An official website of the United States government
Food system sustainability, and ways of measuring it, are widely explored and discussed in academic literature. Measurement efforts are challenging because food systems are inherently complex and multifaceted, spanning diverse components, industries, sectors, and scales. Several systems of indicators and metrics have been proposed to measure sustainability; however, most existing research focuses either on narrow scales (e.g., farm level or within a single supply chain), expansive scales that can gloss over complexity (e.g., national or global assessments), or limited scopes (e.g., only considering environmental factors). A gap in the literature is a holistic local or regional approach to food system sustainability that integrates components across the system at a regional scale. In this reflective essay, we describe our development of a framework to measure and track sustainability in such systems. We use a tiered framework that includes five sustainability dimensions and a system of indices, indicators, and metrics that allows for the measurement of important food system characteristics in a feasible and reproducible way. We employ a collaborative, transdisciplinary, facilitated team science process to first propose, and then refine, a sustainability assessment framework, using the U.S. state of Vermont as a case study. This paper details our process and progress, as well as reflections on challenges and recommendations for other team scientists. We further propose a plan to implement the framework, collect data, and engage with community members. The experiences and findings described here serve as a foundation for our own team’s continued work, as well as a springboard for other similar research efforts.
more »
« less
A malleable workflow for identifying the issues and indicators that define and measure sustainability in food systems
A variety of stakeholders are concerned with many issues regarding the sustainability of our complex global food system. Yet navigating and comparing the plethora of issues and indicators across scales, commodities, and regions can be daunting, particularly for different communities of practice with diverse goals, perspectives, and decision-making workflows. This study presents a malleable workflow to help different stakeholder groups identify the issues and indicators that define food system sustainability for their particular use case. By making information used in such workflows semantically-consistent, the output from each unique case can be easily compared and contrasted across domains, contributing to both a deeper and broader understanding of what issues and indicators define a resilient global food system.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1737573
- PAR ID:
- 10389193
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems
- Volume:
- 6
- ISSN:
- 2571-581X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
There is an increasing appreciation that food–energy–water (FEW) nexus problems are approaching criticality in both the developing and developed world. As researchers and managers attempt to address these complex resource management issues, the concept of the FEW nexus has generated a rapidly growing footprint in global sustainability discourse. However, this momentum in the FEW nexus space could be better guided if researchers could more clearly identify what is and is not a FEW problem. Without this conceptual clarity, it can be difficult to defend the position that FEW innovations will produce desired outcomes and avoid unintended consequences. Here we examine the growing FEW nexus scholarship to critically evaluate what features are necessary to define a FEW nexus. This analysis suggests that the FEW nexus differs from sector-focused natural resource or sustainability problems in both complexity and stakes. It also motivates two new foci for research: the identification of low-dimension indexes of FEW system status and approaches for identifying boundaries of specific FEW nexuses.more » « less
-
With their numerous products and uses, multifunctional crops offer an attractive means for improving smallholder farmer livelihoods. This study applies a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) to Moringa oleifera (moringa), a multifunctional crop with diverse applications in nutrition, cosmetics, and water treatment. The LCSA includes an Environmental Life Cycle Assessment (ELCA), Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA), and Life Cycle Costing (LCC). Surveys were conducted with 58 smallholder farmers and five moringa processors in Ghana. The ReCiPe 2016 Midpoint method was used for the ELCA. The 10-year Net Present Value (NPV) and Payback Period (PBP) were calculated for farmers and processors in the LCC. The SLCA focused on the Worker stakeholder category, particularly smallholder farmer impacts, including indicators for Next Generation Farming, Inclusiveness, Access to Services, Food Security, and Livelihood. A composite sustainability score was calculated from the ELCA, SLCA, and LCC results using the Characteristic Objects Method (COMET), a multi-criteria decision analysis method resistant to rank-reversal. The study compared five supply chains: leaf-only, leaf-and-seed, leaf-and-seed with seedcake reuse, seed-only, and seed-only with seedcake reuse. Environmental hotspots were identified in leaf and seed collection. Economically, leaf-only cultivation provided the highest 10-year NPV for farmers, while seed-only with seedcake reuse yielded the highest NPV for processors. The leaf-only supply chain had the best PBP for both farmers and processors. Socially, leaf-only cultivators outperformed reference points across all indicators, making it the most socially sustainable supply chain. Our findings highlight that improving market access, organizing seed cultivators into farmer-based groups, and optimizing farm gate product collection can enhance the sustainability of moringa supply chains, offering a model for other multifunctional crops in rural development. This study is the first to integrate LCSA with COMET, a promising approach that could be adopted in other sustainability assessment case studies.more » « less
-
The demand for ‘local food’ by U.S. consumers has grown markedly over the last several decades, accompanied by confusion over how to define local food. Is ‘local’ food defined by the location of the farm, food processing factory, distribution warehouse, or all three? Is ‘local’ food defined by geographic, political, or biophysical boundaries? Is ‘local’ solely farm-to-table or can it include factories? This study evaluates food commodity flow ‘localness’ using jurisdictional boundaries and physical distance to investigate the potential for food system transformation and the tradeoffs inherent to ‘localizing’ food production. We take a supply chain approach by making data-driven distinctions between farm-based flows of food and industrial, energy and nonfood (IENF) crops, and manufacturing/distribution flows of food and agriculturally-derived industrial inputs. We analyze the diversity, distance (a proxy for environmental impact), political boundaries, population, weight, and price (net selling value) of food commodity flows. The diversity of a community's food supply has an optimal range of zero to four-hundred miles. We find tradeoffs between food system diversity and local food sourcing, sustainability, and self-sufficiency. As communities look to improve food system resilience, they will need to balance food-miles and the other values associated with local food.more » « less
-
Abstract Beef production systems are at the center of ongoing discussion and debate on food systems sustainability. There is a growing interest among beef producers, consumers, and other beef supply chain stakeholders in achieving greater sustainability within the industry, but the relationship of this interest to general sustainability issues such as climate change, biodiversity loss, food security, livelihood risks, and animal welfare concerns is unclear. Specifically, there is very little research documenting how beef producers define and view the concept of sustainability and how to achieve it. Producer perspectives are critical to identifying constraints to sustainability transitions or to help build agreement with other producers about the shared values such transitions may support. Through a secondary analysis of survey data of U.S. beef producers (n = 911) conducted in 2021 by the Trust in Food division of Farm Journal, a corporation that provides content, data, and business insights to the agricultural community (e.g., producers, processors/distributors, and retailers), we investigated what “sustainable beef” means to U.S. beef producers, highlighting the key components and constraints they perceive to achieving desirable sustainability outcomes. Leveraging the three-pillar model of sustainability as a framework for analysis, we identified key themes producers use to define “sustainable beef.” We found that producers collectively viewed sustainability as: (1) multidimensional and interconnected; (2) semi-closed and regenerative; (3) long-lasting; and (4) producer-centered, although an integrated perspective uniting these aspects was rare. We discuss how these perspectives may be the basis for sustainability efforts supported by producers and raise future research considerations toward a shared understanding of what sustainability is and what is needed for enduring sustainability solutions in the U.S. beef industry.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.684831
