to make room for the possibility of the Economy of Proximity in all local policies.
Figure 35 : Sustainable Agriculture
.GNA
Ecologic
Livable Perennal
Sustainable
Social
Equitable
Economic
Source : http://www.adage35.org/association-adage/lagriculture-durable
8.1. Why should local governments intervene?

Local governments are increasingly called upon to promote actions directly related to the Economy of Proximity in the local area. Several diverse but relevant reasons explain and justify this:
> An appropriate response to the expectations and needs of the population

A first reason is that the Economy of Proximity is an appropriate response to current needs and expectations of a large part of the population of Europe. Over the past 20 years, consumer preference towards local products has gradually changed. This change has a direct connection to food safety issues regarding the agricultural products which are sold through global markets. This is linked specifically to health epidemics related to food contamination such as the recent E. coli bacteria outbreak which started in Germany but spread quickly throughout Europe and had a devastating effect on vegetable consumption. But this change of attitude by the population regarding the Economy of Proximity also has a strong social aspect because the consumption of local agricultural products is often seen as a way to support small local farmers. Buying these products has become a positive ethical choice in accordance with the principles of solidarity and social cohesion.
105
ENGLISH > Chapter 8 : Local governance and the Economy of Proximity
Finally, consumers are becoming more and more willing to buy local agricultural products because they believe that the Economy of Proximity is more environmentally friendly in comparison to the highly industrialised agricultural model. To sum up, if the Economy of Proximity is a response to the expectations and needs of the population, this should be reason enough for local authorities to give it an important position it in their strategic objectives.
Figure 36 : Some expectations and needs of the population
ANG.
Produits traditionnels Respecter l'environnement Scurit alimentaire
Amliorer les conditions de vie des agriculteurs
> An instrument for cohesion and local identity

The Economy of Proximity is also a powerful instrument for strengthening cohesion and a sense of local identity. When local authorities implement policies in favour of the Economy of Proximity, it results in the strengthening of the relationship between local economic agents and promotes a collective awareness of the necessity to defend and promote the heritage of the local area. In this process, local authorities are central to encouraging and promoting cooperation between local stakeholders. This results in the strengthening of local cohesion and identity.
> The economic impact

Another argument in favour of the place of local authorities with regards to promoting the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products is economic impact. It is known that increased sales of local products have a direct economic effect on farmers incomes. But there is also an indirect effect which causes an increase in income for other activities, those who benefit from a sales increase generated by local producers. This multiplier effect does not end there, because the agents who have benefited from this first impact also consume, invest and pay wages and so, in turn, benefit other activities. In short, this represents a leverage effect which grows and spreads the initial effect of increasing sales of local agricultural products in local markets. Admittedly, this multiplier effect associated with the Economy of Proximity can be found in other sectors of the economy, but few have as many benefits both in terms of the scope and diversity of the sectoral impacts linked with its development. So, given its growth potential and its ability to have positive effects on other sectors, the Economy of Proximity is a powerful instrument for local development policies. The Economy of Proximity is therefore a good basis for increasing the wealth produced locally and a promising sector for boosting the development of local entrepreneurship.
>The positive impact on the environment

With regards to the environment, promoting the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products also offers advantages compared to the dominant operational model in the agricultural and food sector. The dominant agricultural model relies too often on the objective of achieving high levels of productivity. In order to succeed, it has to resort to intensive, highly mechanised farming which uses many chemical fertilisers and pesticides which all contribute to water contamination. Furthermore, the agricultural sector is heavily dependent on energy including for transporting the food products (and the consumption of oil). In contrast to this model, most farms in the Economy of Proximity use more traditional techniques. They are more labour intensive and therefore cause fewer greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, given the shorter distances
10 6
.GNA
that the products have to travel in short supply chains, energy consumption is reduced. In addition, increasing the sustainability of agricultural systems has a beneficial effect on biodiversity. This is due firstly, to a greater diversity of crops and secondly to a greater tendency to maintain native crops which help protect the soil and water sources.
> The effects on spatial planning

The Economy of Proximity also benefits spatial planning. Along with other aspects, the management of land allocated to agricultural activities (in urban and suburban areas) is a spatial planning instrument: I t reduces the speculation associated with uncontrolled urbanisation processes which have a very significant impact in terms of access to land I t maintains the areas which are not protected from rain infiltration (soil sealing) I t maintains green areas in an economically productive manner I t protects the heritage (landscape and man-made structures) associated with traditional farming practices. Given its characteristics, the Economy of Proximity can reduce certain threats or damage facing a local area and at the same time, it promotes the relationship between rural and urban areas.
Figure 37 : Some problems linked to spatial planning
Soils sealing
Vaccant lands
Green areas
Choice between accommodation, economic areas or green areas
Therefore, the Economy of Proximity creates favourable conditions for a more efficient use of local land and encourages local authorities to implement actions that reduce the opposition between town and countryside, contributing to the greater welfare of the community.
8.2. How can local authorities promote the Economy of Proximity?

Local governments have at access to a broad set of initiatives for the promotion of the Economy of Proximity. These initiatives aim either to better organise the supply of local agricultural products or to stimulate consumer interest towards agricultural products from nearby. In practice, each local authority selects a limited set of measures to promote its areas Economy of Proximity.
Figure 38 : The Economy of Proximity and local authorities powers
Food safety and public health
food and public catering
Land settlement and food production
organisation of short supply chains
107
> Initiatives which mainly concern production and farmers

For local authorities, one of the most important actions to encourage the Economy of Proximity is to promote and support the creation of farmers associations. Through this official process, the farmers reach a sufficient collective size so that they can supply the market regularly in quantity and quality, and they are therefore more able to meet regulatory requirements for hygiene and food safety. Local authorities can also promote the quality of local products through the establishment of a certification process for local products, because consumers are sensitive to this issue it is reflected in their buying behaviour. They can also consider the network of professional, artisanal food processing structures (bakeries, restaurants, etc.), as potential recipients of these public initiatives. These professionals are involved in the Economy of Proximity because they contribute to the distribution and sale of local agricultural products. Local authority initiatives in this area include giving technical assistance, moving private investment towards the establishment of small processing or commercialisation collectives in all stages of the food production system. Local authorities can also act in favour of the Economy of Proximity when it comes to land use in a context where, despite the protection of agricultural zones, land continues to be urbanised or left fallow in the hope of being urbanised. Therefore, local authorities can guarantee access to arable land through such conditions as property speculation, and not make the land unusable for agriculture. One possible solution is to promote fallow land. This has been done by Chamber of Agriculture of Loire-Atlantique and Nantes Mtropole who have together been actively supporting urban agriculture. This kind of initiative opens up exciting opportunities for the future of the Economy of Proximity, and is particularly interesting for new farmers who have trouble finding arable land for crops.
ANG.
> Initiatives which mainly concern demand and sales outlets.

Governments and local authorities can help promote the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products with the aim to improve, expand and adapt outlet networks to make them accessible to the majority of consumers. However, it must not be overlooked that the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products generally refers to transactions through short supply chains that occur in municipal markets in medium and large urban areas. Therefore, a certain number of local authority initiatives must target these areas. These initiatives should not be restricted to day to day management of these public facilities or focus solely on their physical rehabilitation, it is important that these measures are complemented by others that aim at encouraging consumers to buy more local products and providing the opportunity for local farmers to sell more. These actions include, for example, free parking for consumers who travel to the municipal market and also communication and marketing activities including local media advertising and other initiatives designed to attract a large and diverse group of consumers. Making local products more accessible to consumers also requires the creation of alternative outlets. This includes, for example, internet selling or initiatives such as vegetable boxes which are the result of partnerships between local authorities, farmers associations and cooperatives and which have been successfully set up in several European countries. It would also be important to mention one-off initiatives such as rural markets designed to promote the products and which are, at the same time, additional outlets to make these products more accessible to consumers. Local authorities often conduct marketing campaigns on local products aimed at local residents and tourists. These actions are generally successful, both in terms of final consumers and businesses as they often result in an increase in orders by local shops and restaurants. Finally, there is another a set of initiatives that should not be overlooked which local authorities can set up in order to promote public health, for example, the promotion of healthy eating and the consumption of sustainable agricultural products. Some examples are given below:
10 8
Figure 39 : Local authorities and public health

Essential functions of Public Health
.GNA
Communities
DIAGNOSIS
Local governements
Families
ASSURANCE
POLITICS DEVELOPMENT
Source: Public Health nutrition, USA
Whatever the type of action led by local authorities, their role as partner, sponsor or financial backer always helps to strengthen the cohesion of the local area. They always represent an added-value in terms of trust and security in the eyes other participants, which helps to stimulate and reinforce their commitment.
8.3. Examples of initiatives led by local authorities

Among the different types of initiatives set up by local authorities regarding the Economy of Proximity, the most frequent is the technical specifications for the calls for tender for the supply of goods or food services to public institutions, school meals in particular. But there are other types of initiatives. Some examples are as follows.
>S upplying public institutions Shropshire Council England, UK

This county council has developed a strategy to promote public health by encouraging increased consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables, but this strategy was built with the aim of increasing the consumption of local products. To achieve this objective, the calls for tender for the supply of food items (fresh produce and prepared food) had specific characteristics: First, the supply of goods was subdivided in order to facilitate access for small local producers. S o, those farmers who do not have the capacity to compete for the total supply of goods for a particular service, are able submit a proposal for a small proportion of goods, for example, only the supply of fresh fruit or vegetables. T hen, particular technical specifications have been introduced such as seasonal produce, organic products, natural or projects that have not be subject to refrigeration etc. These specifications give an advantage to local producers when competing with large food production companies. This strategy has enabled local farmers to set up a number of contracts supplying fruit, vegetables, meat, dairy products, etc. Simultaneously, the Council has provided detailed information to students and parents on each individual producer and their production techniques, etc.
109
According to the Council, this strategy has generated an overall saving of 11% for the purchase of fruit and vegetables and has led to the establishment of a more efficient and flexible supply chain and contributed to waste reduction. At the same time, this initiative has been a catalyst for the revival of local food traditions that had almost been forgotten. This initiative has received the silver award by the Food for Life catering mark assigned by the Food for Life organisation which is a network of schools and associations that supports and promotes best practices in providing balanced meals using fresh and healthy food produced locally.
ANG.
Good Food on the Public Plate
This project which is fully funded by the GLA- Greater London Authority began in 2006 and was implemented by the Sustain network. This network has over 100 institutional members consisting of consumer associations, producers, food product outlets and other structures, all of which have a link with health or nutrition.
Figure 40: Good food on the public plate logo
Ce rseau intervient auprs des organismes publics de Londres, notamment les municipalits, universits, hpitaux, foyers pour personnes du 3me ge. Son principal objectif est celui de promouvoir une alimentation saine et la consommation de produits durables. Par exemple, dans la prestation de services de fourniture de repas quils doivent valider ou apprcier, un des paramtres mis en valeur est lutilisation de produits agricoles locaux dans leur prparation. This network engages with public bodies in London, including local councils, universities, hospitals and retirement homes. Its main objective is to promote healthy eating and the consumption of sustainable products. For example, in its evaluation of public food services, an important criterion is the use of local agricultural products.
In 2010, the project Good Food on the Public Plate awarded a range of initiatives including the following two:
U niversity College London Hospitals NHS Trust: The hospital set up a low-carbon menu for employees and visitors made from local seasonal produce, organic or free-range eggs and meat. In addition, the hospital management has started to take into account the criteria of sustainability in the technical specifications for the calls for tender for the supply of goods or food services. C amden Council: Camdens local institutions use only seasonal fruit and vegetables and free-range eggs and meat bought almost exclusively from local producers in the preparation of meals.
> Supplying school meals

The same philosophy can be found increasingly often in the development of specifications for the provision of school meals. These initiatives improve nutrition for the students and create opportunities for teaching about nutrition, health and agricultural training. And, of course, they are a valuable support for maintaining the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products.
11 0
The Cantines de terroir project

The project Cantines de terroir is an example of good practice in this area. Its original aim was to supply school canteens with fresh local produce from farms which use environmentally friendly production methods. Therefore, not only did the students have access to healthy and good quality food, but also local farmers saw their sales increase dramatically. The project was initially implemented in the town of Saverdun (Arige, France), then reached regional level and was extended to the whole of the Pays des Portes dArige-Pyrnes (62 towns and 4 inter-municipal authorities). To achieve this, a community association was formed with the support of the Midi-Pyrnes within its policy to reduce the gap between catering services and the agricultural producers who are active in the local short supply chains. In addition, the project was supported through a technical partnership with the Chamber of Agriculture of the Arige department.
Figure 41 : An image from the Cantines du terroir project website
.GNA
http://www.offrealimentairemidipyrenees.com/1-35579-Lancement-du-1er-repas-100-ariegeois-dans-les-cantinesdu-Pays-des-Portes-d-Ariege-Pyrenees.php
Food for Life

Les programmes Food for Life soutiennent des initiatives qui ont lobjectif de fournir des repas quilibrs et sains, labors partir des produits locaux frais ou biologiques. Par ailleurs, les responsables des cantines scolaires, se voient attribuer une classification en trois niveaux (bronze, argent et or) en fonction du degr de scurit et qualit alimentaires atteint dans les cantines. Ces prix peuvent tre attribus dautres institutions. Par exemple, la mdaille de bronze a t attribue au Conseil des Highlands, organisme de gouvernement local, en raison de ses bonnes pratiques dans les restaurants publics leur charge. En cosse, linitiative est promue par la Soil Association, en Angleterre par le partenariat Food for Life Association. Ces associations comptent sur le soutien du gouvernement, mais elles sont principalement finances par des partenaires privs, tels que le BIG Lotary Fund.
Rudolf Steiner School Scotland gold award

The school involves its students, parents, producers, suppliers and school staff in this initiative. Older students and parents are involved in the preparation of the meals with a team of qualified staff as part of extracurricular activities. Meals served in the school canteen are prepared on the day with fresh products. The meat and eggs are organic and at least 30% of ingredients are certified organic products and 50% are local.
> Community food-growing spaces

Today across Europe, dozens of towns and cities are setting up initiatives to promote Community food-growing spaces in various forms. These projects, which vary in size, all follow the same principals and aims of the Economy of Proximity. London Food, for example, is a partnership between government officials, other institutions and nutrition experts. It is funded by the London Development Agency (http://www.london.gov.uk/londonfood/).
111
This partnership was created in 2003 and implemented in 2004 by the Mayor of London in order to promote a food strategy which aimed to improve the health of the population and also to promote sustainable food production and local consumption. London Food implemented an initiative called Capital Growth which aims to set up 2,012 zones for agricultural production in London in 2012. Local inhabitants who wish to start new or develop existing agricultural areas are eligible for this programme. As well as technical assistance, the inhabitants who join this programme can use land given away by various institutions to cultivate agricultural products.
ANG.
Figure 42 : Community food-growing spaces in London
Source: http://www.capitalgrowth.org/home/

>h ttp://agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/ > http://alimentation.gouv.fr/ > http://www.defra.gov.uk/ > http://www.bordbia.ie/ > http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/ > http://www.gpp.pt/ > http://portal.min-agricultura.pt/ >C hiffoleau, Y. (2008). Les circuits courts de commercialisation en agriculture : diversit et enjeux pour le dveloppement durable. In Les circuits courts alimentaires: bien manger dans les territoires (pp. 21-30). Dijon: Educagri ditions. >D eMuth, S. (1993). Community supported agriculture (CSA) : an annotated bibliography and resource guide. >D epartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. (2002). The strategy for sustainable farming and food - Facing the future. Londres : DEFRA Publications. >G arret, S., & Feenstra, G. (1999). Growing a Community Food System. Western Regional Extension Publication. >R allet, A. (2002). conomie de Proximits. >h ttp://www.capitalgrowth.org/home/ >h ttp://www.offrealimentairemidipyrenees.com/ >h ttp://www.london.gov.uk/londonfood/
11 2
ENGLISH > Chapter 9 : The outlook for the Economy of Proximity from now ENGLISH until 2020 > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
9. The outlook for the Economy of Proximity from now until 2020
In a rapidly changing world, what can be said about the outlook for the Economy of Proximity in the medium term? Building scenarios for the future is always difficult, especially when they have to be based on variables which are not only highly interrelated but are also unstable, as is the case for economy proximity of agricultural products. In reality, the factors that will determine the development of the Economy of Proximity from now until 2020 are linked to two issues: changes in consumer preference and the organisation of production and commercialisation systems, namely food systems. Moreover, these two issues are linked to the rural and environmental development policies implemented by the EU and its member states, in a continuous process of feedback that will ultimately determine the evolution of the Economy of Proximity. A more detailed description of these mechanisms will make their interaction and the different scenarios that can be associated with them clearer.
.GNA
9.1. Consumer preference from now until 2020
Changing consumer preference over the last twenty years shows some stable characteristics. However, a deeper analysis highlights the existence of contradictory tendencies and whose results are difficult to determine. A global process can be observed across the world where living conditions and income levels are increasing. At the same time, the proportion of the population living in urban areas is also increasing. This process increases the distance between consumers and short supply chains as they are less accessible and take longer to access them, so it leads them to give preference to products that are not present in the local supply chains but offer advantages in terms of convenience and time (prepared meals, pre-cut and washed frozen vegetables, functional food products ...) and to associated services such as home delivery, ordering online, etc. Simultaneously, there are opposite tendencies triggered by food crises and their adverse effects on health, and by increasing food supply problems. This leads consumers to give more preference to local products. The direct relationship with the producer, the traditional cuisine, the traceability and certification of products (Protected Geographical Indication, the Protected Designation of Origin Traditional Speciality Guaranteed, etc.) guarantee, in the eyes of consumers, increased food security and therefore they increasingly buy products from short supply chains. Obviously, these conflicting signals seen in the consumption of agricultural products must be taken into account when developing scenarios for the future evolution of the Economy of Proximity.
Figure 43: Future consumer preference- contradictory signs
+
Pre-cut and washed frozen vegetables Prepared meals
+
Local products
+
Organic products
9.2. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) from now until 2020
For the European Commission, the CAP reform is necessary because the EU needs to find an adequate response to new challenges: food safety, the environment, climate change and regional balance. Moreover, the Commission considers that this reform should also contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy through the implementation of a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth model. In short, it is a question of
113
ENGLISH > Chapter 9 : The outlook for the Economy of Proximity from now until 2020
promoting the ecological growth of the agricultural sector and the rural economy which could improve welfare through environmentally friendly economic growth (Communication from the Commission: The CAP towards 2020: Meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future).
In the same document, the Commission specifies three main objectives of the future CAP : Objective 1: Viable food production
ANG.
>T o contribute to farm incomes and limit farm income variability, recalling that price and income volatility and natural risks are more marked than in most other sectors and farmers incomes and profitability levels are on average below those in the rest of the economy. >T o improve the competitiveness of the agricultural sector and to enhance its value share in the food chain, because the agricultural sector is highly fragmented compared to other sectors of the food chain which are better organised and have therefore a stronger bargaining power. In addition European farmers face competition from the world market while also having to respect high standards relating to environmental, food safety, quality and animal welfare objectives requested by European citizens. >T o compensate for production difficulties in areas with specific natural constraints because such regions are at increased risk of land abandonment.
Objective 2: Sustainable management of natural resources and climate action

>T o guarantee sustainable production practices and secure the enhanced provision of environmental public goods as many of the public benefits generated through agriculture are not remunerated through the normal functioning of markets. >T o foster green growth through innovation which requires adopting new technologies, developing new products, changing production processes, and supporting new patterns of demand, notably in the context of the emerging bioeconomy. >T o pursue climate change mitigation and adaptation actions thus enabling agriculture to respond to climate change. Because agriculture is particularly vulnerable to the impact of climate change, enabling the sector to better adapt to the effects of extreme weather fluctuations, can also reduce the negative effects of climate change.
Objective 3: Balanced territorial development

>T o support rural employment and maintaining the social fabric of rural areas. >T o improve the rural economy and promote diversification to enable local actors to unlock their potential and to optimise the use of additional local resources. >T o allow for structural diversity in the farming systems, improve the conditions for small farms and develop local markets because in Europe, heterogeneous farm structures and production systems contribute to the attractiveness and identity of rural regions. The first two objectives relate to the conditions of viable and globally competitive food production which is supported by a sustainable management of natural resources and actions to mitigate climate change. This has only a very distant connection to Economy of Proximity issues. However, the third objective which concerns balanced territorial development, sets out a framework of expectations and specific objectives which are very much related to the Economy of Proximity: from supporting rural employment and maintaining the social fabric in rural areas to enabling structural diversity in farming systems and developing local markets, all of which can be achieved through the development of the Economy of Proximity. So, even if the CAP does not mention the Economy of Proximity specifically, the policies that will be implemented to achieve the balanced territorial development objective will surely be conducive to the growth of the Economy of Proximity.
11 4
9.3. The Economy of Proximity from now until 2020

The medium-term evolution of the Economy of Proximity in EU countries obviously depends on changes in consumer preference and the CAP reform orientations, there are also other variables. A study in 2009 prepared by the European Science Foundation2 presents four possible scenarios for the evolution of agricultural systems, taking into account the evolution of demographic and economic variables such as climate change.
.GNA
9.3.1. The models variables
The model considers the following groups of variables:
Demographics: The worlds population will increase from 6.7 billion people in 2005 to 8.3 billion in 2030 (average age: 34), the European Union will see its population decrease from 494 million in 2005 to 485 million in 2030 (average age: 46). Although these figures do not take account of migration, which have a residual effect, they do reflect current demographic trends. Economic variables: On a global scale, largely because of the high growth rates expected in emerging countries, it is expected there will be a significant increase in income and increased demand for food, especially regarding meat consumption. In Europe, trends indicate a stagnant agricultural demand by the EU-15 countries, but a growing market for the EU-27 given the expected increase in demand from new member countries. Overall, the demographic trends and global growth expected in the next decade may result in increased demand for the European agricultural sector, but this will depend greatly on the degree of liberalisation and globalisation of markets. Climate change: The effects of climate change (some more predictable than others) may have significant impacts, especially regarding the irrigation of crops and cause a reduction in yield and agricultural productivity. These projections indicate that the environmental impacts will be more intense in western and southern Europe, where the specialisation of production has increased irrigation needs.
9.3.2. Future evolution scenarios for European agriculture

Based on the analysis of the prospects for evolution of the variables described above, the study by the European Science Foundation explores two opposing types of situations: one where it is assumed that the risk of food crises is seen by consumers as high and another where the risk is seen as very low. From these two opposing situations, the authors construct for each of them two alternative scenarios corresponding respectively to a high or low involvement of governmental institutions in agricultural markets. The study therefore identifies four possible evolution scenarios of the European food production system for 2020, which are presented briefly below.
Figure 44 : Do food crises represent a serious threat?
Cucumbers contaminated by the Escherichia coli bacteria

2- European Science Foundation; (2009). Forward Look on European Food Systems in a Changing World. Strasbourg: IREG.
115
ENGLISH > Chapter 9 : The outlook for the Economy of Proximity from now until 2020
Situation A- High risk associated with food crises
In situations such as those experienced during the first decade of the 21st century with successive crises related to food which endangered health and food safety, consumers tend to buy more local products which are safer. The trend towards greater regionalisation of markets or, failing that, maintaining the prevalence of world markets, largely depends on government reactions and the implementation of protectionist measures and global markets responses to consumer concerns.
ANG.
Scenario 1- Protectionism and the increased importance of regional/local markets
In the first scenario, it is assumed that agents feel that food crises represent a high risk in terms of food safety. It is likely that consumer concerns trigger a strong reaction by national governments who will take protectionist measures in favour of local markets and will impose very demanding quality and public health standards on products from elsewhere. Governments simultaneously will seek to support domestic production and take measures to support agricultural and rural development. For their part, consumers will buy local products more often and seek to organise themselves to better support agricultural producers and to put pressure on the government in order to maintain a high level of food safety. In this context the Economy of Proximity will grow, as will short supply and commercialisation chains supported by the collective actions of the stakeholders.
Figure 45 : Protectionism supports the growth of the Economy of Proximity
Scenario 2- Liberalisation and the reaction of global markets

In the second scenario, which still assumes that agents consider a high risk, a hypothesis can be made showing an aggressive reaction by global markets in order to meet consumer expectations and restore their confidence. In this context, the actions of stakeholder will focus on world markets where very demanding standards regarding food safety and control will be imposed. Moreover, organic production will develop on a large-scale and large retail chains will seek to supply them more at local level. In this scenario, the relationship of trust between producers and consumers in terms of food safety is becoming less important, but the costs associated with higher levels of safety and the shift towards more extensive farming systems, will result in higher prices on global markets.
Situation B- Low risk associated with food crises
In the hypothesis where only a low risk is associated with food safety, significant changes in the evolution of consumer preference are not expected. So, choosing between local/regional markets and global markets will depend on actions by local governments.
11 6
Scenario 3- Promoting rural development and protectionist measures

In this scenario, it is assumed that the consumer associates a reduced risk with food crises. Even in these circumstances, the policy of promoting rural development will lead to the implementation of protectionist measures in order to support the diversification of agricultural activity. Therefore, initiatives which bring together the services with high added value and which meet the preferences of consumers will be encouraged: rural tourism, establishment of manufacturing units for traditional food preparation, catering, home delivery, etc. Local markets and the Economy of Proximity can only develop if farmers are able to adapt to consumer demand, offering comfort, convenience and saving time.
.GNA
y tim xorp fo ymoand no cE e ht rof Scenario 4-i Re-orientation of agricultural productive liberalisation tnempoleved
In this last scenario, there is still the assumption of a reduced risk associated with food crises. But now, it is assumed that due to this lack of threat to food safety, there are no compelling reasons for government intervention. In these circumstances, agricultural production will tend to occur in regions where it is most effective and will tend to favour large food supply chains. Changing consumer preference could help to redirect global production systems towards organic production, and perhaps some food companies would supply more local food in response to consumer demand. However, in general, there would be a lot of competition over prices and there would be deterioration of the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products. In short, out of four scenarios presented in this study by the European Commission, three are favourable to the growth of the Economy of Proximity of agricultural products from now until 2020, although it is also necessary that the production systems themselves are able to keep up with changing consumer preferences.

>h ttp://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/index_pt.htm >W atts, D.C.H.; Ilbery, B.; Maye, D., Making Reconnections in Agro-Food Geography: Alternative Systems of Food Provision, Geography Subject Group, School of Science and the Environment, Coventry University, Priory Street, Coventry, CV1 5FB, UK. >T he CAP towards 2020: Meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future Comunicao da Comisso Europeia (2010) >P rospects for agricultural markets and income in the EU 2010-2020 >E uropean Commission - Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (2010), Prospects for Agricultural markets and income in the EU 2010-2020 >S cenar 2020 Scenario study on agriculture and the rural world
117
ENGLISH > Chapter 10 : The Economy of Proximity for the towns in the Atlantic Area
10. The Economy of Proximity for the towns in the Atlantic Area
In Europe, the urban factor not only determines the how the population uses the land but also identifies the keys to sustainable development. Currently, cities are facing major challenges caused by the Financial Crisis and are therefore looking for ways to provide an answer to these challenges. In a competitive environment, the Atlantic cities located on the outskirts of large trade networks, have to constantly innovate and adapt to the extremely rapid market evolutions in order to remain attractive and maintain quality jobs and keep the population in the area. In terms of the Atlantic Arc, which has been specifically affected by the Financial Crisis that has caused a reduction of revenue, environmental requirements should be linked to maintaining an economic activity that creates wealth and quality jobs.
ANG.
The peripheral location of the Atlantic cities is increased by the lack of access to them. However, this region benefits from many advantages, especially its urban dynamism. Similarly, it has a rich environmental heritage thanks to its position along the Atlantic Ocean and its large share of rural areas. The Atlantic Areas environmental resources are also relatively well protected because urbanisation is lower than elsewhere in Europe, despite increasing pressure. This leads to a quality of life which is recognised and should be further taken advantage of. The ANATOLE project not only highlights the central role of cities in the development of the Atlantic Area, but it reveals how the Economy of Proximity is an essential tool for combining the three pillars of sustainability: environmental, economic and social, through an eco-systemic growth approach.
10.1. How the Economy of Proximity can protect the environment

The Atlantic Area is a macro-region with a high level of conservation and remains very attractive. Whilst its rich biodiversity is perhaps less threatened than others may be, extreme events due to climate change such as the storms Klaus (2009) and Xynthia (2010) show that measures for prevention and adaptation are necessary. This is even more relevant since this region is working towards becoming Green Arc where sustainability aims to provide the best results for the environment and for people. An urban strategy for sustainable development would not be complete if it did not take into account these two complementary approaches. In 2008, the Atlantic Arc cities had already decided to take action against climate change and approved the Atlantic Charter of San Sebastin for sustainable urban development - green, attractive and solidarity-based cities. With this charter, the cities offer a new strategy, focused on defining a new green urban model. Similarly, many Atlantic cities are among the 3,000 signatories of Frances Mayors Agreement. Today, through Agenda 21 and Climate-Energy for sustainable energy action plans, cities seek ways to provide enough food for the local population and reduce negative environmental effects at the same time. Climate change is one of the major regulatory conditions for the sustainable development of agriculture and food production. Food safety for cities has to be built on renewed production and distribution systems, protecting natural resources and responding to new lifestyles. In terms of transport and energy, the concept of food miles has entered into the ecological analysis and encourages the reduction of distance during the production and distribution of food products. Every meal therefore, fights to reduce the impact of transportation and packaging on the environment. With this in view, improving local markets can contribute to a more sustainable agriculture, respect high environmental standards, reduce energy consumption, promote animal welfare and promote nature and biodiversity.
11 8
ENGLISH > Chapter 10 : The Economy of Proximity for the towns in the Atlantic ENGLISH Area > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
.GNA
This also assumes that there is restricted urban planning to avoid urban sprawl and facilitate urban regeneration, making the most of green areas instead of abandoning them. The urban-rural contact and the increased demand for local products will result in the opportunity to rethink the city in terms of food safety. The deindustrialisation of the Atlantic Arc cities has become an asset particularly with regards to using wasteland for agriculture
10.2 Proximity as an economic driving force

Food prices in Europe hit a record high in 2011 and led to various food, environmental and social issues. Usually, according to customer demand for local products, local authorities can take action in terms of prices (because there will be an increase in supply in response to this new demand), environmental production conditions and social equity in order to facilitate access fresh and quality produce. While maintaining competition and transparency, consumer demand can be used to help guide the market to become more socially responsible and contribute to sustainable development. This demand by the local authorities will be an example which can influence the market. European directives on the provision of services provide the opportunity for social considerations to be taken into account, provided they are related to the main aim of the contract. Similarly, the effects of the Economy of Proximity on the local market contribute to more effective public expenditure, because they can measure risks and encourage budgets to prioritise types of expenditures that improve social outcomes. In a context where unemployment is on the rise, it is important to note that the involvement of towns in the Economy of Proximity creates employment opportunities (green jobs in a sustainable food system) and helps to maintain existing jobs. It strives to provide decent work, to help the sector achieve sustainability, to guarantee social and labour rights and social inclusion. Moreover, the Economy of Proximity favours the promotion of SMEs and entrepreneurs, improving, for example, the viability of small farms, local markets and local shops. However, since the Crisis particularly affects the Atlantic cities real economies, the role of the Economy of Proximity would not be able to be limited to public demand. For the system to be perpetuated and efficient, cities in partnership with the rest of the stakeholders should aim at improving skills (for labour and management) and help companies promote their products, particularly by giving small-scale farmers the opportunity to communicate to consumers the difference between their products and conventional products ethically and in terms of their production methods. Similarly, the process must attempt to resolve supply problems and increase access to fresh food including for distributors, for takeaway restaurants and supermarkets. The partnership that should be built should consist of a variety of local food producers, suppliers, retailers, community groups, consumers and other organisations in order to promote the tools in support of local projects which are innovative, can bring people together and generate growth.
10.3 Proximity can be a social and identity link

The average size of Atlantic cities means that a social environment can be created and maintained where everybody knows their neighbours and where the rural link is still very strong. What people eat is not only a response to human necessity but also a question about the world we live in. Food safety, in all its aspects, reminds the Atlantic society of its ties to and role in globalisation. As it was mentioned earlier, the Economy of Proximity creates partnerships in which all groups are included and promotes local, balanced trade. These food clusters will help lead to better inter-connected cities, especially if measures incorporate new technologies and nutritional mapping.
119
ENGLISH > Chapter 10 : The Economy of Proximity for the towns in the Atlantic Area
The direct participation of inhabitants in the setting up of these projects, or in the production or distribution, is essential. In the Atlantic Arc, this participation has developed in several forms, such as Community-Supported Agriculture, nutritional workshops, local food networks, good fruit and vegetables systems, breakfast clubs, local labels, etc. Social responsibility (public and private) can help to improve access to tasty, affordable, fresh, seasonal and local food products. The promotion of access, healthy eating and nutrition education needs to be reflected in increased food safety for all, especially for social groups who are less privileged. Food products are linked to the identity of a region and its natural, cultural and historical aspects, both coastal and inland, including local recipes and the flavours which represent a sense of ownership by local communities. In the definition by the Food Agriculture Organisation, the characteristics of the Atlantic diet include the following: > Plenty of seasonal, local, fresh and unprocessed products. > Plenty of vegetables, fruit, bread and cereals, potatoes, chestnuts, nuts and legumes. > The importance of fish and shellfish and dairy products, cheese in particular This Atlantic diet matches the traditional Celtic respect for nature. In consistency with these characteristics, the Economy of Proximity in Atlantic Area not only serves to strengthen social and economic links, but also defines, in relation to food, the authentic identity and culture specific to the area. Moreover, traditional and artisanal recipes are important on a day-to-day basis and food is an asset for the protection of local heritage and traditions. In conclusion, an Atlantic city which sets up an Economy of Proximity system is a green, attractive, inclusive Atlantic city.
ANG.
12 0
ENGLISH > Chapter10 : The Economy of Proximity for the towns in the Atlantic ENGLISH Area > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?
CONCLUSION
ANATOLE, the European Commission and the future CAP In March .G NA 2012, the ANATOLE partners presented to the European Commission in Brussels, the results of
work conducted with support from the ERDF under the INTERREG IVb Atlantic Area on the priority of urban development. In a guidance note, dated April 2012, concerning the support from the future CAP from 2014 to 2020 for the agricultural economy of proximity, Commissioner Ciolos made six proposals, five of which have been highlighted by the ANATOLE project: > He proposed to better identify consumer demand -. ANATOLE did a survey of consumers via the Basque Country on the expectations and perceptions of products. > It stresses the need to retrain the craft trade producers - ANATOLE proposed several solutions to overcome the lack of business training for farmers or using intermediaries (Ireland), or through producer groups and communities (SCIC in Aquitaine), but also imagining a speed meeting (Poitou-Charentes) or by creating collective warehousing (Loire). > The Commissioner calls for the identification of local sectors to ensure better visibility - ANATOLE established diagnoses to determine the status of the local economy in the territories involved in the project. > A t the same time, the Commission stresses the need for support of small farms to implement a tailored health regulations - This point is the subject of a chapter in the Good Practice Guide written by Anatole partners. > T he report of DG AGRI suggested renewing rural / urban links - ANATOLE brings the countryside into the city, not only by introducing local produce markets (Markets Producers Country Bordeaux) but also by developing farms closer to the city (land theme developed by Nantes Mtropole) . ANATOLE collaborates directly with the governance of cities to create rural / urban links amongst consumers and suppliers. Finally, the Commissioner encourages farmers to invest in the local economy. This will be possible when the producers discern more clearly the economic opportunities of this new market. They invest so much better when the future CAP establishes incentives on all six directions envisaged by the European Commission. Cities and Atlantic regions have fully understood that to develop their agriculture and rural areas, consumers must be involved, especially since they usually have a very positive image of local products.
121
FRANAIS > Le projet ANATOLE
Le projet ANATOLE
Le projet ANATOLE - Atlantic Networks Abilities for Towns to Organize Local Economy, est un projet transnational financ par le programme europen Espace Atlantique, dont les travaux ont dmarr en janvier de 2010 et conclus en dcembre 2011. Les rsultats du projet sont des outils pratiques servant mettre en uvre des interventions en partenariat avec les acteurs oprationnels de terrain et dirigs vers les marchs locaux de produits agricoles des villes atlantiques. Le projet regroupe de 9 partenaires effectifs et 3 partenaires associs rpartis sur quatre pays. Lobjectif principal dANATOLE est celui de promouvoir lconomie de proximit de produits agricoles dans les villes de lArc Atlantique.
FR
Argumentaire

Figure 46: Les partenaires du projet ANATOLE
WEDP CVAA
AC3A Bureau de Nantes
Irish Exporters
Nantes mtropole aDterra
Hazi Ieru Diputacin de Huelva
> AC3A Association des Chambres dAgriculture de lArc Atlantique

Figure 47: Territoires reprsents par lAC3A
Chef de file du projet ANATOLE, lAC3A est depuis 1992 une association qui regroupe 5 Chambres Rgionales dAgriculture de la faade atlantique franaise, qui ont dcid de renforcer leurs changes et de dvelopper des actions communes. LAC3A est pilote par un bureau compos des Prsidents des cinq Chambres Rgionales, assistes de leurs Directeurs. Ses diffrents programmes dactivits sont orients et suivis par des commissions composes de respon-sables professionnels agricoles. Structure comme une plateforme de coopration, lAC3A a pour mission de reprsenter lintrt des secteurs dactivits ruraux auprs de lUnion Europenne et des organisations interrgionales de lEspace Atlantique (CRPM, Commission Arc Atlantique). Lassociation assure
18 0
galement lingnierie de projets transnationaux innovants dans le cadre des programmes soutenus par le FEDER, FSE, etc. Pouvant impliquer, elle seule, toutes les rgions franaises atlantiques, lAC3A a un rle moteur important dans le dveloppement agricole de lEspace Atlantique.
RF
eriatnemugrA
Daniel GENISSEL, Prsident de lAC3A Jacques CHEVALIER, Secrtaire Gnral de lAC3A
seuqitilop sed ruevaf nE eimonocl ed noitomorp ed timixorp ed

> Province de Huelva
Le Prsident Daniel GENISSEL a propos lors du congrs 2011 qui a eu lieu Nantes avec Nantes Mtropole, de conduire une rflexion sur lconomie de proximit (ANATOLE) et lconomie dune agriculture mondialise. Au travers de celles-ci, le Prsident a souhait que nous ayons une rflexion sur le devenir de la PAC.
Figure 48: Vue de la ville de Huelva La ville de Huelva est une ville industrielle et portuaire qui comprend 144.000 habitants en 2010. La Province dHuelva a une superficie de 10.090 km2 et une population de 518.081 habitantes en 2010. Conjointement avec lindustrie, le btiment et le tourisme, lactivit conomique et des entreprises est attache au secteur agricole. Les produits agroalimentaires plus importants de lconomie locale sont le jambon, lhuile dolive, le vin, la fraise, les citrons, les conserves de poisson et les fruits de mer. Ces produits ont des marchs locaux assez restreints, tant vendus pour la plupart dans lAndalousie occidentale avec la collaboration de la dnomination dorigine Jamn dHuelva , la dnomination dorigine Vins et Vinaigres du Comt dHuelva , la marque Aceite dHuelva, Freshuelva, lAssociation de Citriculteurs et Interfresa. La Diputacin Provincial dHuelva est linstitution charge du gouvernement et de ladministration autonome de la Province dHuelva. La Diputacin collabore dans la gestion, coopration et prte assistance aux 79 municipalits de la Province dHuelva.
Ignacio CARABALLO ROMERO, Prsident de la Diputacin Provincial de Huelva.
Le rle des reprsentants politiques, dans le cadre du projet ANATOLE, est celui de convaincre de la valeur de la proximit et limportance dappuyer les secteurs productifs locaux de Huelva, en particulier les produits drivs de lhuile dolive, conserves de poisson et vins.
181
> ADTERRA
Figure 49 : Equipe de travail dADTERRA
ADTERRA est une association qui participe dans le dveloppement des territoires dans la rgion de Galice, en assurant des services de formation, daccompagnement et autres lattention des acteurs locaux (professionnels, techniciens, entrepreneurs, associations culturelles, institutions sociales, etc.), les appuyant ainsi dans leur itinraires pour rpondre aux dfis actuels du dveloppement: > Promouvoir les richesses et la diversit des territoires ; > Doter les territoires de projets mobilisateurs ; > Inventer le futur des territoires.
FR
Argumentaire
Lintgration des acteurs locaux dans des rseaux de coopration et partenariat leur permet dinscrire leur travail dans un processus continu de formation-action qui scoule sans sursauts. Ce processus de formation introduit dans les rseaux une dynamique de questionnement, la reconnaissance et lchange dides entre les participants, pour qui ce processus se rvle tre ainsi un moyen privilgi dinnovation. Ce travail dADTERRA trouve sa lgitimation dans la vision que lon a actuellement du territoire, en tant quespace vivant et riche en ressources quil est urgent de dvoiler et valoriser pour gnrer de nouvelles activits conomiques et emplois.
D. Joaqun HERREROS ROBLES, Prsident de lADTERRA
Pour ADTERRA, en tant quinstitution qui pratique le dveloppement local, le projet ANATOLE a t une opportunit spciale pour mettre en pratique le concept de proximit et dcouvrir des nouveaux cas et mthodes dans son application comme cadre dinitiatives de dynamisation conomique, de cration demplois, de valorisation des ressources humaines, et de coopration sociale publique-prive et intersectorielle.
> IERU Instituto de Estudos Regionais e Urbanos da Universidade de Coimbra

Figure 50 : Equipe de travail de lIERU LInstitut dtudes Rgionales et Urbaines de lUniversit de Coimbra (IERU), est un organisme de recherche pluridisciplinaire dans les domaines de lconomie rgionale et urbaine qui a t cr en 1986. Outre les activits de recherche, lIERU labore des tudes et assure dautres services spcialiss des organismes privs et publics, surtout des municipalits. Dans les dernires annes, lIERU a particip dans une douzaine de projets financs par les programmes communautaires INTERREG, ESPON et Leonardo da Vinci. Dans le cadre du projet ANATOLE, lIERU a concentr une bonne partie de ses efforts la production doutils de diffusion et de promotion de lconomie de proximit (un guide de lconomie de proximit et le prsent ouvrage). Par ailleurs, en collaboration avec la municipalit dAveiro, lIERU a particip activement la dfinition et au
18 2
dmarrage dun programme dactions dont lobjectif principal est de transformer les deux marchs municipaux dAveiro (marchs de Santiago et Manuel Firmino) en des lieux privilgis pour stimuler lconomie de proximit des produits agricoles.
RF
eriatnemugrA
Henrique ALBERGARIA, Directeur de lIERU.
seuqitilop sed ruevaf nE eimonocl ed noitomorp ed > CVAA - Confrence des Villes de lArc Atlantique timixorp ed
La Confrence des Villes de lArc Atlantique (CVAA), constitue en 2000 linitiative de M. Edmond Herv, alors maire de Rennes, reprsente actuel-lement plus de 100 collectivits locales et 7 millions dhabitants de villes de la faade atlantique europenne. Ce rseau travaille avec diffrentes institutions afin de promouvoir le rle des villes en Europe et de mettre en avant la spcificit de lArc Atlantique. La prsidence est actuellement assure par M. Philippe Duron, Dput-Maire de Caen.
Pour lIERU, ANATOLE a reprsent une excellente opportunit pour dvelopper une recherche applique sur un thme de la plus grande actualit. Mais, ce qui a t vraiment gratifiant cest quunis derrire lobjectif de promouvoir lconomie de proximit, le partenariat a produit des rsultats concrets qui ont bnfici quelques territoires de lEspace Atlantique en mme temps quil a cr des outils qui permettront, en quelque sorte, damener la bonne parole dautres villes de lespace atlantique et du reste de lUE.
Figure 51: Localisation des membres de la CVAA
Structure de coordination et de reprsentation, la CVAA tablit des liens tangibles entre ses membres et cre des synergies entre les diffrentes actions aux niveaux local et transnational. Afin damliorer leur attractivit, le travail en rseau offre aux villes adhrentes la possibilit de reprsenter une masse critique qui accrot progressivement leur visibilit et leur influence. La CVAA entend ainsi devenir le forum urbain de rfrence de lArc Atlantique travers la promotion dun modle de villes vertes, attractives et solidaires.
Le projet ANATOLE met non seulement en avant le rle primordial des villes dans le dveloppement de lespace atlantique, mais il rvle lconomie de proximit comme un outil indispensable pour conjuguer les trois axes de la durabilit : environnemental, conomique et social, dans une approche co-systmique de la croissance.
Philippe DURON, Dput-Maire de Caen.
183
> HAZI, Corporacin del Gobierno Vasco para el desarrollo del medio rural y marino
Figure 52 : Canton de Donostealdea San Sebastin
HAZI est le fruit de lunion entre les entreprises Itsasmendikoi, IKT y Fundacin Kalitatea, qui se sont associs pour atteindre un objectif commun: stimuler la comptitivit et la durabilit du secteur primaire, alimentaire et du milieu rural et littoral basque.
FR
Argumentaire
Le canton de Donostialdea a une superficie de 376 km2 et une population de 379.039 habitants. Il sagit donc dun canton trs peupl, avec une densit leve (1.008 hab./km2), ce qui sexplique, entre autres, par le relief doux dune grande partie de son territoire et aussi en raison de sa localisation stratgique. Depuis toujours sont prsents dans la ville de San Sebastian des producteurs locaux qui font de la vente de produits dans les circuits courts leur moyen de vie. Actuellement, aux circuits de vente traditionnels de produits locaux, sont mises en route des nouvelles initiatives qui renforcent la prsence de produits locaux dans San Sebastian. Par ailleurs, on assiste la consolidation des expriences existantes au fur et la mesure que les projets avancent au mme temps que les rapports entre les administrations et et les producteurs se renforcent.
Juan Pablo MEDRANO Directeur de Desarrollo Rural y Littoral del Gobierno Vasco
Ce type de projets en rseau suppose non seulement que lon partage des expriences sur les systmes de commercialisation dont peuvent dpendre un type dexploitations durables et autosuffisantes, mais aussi que lon accepte un travail de sensibilisation dans les institutions qui y participent. Celai favorise linteraction entre le monde rural et le monde urbain, une entente qui est fondamentale pour les politiques tenant la qualit alimentaire ou la production durable.
> Nantes Mtropole

Figure 53 : Nantes Mtropole Lagglomration nantaise est situe 360 km lOuest de Paris, sur lestuaire de la Loire, en faade Atlantique. Elle comprend 590.000 habitants sur 24 communes. Les enjeux agricoles et naturels y sont particulirement importants, puisquils reprsentent les deux-tiers des 52.000 ha de lagglomration. Dans le cadre de ses comptences, Nantes mtropole dveloppe un important programme de soutien lagriculture priurbaine en troite collaboration avec ses partenaires : Chambre dAgriculture de Loire-Atlantique, SAFER, communes et autres collectivits, associations
18 4
Ses priorits portent sur la prise en compte et la protection rglementaire des espaces agricoles (avec un engagement politique au maintien des terres agricoles durant 20 ans au minimum) ainsi que sur laccs au foncier pour les professionnels (lutte contre la rtention foncire et valorisation des friches agricoles). Ces objectifs sont accompagns par le dveloppement de lconomie de proximit dont la vente directe, ainsi que par la prise en compte de la biodiversit dans les exploitations agricoles, mais galement par la contribution de lagriculture la trame verte et bleue.
RF
eriatnemugrA

Jean-Pierre LEGENDRE, Vice-Prsident de Nantes Mtropole
Le dveloppement des circuits courts est un moyen pour les agriculteurs de valoriser leurs produits et de conserver localement la valeur ajoute cre. Il permet ainsi de compenser les contraintes de production en milieu urbain, commencer par les difficults daccs au foncier. Il sagit galement de rapprocher les producteurs des consommateurs. Ceci est indispensable pour faire comprendre et accepter le rle de lagriculture dans lagglomration : produire des biens de consommation, soutenir une activit conomique dynamique, assurer lentretien des paysages agricoles et naturels caractristiques de nos territoires (vignobles, prairies, bocage, marachage).
> IEA Irish Exporters Association

Figure 54: Dublin County
LIrish Exporters Association (IEA) est un organisme dont lobjectif principal est de promouvoir et de reprsenter les intrts des exportateurs irlandais, et de tous ceux qui souhaitent dvelopper leur activit lexport aussi bien dans lindustrie quen prestations de services. travers le projet ANATOLE, lIEA et le Dublin County Enterprise Boards, ont cr en fvrier 2011 la Dublin Food Chain dont lobjectif est de Chercher et identifier les principaux dfis auxquels doivent faire face les petits producteurs, distributeurs et dtaillants dans le secteur alimentaire de la rgion de Dublin et dvelopper un rseau dans lequel les diffrents acteurs pourront travailler ensemble pour dvelopper une conomie locale durable.
Le maire de Dublin, Gerry Breen a flicit Dublin Region City & County Enterprise Boards et lIrish Exporters Association pour cette excellente initiative. La Dublin Food Chain augmentera les opportunits dexportation et la croissance des entreprises locales, ce qui son tour, aura des effets sur la cration demplois .
Cllr.Gerry BREEN, Maire de Dublin
185
> County Westmeath

Figure 55: County of Westmeath
Le comt de Westmeath est situ dans la province de Leinster dans la rgion Nord Centre de lIrlande. En 2006, Westmeath avait 79.346 habitants. Mullingar est le centre administratif du comt et a la plus nombreuse population urbaine du comt. Bien quil existe beaucoup de commerces et des centres commerciaux, Westmeath reste traditionnellement marqu par lconomie rurale. Westmeath County Council a labor la stratgie Apporter Qualit la Vie et sest engag dvelopper le comt pour quil devienne un centre demplois, dentreprises, dentrepreneurs et dinvestissements et ainsi crer une conomie robuste et diversifie, mais aussi une conomie de proximit.
FR
Argumentaire
Le travail dANATOLE Westmeath sest souci avec le dveloppement de lconomie de proximit, en particulier dans le domaine de lalimentation, et sa contribution au dveloppement conomique. Westmeath Community Development, en tant que partenaire du projet ANATOLE, a dcid de focaliser son action sur les achats et les ventes collectives et aussi sur le rseau de producteurs, avec lobjectif de rduire les cots. Dans le cadre de cet objectif, Westmeath Food Network a t cr en mars 2010 et compte actuellement avec 30 membres.
Robert TROY T.D, Membre du Parlement pour Westmeath
Dan McCARTHY, Vice Prsident, Westmeath Co Council
Le succs du projet ANATOLE est mis en vidence par la qualit de la participation de Networking et de lInter-Agency.
Le projet ANATOLE est un bon exemple de leadership dmontr par Westmeath Community Development dans le dveloppement conomique de quatre cantons.
18 6
> Municipalit de Santiago de Compostela et Canton

Figure 56: Municipalit de Santiago de Compostela La municipalit de Santiago de Compostela, est la capitale administrative, politique et culturelle de la Galice. Sa superficie est de 220,35 km avec une densit de population de 430,33 hab./km. Le canton de Compostela comprend une population de 168.384 personnes et occupe un territoire avec 689,5 km. Bien quelle ne soit pas une municipalit qui soit connue pour sa production agricole et son levage, son statut de capitale du canton de Compostela, lamne travailler avec des municipalits trs rurales, correspondant la zone dinfluence du Groupe de Dveloppement Rural GRD 24, Terres de Compostela. Cela lui donne une localisation spcifique et une situation de leadership lintrieur du canton, et une position privilgie pour dfinir des stratgies favorisant lactivit conomique agricole et notamment llevage selon les principes de la durabilit environnementale et le dveloppement de stratgies centres sur lconomie de proximit, comme dans le cas du projet ANATOLE.
RF
eriatnemugrA
Angel CURRS, Alcalde de Santiago de Compostela
ANATOLE reprsente pour la municipalit de Santiago un excellent moyen pour approfondir les opportunits offertes lconomie de proximit pour amliorer la qualit de vie des citoyens de Santiago de Compostela, le dveloppement de ses environs ruraux et la jouissance des millions de visiteurs que nous accueillons chaque anne, dune faon socialement plus juste et conomiquement plus durable.
> Municipalit dAveiro

Figure 57: La ville dAveiro
Partenaire associ du projet ANATOLE, Aveiro est situ 230 km de Lisbonne, 70 km de Porto et 180 km de la frontire espagnole. La municipalit dAveiro a une surface de 199,77 km et comprend en 2011une population de 78.450 habitants. La ville dAveiro, sige de la municipalit, a un peu plus que 56.000 habitants. Chaque jour 30.000 personnes rentrent dans la ville et y viennent pour travailler ou tudier. Le secteur agricole a un poids rduit dans lconomie dAveiro en termes demplois et de cration de valeur ajoute. Toutefois, limportance de ce secteur doit tre value dans une perspective plus large, celle dun modle de dveloppement durable o lon tient compte simultanment de lconomie, de lenvironnement et videmment du social. Dans cette perspective, Aveiro, o lon a
PORTO
AVEIRO
LISBOA
187
recens plus dun millier de petites exploitations agricoles, lagriculture est une activit importante, entre autres, pour tout ce quelle reprsente au niveau de la cohsion du tissu social et par son potentiel pour promouvoir lconomie de proximit. Toutes ces raisons expliquent lintrt des responsables politiques dAveiro pour le projet ANATOLE.
FR
lio MAIA, maire dAveiro
Le dveloppement du projet ANATOLE Aveiro a t initi partir du partenariat tabli avec lIERU. Il a contribu mettre en uvre un certain nombre dinitiatives dans les marchs municipaux qui cherchent promouvoir la consommation de produits agricoles locaux et donc promouvoir lconomie de proximit et les bienfaits que dhabitude on leur associe au niveau conomique, social et environnemental .
Argumentaire
18 8

Argumentary

Cargado por

Información del documento

Descripción:

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Descripción:

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Argumentary

Cargado por

Descripción:

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Argumentaire

ARGUMENTAIRE en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

> Rmi MER, consultant

Cofinanc avec lappui de lUnion europenne FEDER - Programme Espace Atlantique

INVESTIR DANS NOTRE FUTUR COMMUN

ARGUMENTAIRE en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

ARGUMENTAIRE en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

73 78 81 91 95 99 105 113 118 121

Lenjeu de lconomie de proximit pour les villes de lArc Atlantique 62 Conclusion 65

ARGUMENTAIRE en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

Chapitre 1 : Les politiques publiques des collectivits

Introduction ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?

ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?

1. What is the Economy of Proximity?

Cognitive resources Mediation system

Source: N. Bon (2009)

1.2. Economy of Proximity, flow and identity

ARGUMENTAIRY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?

ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

ENGLISH > Chapter 1 : What is the Economy of Proximity?

Figure 3 : Setting up a direct link between producer and consumer.

ytimixorp fo ymonocE eht rof tnempoleved

ARGUMENTAIRY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

For more information ...

for the Economy of proximity development

ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

2. What are the benefits of the Economy of Proximity?

ytimixorp fo ymonocE eht rof tnempoleved

Environmental and natural resources system

2.1. The re-localisation of economic flows

for the Economy of proximity development

Figure 7: The multiplier effect of employment

Employment in other sectors

Source: Otto & Varner, 2005

ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

Figure 8: Substituting importations

ytimixorp fo ymonocE eht rof tnempoleved

2.2. positive impact on the environment

Source : Pirog, Van Pelt, Enshayan, & Cook, 2001

ARGUMENTAIRY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

2.3. The impact on land use

for the Economy of proximity development

2.4. An answer to the expectations and needs of the population

ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

For more information ...

ytimixorp fo ymonocE eht rof tnempoleved

ARGUMENTAIRY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

3. Who are the stakeholders of the Economy of Proximity?

for the Economy of proximity development

European Union Central Governments

3.1. Local governments and authorities

ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

ytimixorp fo ymonocE eht rof tnempoleved

ARGUMENTAIRY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit

Figure 11 : Different types of consumers

3.4. Community institutions

for the Economy of proximity development

For more information

ARGUMENTARY en faveur des politiques de promotion de lconomie de proximit