Localisation of primary food production in Finland: production potential and environmental impacts

19 Pages·2008·1.96 MB·English

A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
Localisation of primary food production in Finland:
production potential and environmental impacts of
food consumption patterns
Helmi Risku-Norja
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Economic Research, FI-31600 Jokioinen Finland,
e-mail: [email protected]
Reija Hietala
Department of Applied Biology and Agroecology, FI-00014 Helsinki University, Finland
Hanna Virtanen
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Biotechnology and Food Research, FI-31600 Jokioinen, Finland
Hanna Ketomäki
MTT Agrifood Research Finland, Economic Research, FI-31600Jokioinen, Finland
Juha Helenius
Department of Applied Biology and Agroecology, FI-00014 Helsinki University, Finland
The potential for and environmental consequences of localising primary production of food were investi-
gated by considering different food consumption patterns, based on conventional and organic production.
Environmental impact was assessed according to agricultural land use and numbers of production animals,
both of which depend on food consumption. The results were quantified in terms of nutrient balances,
greenhouse gas and acid emissions and the diversity of crop cultivation, which indicate eutrophication of
watersheds, climate change and landscape changes, respectively.
The study region was able to satisfy its own needs for all farming and food consumption scenarios. Di-
etary choice had a marked impact on agricultural land use and on the environmental parameters considered.
Organic farming for local food production resulted in higher greenhouse gas emissions. Compared with
mixed diets, the vegetarian diet was associated with lower emissions and nutrient surpluses, but also with
reduced crop diversity. The arable areas allocated to leys and pastures were also smaller.
The study area represents a predominantly rural region and is a net exporter of agricultural produce.
Therefore, only part of the environmental impact of food production results from local needs. Both the
© Agricultural and Food Science
Manuscript received August 2007
127
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
differences among the dietary options and the overall environmental benefit of localised primary food
production were greatly reduced when considering total agricultural production of the region. Much of the
negative impact of agriculture is due to food consumption in the densely populated urban areas, but the
consequences are mainly felt in the production areas. The environmental impacts of localisation of primary
food production for the rural areas are small and inconsistent. The results indicate the importance of defining
‘local’ on a regional basis and including the urban food sinks in impact assessment.
Key-words: food production, food consumption, conventional and organic local production, dietary changes,
production potential, environmental impacts
128 129
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
Introduction
2005, Herro 2006, Roe 2006). Local, organic, slow
and vegetarian foods, as well as fair trade food, ap-
pear as attempts to reconcile food production and
Problems related to food production are of great food consumption, and the associated social, envi-
public concern. This is partly due to restructuring ronmental and ethical issues, with personal choice,
of markets for increased global production and con- healthiness and tastiness.
sumption, and the cumulative economic forces that In literature dealing with food systems the fea-
drive the food trade towards increased centralisa- sibility in terms of production capacity has not been
tion. Globalisation, or centralisation, is governed the issue. In contrast to the mainstream food sys-
by prevailing economic conditions that favour scal- tem research, agro-food studies approach alterna-
ing-up of industrial production and establishment tive food supplies in more physical terms. Research
of fewer, larger trans-national food corporations related to environmental impacts of local, domestic
(e.g. Whatmore 2002). The standard arguments in and organic food production and of dietary choices,
favour of global food markets are free trade and is active, but to date the results are inconclusive.
competition. This appeals to consumers because In Sweden, it was shown that substituting one to
food prices are lower due to economies of scale. several imported food items with local or domes-
The centralisation of food production on a global tic products over the product life cycle had a posi-
scale is the prevailing trend and well-established tive impact on the environment (Carlsson-Kanya-
structures have been developed to secure profita- ma 1998a, Carlsson-Kanyama 1998b, Sundqvist et
bility of the trade. al. 2001, Carlsson-Kanyama et al. 2003, Johansson
Industrial, global food production also has neg- 2005). Energy consumption associated with do-
ative impacts on food safety, food security and on mestic food supply on the other hand can be great-
the environment, and its social justification has er than that for imported food, depending on pro-
been questioned (e.g. Nabhan 2002, Whatmore duction methods and transport distances (Cowell &
2002, Halweil 2004). In response to current de- Parkinson 2003, Roy et al. 2007). Several studies
velopments and increasing consumer awareness, on the impact of dietary choices have shown that
there is growing interest in alternative supplies of in comparison with crop cultivation, animal hus-
food. The proponents argue that geographical and bandry is more resource intensive, suggesting that
social distance between food production and con- crop production, linked with a vegetarian diet, is an
sumers leads to alienation of consumers. The ar- environmentally preferable option (Carlsson-Kan-
guments in favour of more local food production yama 1998a, Vijver 2002, Helms & Aiking 2003,
include improved food quality, greater safety and Keyzer et al. 2003, Zhu & Ierland 2004, Risku-
security, better environmental and animal welfare, Norja & Mäenpää 2007).
improved rural livelihoods, strengthened regional Product-based life-cycle inventories, as well as
economics and cultural heritage, and enhanced so- assessments of farming practices, indicate environ-
cial responsibility in terms of food equity and ac- mental benefits accrue from organic farming (Ce-
cess at national and global levels ( e.g. Kloppen- derberg & Mattsson 2000, Pimentel et al. 2005),
burg et al. 1996, Hinrichs 2000, Mardsen 2000, and organic agriculture based on animal and crop
Francis et al. 2003, Goodman 2003, Hinrichs 2003, products could lead to considerable reduction in
Morris & Buller 2003, Ilbery & Maye 2005, Pretty nitrogen and phosphorus leaching (Granstedt et al.
et al. 2005, Holloway et al. 2007). Consumer-fo- 2005). Most studies suggest that the impact of or-
cused discussions have paid particular attention to ganic farming on biodiversity is generally positive
overall chemicalisation of food and to the healthi- (Bengtsson et al. 2005, Fuller et al. 2005, Hole et
ness, cleanliness, freshness, taste and to high-quali- al. 2005), but that the key to farmland biodiver-
ty specialist food products ( e.g. Nygard & Storstad sity is habitat heterogeneity (Benton et al. 2003,
1998, Tuorila 2000, Prescott et al. 2002, Murdoch Weibull et al. 2003). In Finland, environmental im-
& Miele 2003, Carlsson et al. 2005, Ilbery & Maye pacts of organic production were dealt with on a
128 129
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
national scale (Lötjönen et al. 2004, Grönroos et al. et al. 2007). A more geographically tuned definition
2005, Risku-Norja & Mäenpää 2007) and suggest- implies, that food production and consumption are
ed benefits in terms of reduced energy consumption spatially close (e.g. Kloppenburg et al. 1996, Hin-
and nutrient loading. richs 2000, Holloway & Kneafsey 2000, Tansey &
Production capacity and environmental impacts Worsley 2000, Renting et al. 2003, Watts et al. 2005).
of localising primary production have not been Here, the spatial approach was adopted, ‘local’ im-
studied systematically. The present paper deals plying a provincial scale in Finland. The study fo-
with the physical basis of food supply, and the is- cuses on the production capacity of the target area in
sue of local food is approached from the viewpoint terms of the basic domestic foodstuffs; meat, milk,
of primary production. The focus is, thus, on the eggs, fish, grains, potatoes, sugar, oilseeds, vegeta-
hinterlands of the urban consumption areas which bles, fruits and berries, and on the environmental
are crucially important regarding food security and impacts of their production. These items represent
environmental stewardship, the key elements for about 90% of the current average food consump-
sustainable agro-ecosystems (Helenius et al. 2007). tion in Finland. In addition to food for humans, an-
The aim is to assess 1) regional production capacity imal feed was assumed to be produced in the same
in relation to local food consumption including the area. The special, authentic or traditional products
current use and the potential to increase consump- of the region, the geographic origin of which is im-
tion of local wild fish, game and berries, and 2) en- portant in marketing, are not considered here. Such
vironmental impacts of different food consumption niche products are produced for specific consum-
patterns associated with local food supply. The re- er groups and for export and they were, therefore,
sults are used to discuss ‘local’ and localised food beyond the remit of this study.
production from the standpoint of primary produc- The target area of the research was the province
tion. In this study both organic and conventional of South Savo, in eastern Finland. The impacts on
production are accounted for and both are confined the landscape and the feasibility of increasing the
within the study area. This was done because usu- share of wild products in the kitchens of the local
ally food that is labeled as organic is only a guar- schools were studied in the municipality of Juva
antee that the production fulfils the strict criteria (Fig.1). South Savo comprises about 3% (161,000
defined for organic production, but does concern inhabitants) of the total population, 5% of the total
geographic origin. land area and 4% of the total agricultural area of
The study comprises one part in an interdis- Finland (Statistics Finland 2005). The South Savo
ciplinary food system research project dealing region is one of the less developed rural areas in
with the environmental and economic impacts and Finland, with a lower average income, higher level
learning challenges of localising food systems at of unemployment and with a marked contribution
province level in a Finnish case (Seppänen et al. of agriculture to economic life.
2006, Helenius et al. 2007). Only the agricultural sector of food production
was addressed, and the impacts on the environment
were assessed on the basis of agricultural land use
and the numbers of production animals. These vary
Material and methods depending on dietary choices and methods of pro-
duction. Agricultural land use and the numbers of
farm animals in 2002 (Ministry of Agriculture and
“Local food” is a broad term containing different Forestry 2002, 2003b, 2003c) were taken as the
dimensions ranging from physical space to histor- controls against which changes were compared.
ical, cultural and social features and covering also These data were also used to estimate the current
high-quality specialist food products with a guaran- extent of food self-sufficiency in the target area.
tee for origin or traditional speciality (e.g. Morris & Localisation was assumed to involve only ag-
Buller 2003, DuPuis & Goodman 2005, Holloway ricultural land and not other land use type; in the
130 131
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
Juva
Fig.1. Index map showing the
target area in Finland. The in-
sert figure at right presenting
the municipality of Juva shows
the strong linear NW-SE lin- Kuopio
earity created by the advanc-
ing ice front during the glacial
Mikkeli
period and characteristic of the
geomorphology of the region.
The dark areas in the insert fig- Helsinki
ure are field plots, which are lo-
cated between the tilly forest- The province of South Savo
ed ridges. The Juva municipality
remaining of the farmland not needed to satisfy erage statistics on crop yields per hectare and on
the local demand, the status quo was maintained. outputs of animal products per animal (Ministry of
Similarly, the farm animal production that exceed- Agriculture and Forestry, annual issues) were used
ed local consumption was redistributed according to calculate the required farmland allocations for
to the situation in 2002. The basic assumption was each of the localised diet options.
that the livestock is maintained on locally grown In localised primary food production, the chang-
feed, both for organic and conventional animal hus- es in food consumption cause concomitant chang-
bandry; therefore the output per animal was also es in the demand for various agricultural products.
the same. However, compared with conventional The starting point was local food demand, which
production, the yields per hectare are up to 30% defines the farmland required and the farm animal
lower for organic crop production (Lötjönen et al. allocation to meet local needs. Environmental im-
2004, Risku-Norja & Mäenpää 2007), and there pacts were estimated on the basis of changes in
were therefore differences in the areas of agricul- these key parameters.
tural land needed for food and feed production. The production potential, farmland allocation
The primary data sources were the digital spa- and environmental impact of farming to satisfy
tial field parcel register, the register of domes- the local demand for food was considered for four
tic animals (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry locally produced food consumption options and
2003b), the yearbook of farm statistics (Ministry for both conventional and organic farming: I- the
of Agriculture and Forestry 2003c) and food con- present day average Finnish diet, II - a diet based
sumption statistics (Ministry of Agriculture and on the national standard dietary recommendations,
Forestry 2003a). The per capita consumption of III - a mixed diet with no pork and poultry and IV -
wild berries and catches of game and fish were a vegetarian diet (Table 1). The energy intake of the
based on existing statistics (Salo 2002, Game and diets was kept constant, and they were nutritional-
Fishery Research Institute 2004). Long-term av- ly balanced in terms of reasonable daily intakes of
130 131
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
ally produced food, ption II: nutritional- Option IV kJ+/-, g 204615 110043 30018 40017 500-13 1446 831-40 297566 1500107 223102 150-17 44689 18626 0-36 240 0-27 0-1082 0-49 0-87 0-42 0-1 0-8 0-4 0-28 -94610825
ocO
ed of lerries, g 143 84 21 27 156 10 50 80 110 229 67 109 46 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1160
sb
pod
griculture and Forestry 2004) and the dietary options comption, where citrus fruit has been replaced by local fruit andiet with no poultry and pork, Option IV: vegetarian diet. Locally produced diets Option IIOption III gkJ+/-, ggkJ+/-, g 13519327196280067 7910303876100036 1420011111528 23350142030011 2036503420365034 56505690 811346-9601000-30 14528033124019 45315652 229223102229223102 113251299621412 85348658534865 1536241334819628 00-3600-36 3328528240 27172000-27 6792044-4037632297-319 32250-171182-38 33300-5400-87 41250-100-42 16000-1 625-2521-3 4230318-1 301283301272 202310825-83190710825-199
Amd
Finland (Ministry of esent day food consuons, Option III: mixe Option I kJ+/-, g 18350 5300 440 1420 5420 650 14950 5280 450 1240 140-21 22936 45-9 0-36 240 1720 32560 3820 7880 2560 70 340 250 1170 10825-30
mption in ption I: prmmendati g 128 40 3 10 169 5 90 14 3 127 63 56 11 0 28 27 1082 49 87 42 1 8 4 28 2076
Table 1. The current average food consugrams and kilojoules per capita per day. Oly-balanced diet based on the dietary reco Present average food consumption Food itemgkJ Wheat1281835 Rye40530 Barley344 Oat10142 Potato169542 Potato flour565 Sugar901495 Vegetable oils14528 Pea345Vegetables, excl. 127124tomatoesFruit, excl. citrus84187 Garden berries2081 Wild berries2081 Citrus fruit3665 Tomatoes2824 Eggs27172 Milk10823256 Beef49382 Pork87788 Poultry42256 Mutton17 Game and reindeer834 Offals425 Fish28117 Sum total210610825
132 133
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
carbohydrates, fats and proteins. For each option, Quantification of the environmental impacts in
both conventional and organic production systems South Savo area required additional data: 7) phos-
were considered. In relation to the dietary recom- phorus and nitrogen content of the yields and seeds,
mendations, the current diet is still biased towards 8) fertilizer application levels for the cultivated
animal products, although vegetable consumption crops, 9) nitrogen losses, 10) amount of manure per
has slowly increased during the past years (Heik- animal and its phosphorus and nitrogen contents,
kinen & Maula 1996). This bias was corrected in 11) biological nitrogen fixation, 12) emissions of
option two. In option three the meat was the by- methane (CH ) from the production animals 13)
4
product of milk production and was assumed to be amount of acid fallout in the form of nitric acid
consumed locally. Option four was a pure vegetar- (HNO ), originating from storage and handling of
3
ian diet satisfied with locally cultivated food crops. dung and from nitrogen fertilisers. The greenhouse
In all options, the imported fruit was substituted gas and acid emsissions from agriculture into the
with local fruit and wild and cultivated berries. atmosphere were expressed as CO and SO equiv-
2 2
The environmental impact assessment includ- alents, respectively.
ed soil-surface nutrient balances (Oenema et al. The details of the calculations and the exact
2003), greenhouse gas and acid emissions (IPCC figures for the calculated parameters have been
2005) and changes in landscape diversity expressed published in a technical report (Risku-Norja et al.
using Shannon’s diversity index, SHDI (McGari- 2007), and can be obtained on request from the
gal & Marks 1995), the value of which increases authors.
as the number of different land cover classes in- For the emissions of greenhouse gases - nitrous
creases and/or the proportional distribution of the oxide (N O), methane (CH ) and carbon dioxide
2 4
area among land cover classes becomes similar. (CO ) from the soil, the average Finnish annual
2
The chosen parameters indicate the nutrient load- value of 2.35 tons per hectare (Statistics Finland
ing potential of the watersheds, climate change and 2007) was used, and the airborne fall-out of nitro-
biodiversity, respectively. gen was assumed to be 2.2 kg per hectare per year1.
The numerical quantifications were based on To compare the impact of animals of very different
the volumes of consumed plant and animal prod- sizes, such as cows and poultry, the actual numbers
ucts. Consumption defines the area needed for vari- of animals were converted into animal units, with
ous cultivated food plants and the numbers of dif- one unit corresponding to the impact of one milk-
ferent production animals. Based on the numbers ing cow (Ministry of the Environment 1998).
and feed requirements of the production animals, The results for farmland requirements were
the area needed for different feed crops was cal- based on long-term regional averages of the yield
culated. The nutrient balances and greenhouse gas and production levels, and they are reliable also in
and acid emissions were calculated from the extent absolute terms. The national averages of soil green-
and distribution of farmland, and from the animal house emissions and nitrogen fall-out used with the
numbers. The Shannon diversity index was derived regional averages for calculating the nutrient bal-
from the land use data. Both conventional and or- ances and gaseous emissions in reality hide large
ganic production systems were accounted for. variation due to differences in soil type, climate,
The results on production potential were ex- local geomorphology, and production conditions.
pressed relative to self-sufficiency of the various The results are, therefore, somewhat less accurate.
basic food products. For calculating the produc- However, they show the relative differences be-
tion potential, the following data were needed: 1) tween the dietary options and they are useful for
number of inhabitants, 2) food consumption per comparative purposes in the way they have been
capita, 3) consumption of the various feedstuffs per used in this study.
animal, 4) yield per hectare of the various crops, 5)
factors for converting yields to food and 6) output
1 Finnish Meteorological Institute, average from
per animal of the various animal products.
Punkaharju measuring station during the years 1998-2002
132 133
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
Results
search area. They also demonstrate that the differ-
ent foodstuffs require different population basis to
balance supply and demand.
Current food self-sufficiency
The agriculture of the study area is heavily focused Feasibility of localising primary food
on milk and outdoor vegetable production, and these
production
are produced well beyond local demand. Other than
that, crop cultivation is clearly deficient. Besides
outdoor vegetables, only oat and barley are pro- The area was calculated for agricultural land re-
duced in excess. Except for beef, the by-product quired to produce the food for local consumption
of dairy cattle, animal production - eggs, pork and according to the four dietary options. With each op-
poultry - is deficient (Fig. 2). The grain and rough- tion, the land use for both conventional and organic
age for animals is produced locally, but the protein production was considered (Table 2).
feed (mainly soya) is imported. Concerning the basic foodstuffs, the region was
The results show the degree of food self-suffi- able to satisfy its own demand, even if production
ciency that could be realised within the current pro- was based on organic farming. Depending on the
duction structure, if the food produced were used diet, conventional farming would require 35-69%
to satisfy local demand, and only the excess were of the available agricultural land. If organically
exported. In reality the situation is not that simple produced, the current average food consumption
because food is imported into the area, even if pro- (option I) would require all the cultivated land area
duction meets or exceeds local consumption. Simi- to satisfy local demand, but with the other options
larly, food is exported although production does not only part of cultivated land area (58-79%) would
cover local consumption. The results provide, how- be needed. Localising primary production for own
ever, an approximation of the status quo of supply food consumption would, in any case, require some
and demand for the various foodstuffs in the re- redistribution of primary production.
1000 tons
4
2
0
-2
-4
80
s60
-6 0 ton40 Fofi glo. c2a. lN ceotn psuromdputcitoino no fi nth eex fcoeosds
0
1020 products in 2002 in the province
-8 0 of South Savo, 1000 tons per
Outdoor Milk
vegetables year. Milk and outdoor vegeta-
-10 bles are shown in the insert fig-
W heat RyeBarley Oat PeaPotatoeSguetgaarble oilsFruiBterTrioesmatoesEggsBeefPorkPoultryMuttonOGffaalmse meatFish uvtoor eltuh, meb reeecss atau.rsee tethnefoirl dp rcoodmupcatiroedn
V
134 135
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
Table 2. The area needed for production of local food in are free, but the costs of the meals are accounted for
the province of South Savo expressed as hectares, hec-
in the municipal budgets. The substitution options
tares per capita and as percentage from the present day
slightly increased the costs of the school meals, but
total area of farmland in the province. Option I: present
the difference were marginal (Table 3).
day food consumption, where citrus fruit has been re-
placed by local fruit and berries, Option II: nutritional-
ly-balanced diet based on the dietary recommendations,
Option III: mixed diet with no poultry and pork, Option Impact on landscape
IV: vegetarian diet.
Conventional ha/ Organic ha/
Options
production capita production capita The impact of localising food production on the
I ha 53314 0.33 79452 0.49 landscape was considered in the Juva municipal-
% 69 102 ity. Because only the changes in agricultural land
II ha 42086 0.26 61132 0.37 use were taken into account, the changes in land-
% 54 79 scape diversity actually describe the changes in
III ha 31250 0.19 44729 0.27 crop diversity and in other farmland use (fallow,
% 40 58 tree plantation, area dedicated for specific agri-en-
IV ha 27311 0.17 50075 0.31 vironmental measures etc.), which link the visu-
% 35 64 al landscape with available ecological niches and
total area, ha 77673 species diversity.
Adjusting food production so as to satisfy lo-
cal demand for food would generally decrease the
area of farmland dedicated to production of cereals,
Role of wild food products grass and pastures. However, the areas for fruit and
berries, and for oilseed crops and peas, would in-
crease if the imported fruits and soya were replaced
Everyman’s right in Finland entitles people to gath- with domestic items. The considered diet options
er wild berries and mushrooms, as well as to rod- differ regarding SHDI values but, within each op-
fish and ice fish, without permission being required tion, there were few differences between conven-
from the landowner. Hunting and other forms of tional and organic production (Fig. 3a). The mixed
fishing are controlled with licences. Wild products diets had higher SHDI values than the vegetarian
from nature have their place in the average Finnish diet. This is because in the vegetarian option there
diet, and in South Savo their share is higher than the is no feed production; consequently permanent pas-
average in Finland (Salo 2002). An insight into the tures and grasslands are absent, which has a nega-
role of the wild berries was obtained by considering tive impact on the diversity of wild species.
the volume of wild berries used in the kitchens of When the farmland in excess of local demand
the primary schools of the Juva municipality. Cur- was considered, compared with the situation in
rently the pupils and school staff provide 68% of the 2002 (SHDI 1.96), the SHDI values increased
wild berries used in schools, the rest being bought slightly for all four local-production dietary options
from private gatherers or wholesalers. The possi- (Fig. 3b). This is because the proportional distri-
bility to increase the use of local wild berries was bution of the area among the land cover classes
estimated by considering two options in which the evened out. Although the number of plant species
fruit used in the school kitchens was replaced par- was the same, in 2002 the cultivation was concen-
tially or completely with wild berries (Table 3). trated more on larger areas of crop species, espe-
The potential of exploitable wild products is far cially of cereals. Within each diet the organically
greater than is actually used (Ministry of Agricul- produced option resulted in slightly higher SHDI
ture and Forestry 2003c), so the substitution of fruit values, and the organically produced vegetarian
with local wild berries is plausible. School lunches diet had the highest value. However, compared
134 135
A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E A G R I C U L T U R A L A N D F O O D S C I E N C E
Risku-Norja, H. et al. Local food, environmental impacts of food consumption Vol. 17 (2008): 127–145.
Table 3. The total consumption of fruit and wild berries (kg/year) and its monetary value (€/year) in primary schools in
the municipality of Juva (Muilu 2004). In the final row the data are presented as grams per pupil per day. Option A: Half
of the fruit used in school kitchens has been substituted with wild berries out of which 1/3 are lingonberries and 2/3 are
blueberries, Option B : All fruit used in school kitchens has been substituted with wild berries out of which 1/5 are lin-
gonberries, 2/5 are raspberries and 2/5 are blueberries.
2002 Option A Option B
kg/year €/year kg/year €/year kg/year €/year
Wild berries
Lingonberry 450 225 1160 1650 1300 1400
Blueberry 305 730 765 1300 860 1300
Raspberry 0 0 0 0 220 1000
in total 755 955 1925 2950 2380 3700
Garden berries
Strawberry 220 680 220 680 220 680
Raspberry 115 135 115 135 115 135
Redcurrant 70 160 70 160 70 160
Blackcurrant 110 200 110 200 110 200
in total 515 1175 515 1175 515 1175
Fruit
Citrus fruit 420 645 210 322.5 0 0
Melon 200 320 100 160 0 0
Banana 270 475 135 237.5 0 0
Apple 420 700 210 350 0 0
Other 95 220 47.5 110 0 0
in total 1405 2360 702.5 1180 0 0
Fruit and berries in total 2675 4490 3142.5 5305 2895 4875
Fruit and berries per pupil a year 2.5 4.2 3.0 5.0 2.7 4.6
g/day cents/day g/day cents/day g/day cents/day
Fruit and berries per pupil per day 12.6 2.1 14.8 2.3 13.6 2.3
SHDI SHDI
2,5 2,5
a) b)
2,25 2,25
2 2
1,75 1,75
1,5I con I org II conII org III conIII org IV conIV org 1,52002 I conI org II conII org IIIconIIIorg IV coInV org
Fig. 3. Diversity of cultivated plants in the Juva municipality expressed as the Shannnon diversity index (SHDI). a) The
SHDI values, when only the farmland needed for local demand is considered. b) The SHDI values for the year 2002 and
for different dietary options, when also the farmland in excess of local demand is considered. Option I: present food con-
sumption, where citrus fruit has been replaced by local fruit and berries, Option II: nutritionally balanced diet based fol-
lowing dietary recommendations, Option III: mixed diet with no poultry and pork, Option IV: vegetarian diet. con = con-
ventional production, org = organic production.
136 137