1

CASESTUDYREPORTSDanishcasereport:TheDanishFoodCommunitiesAuthors:ChrisKjeldsen,EgonNoeandKlausBrøndLaursen

1Introduction

KøbenhavnsFødevarefællesskab(TheFoodCommunityofCopenhagen)‐http://kbhff.dk/english/

AarhusFødevarefællesskab(TheFoodCommunityofAarhus)‐http://www.aoff.dk/TheFoodCommunitieswaschosenasacaseforHealthyGrowthbecausetheyconstituteamajornoveltywithintheDanishfoodscape.Asindicatedinsection3,theFood

2

Communitieshaveemergedasthelatestincarnationofaseriesofattemptstoforgealternativefoodnetworksoperatingbeyondthesupermarketsystem.Denmarkisdistinguishedbyalargemarketshareoforganicfoodbeingsoldviasupermarkets,butTheFoodCommunitiesareanoveltyduetotwofactors,(1)theyhaveexperiencedarapidgrowthsincetheoutsetin2010,and(2)theyareorganisedinadecentralisedmanner,wheretheycontinuetosplitupthenetworkinchapters,eachoperatingwithintheirdistinctlocalarea.TheFoodCommunitiesareapredominantlyurbanphenomenon.

2Case‐studyapproach:materialsandmethods

Table1.Thedocumentsusedasinformationsources. Datatype Document

numberShortdescriptionofcontent

Homepage Webpage ThewebpagesoftheFoodCommunitiesoftheAarhusandCopenhagenchapterswereused

Studentessays/researchreports ‐Newspaperarticles Somepressclipswere

usedintheinitialphaseCommercials ‐Magazines ‐Leaflets ‐Legaldocuments(e.g.founding) Written

documentation

Templatesregardingorganizationalmatters,suppliedbytheCopenhagenchapter,wereused

Contractswithsuppliers/customers/members

‐ Onlyoralagreementsareused

Internalstrategypapers ‐ Internalstrategyareonlydocumentedinminutesofgeneralassemblies,availableviathewebsites

Minutesofinternalcommunication/meetings

Audiorecording

Decisionsatmeetingswereelaboratedonduringinterviews

Internalnewsletters ‐Qualityassurancedocuments ‐Listofsuppliers/customers/members ‐ Onlyoralagreements,no

formalsupplierlistsavailable

Financialaccounting ‐Other(specify)annualreports,officialregisters,socialmedia,trainingprograms

Socialmedia(Wordpress,Wiki,Facebook)

TheCopenhagenchaptersuppliestheotherFCswithmaterialfromaWiki;Facebookformsthemaininterfacewithmembers;Wordpressisusedasbloggingtoolforothermediation

Table2.Interviewsandinterviewees.Interviews Date Duration,hours Remarks

Participants Role I‐1 I‐2 I‐3

3

FF01 Chair,FCAarhus

x Seereferencelist(FF012012)

FF02 Activist,FCAarhus

x Seereferencelist(FF022012)

FF03 ViceChair,FCAarhus

x Seereferencelist(FF032012)

FF04 Producer,FCAarhus

x Seereferencelist(FF042012)

FF05 Activist,FCCopenhagen

x Seereferencelist(FF052012)

FF06 Producer,FCCopenhagen

x Seereferencelist(FF062012)

FF07 Producer,FCCopenhagen

x Seereferencelist(FF072012)

FF08 Activist,FCCopenhagen

x Seereferencelist(FF082012)

FF09 Activist,FCCopenhagen

x Seereferencelist(FF092012)

3.Overviewofthecase–generalandcommontoalltasks

Denmarkisdistinguishedbyahighlymodernizedfoodandagriculturalsector.HistoricalstudiesofthedevelopmentoftheDanishfoodsystemhasemphasizedthatalreadyfromthelate1880’s,asignificantfocuson‘efficient’andexport‐orientedfarmingemergedwithinDanishagriculture(Ingemann1999,2002).AsDenmarkhadfewothernaturalresourcesbutagriculturalland,theDanishstateplayedaveryactiveroleinthemodernizationprocess.Statefundingofbothresearchinstitutionsandagriculturalextensionservicecreatedcloselinksbetweenstate,scienceandfoodsystemsdevelopment.Theresulthasbeenafoodsectordistinguishedbyhighlyefficientfarms,farmer‐controlledcooperativeprocessingfirmsandfarmer‐ownedextensionservices.Intermsofproductquality,thedevelopmentofindustrialqualitystandardssuchasDanishBaconandLurpakButterhasbeenahistoricalstrongholdofDanishagriculture.Thesedevelopmenttrajectorieshavehadasignificantimpactonontherelationbetween‘alternative’and‘mainstream’intheDanishfoodsector.AsseveralstudiesofthedevelopmentoftheDanishorganicfoodsectorhasdemonstrated,organicfarmingwasincludedinthe‘mainstream’foodsectoratarelativelyearlystageofitsdevelopment(Kjeldsen&Ingemann2009,2010;Michelsen2001).Specifically,theDanishgovernmentcreatedanorganiclabellingschemein1987,atapointwereorganicmarketsharesweremarginal.OneoftheindicatorsofthelevelofprofessionalizationwithintheorganicsectoristhattheaveragefarmsizewithintheDanishorganicdairysectorisbiggerthanwithintheirconventionalcollegaues(Dalgaardetal.2008).Withtheorganicsectorbeingincludedinthe‘mainstream’foodsector,thereisarelativelyminor‘alternative’foodsectorinDenmark.ThereisnotmuchsystematicdataavailableonconsumptionoffoodoutsideDanishretailchains,butmostestimatesstatethatapproximately10‐12percentofthefoodmarketinDenmarktakesplaceoutsidetheestablishedretailsector(DST2007;Kjeldsen2005;ØL2009).Foodnetworksoperatingoutsidethe‘mainstream’includemanydifferenttypesofnetworks.Examplesincluderegionalboxschemes,nationallevelboxschemes,specialtyshopsaswellasecologicalcommunities,consumergroupsandothers.Theseexamplesexhibitadiversearrayof‘taskscapes’(Ingold2000),differentfieldswhicharedistinguishedbydifferentactors,practices,rationalitiesandideologies.Eventhoughthesealternativefoodnetworksonlyconstituteaminorpartofthefoodmarket,theymightbeveryimportantasexamplesofsocialinnovationwithintheDanishfoodscape,sincetheyhavehelpedforgingnewqualitiesandrelationsbetweenproductionandconsumption.

4

ThescaleofDanishfoodnetworksoperatingoutsidetheestablishedretailsectorisrelativelyminor.Still,someofthemostsignificantdevelopments,intermsofsocialinnovation,havetakenplaceoutsidethemainstream.Duringthe1990s,fueledbytheemerginginterestfororganicfoodamongDanishconsumers,severalattemptshadbeenmadetocreatealternativesectororganisationslikeindependentdairiesandslaughteries.Manyoftheseprojectsfailed,andbythelate1990smostofthe‘alternative’foodmarkettookplacewithinestablishedretailchainsorvialocalizedsystemsofprovision,suchasboxschemesordirectselling.Fromtheyear2000andonwards,severalnewinnovativeapproachescouldbeobservedontheDanish‘foodscape’(Kjeldsen&Ingemann2009).Oneoftheimportantprojectswastheweb‐basedboxschemeAarstiderne.com(aarstiderne.com2003).Theenterprisestartedoutasalocalboxscheme,supplying100localfamilieswithfreshvegetables.Thisbusinesssetupprovedrelativelyunsuccessfulineconomicterms,butalsointermsofaheavyworkloadonbehalfoftheproducers.Theownersoftheenterprisethendecidedtotransformtheirbusinessintoanational‐levelboxscheme,capableofsupplyingvirtuallyallDanishhouseholds,butwiththemarketstrongholdbeingtheDanishcapitolofCopenhagen(AA01_direktør2002).Morethan10yearslater,Aarstiderne.comdelivers35.000boxeswithfreshorganicfruitandvegetableseveryweektoconsumersalloverDenmark.Theenterpriseisoneofthefewexamplesofthesuccessfultransformationfromlocal‐levelboxboxschemeintoahighlyprofessionalizede‐businessoperatingonnationallevel.Otherimportantinitiativestakingplacefromtheyear2000andonward,wasthecreationofthefirstDanishCSALandbrugslauget.Landbrugslaugetwasaconsumer‐ownedcooperativefarm,managedbyskilledfarmers,whoalsohadsharesinthecooperative.TheCSAwas,likemanysimilarinitiativesinNorthAmerica,basedonthedirectinvolvementofurbanconsumers,bothintermsofownershipbutalsointermsofdoingfieldwork.TheseprojectspavednewpathsacrosstheDanishfoodscape.AarstidernewasthefirstDanishfoodnetworktoutilizeweb‐basedmeansofconsumptiononanationalscale,andLandbrugslaugetwasthefirstfarminDanishhistorywhichwasownedbyagroupofconsumers(thecooperativehad500members,including3farmermembers).Thesedevelopmentsformsthebackgroundcontext,fromwithinwhichthefoodcommunitiesemerge.

3.1Presentationandtrajectory

ThemainempiricalcasesinourinquiryistheDanishfoodcommunitiesinCopenhagenandAarhus.TheFoodCommunitiesofCopenhagenconsistsof11neighbourhood‐specificcommunities,eachofwhichfunctionsasaseparateassociation(KBHFF2014).Inaddition,7newfoodcommunitiesareindevelopmentintheCopenhagenarea.TheFoodCommunityofAarhusisoneassociation,andhasnotyetbranchedoutintoseparatechapters(AAFF2014).Therearenow17FoodCommunitiesacrossDenmark(DKFF2014).Thetwofoodcommunitiesinhavebeenstudiedusingsemi‐structuredqualitativeinterviews.Untilnow,9respondentshavebeeninterviewed.Eachinterviewlastedforapproximately2hours.Therespondentswereselectedusingsnowballsampling.Furthermore,contentanalysiswasappliedinrelationtopublicdocumentsandwebsites(Krippendorff2004).

5

Figure1:OverviewofDanishFoodCommunities(DKFF2014)

TheDanishfoodcommunities1arefoodnetworks,whichemergedforthefirsttimeinlate2010intheDanishcapitolCopenhagen.FromamodeststartinCopenhagen,themovementhasspreadtoatleast4majorcitiesofDenmark,includingthesecond‐largestcityofAarhus.ThefoodcommunitiesinCopenhagennowcountsmorethan3.000members,organizedinlocalnetworkswithin9differentneighborhoodsofCopenhagen.ThefoodcommunityofAarhuscounts300memberstoday(thenetworkstartedoneyearlaterthantheoneinCopenhagen)andisnotyetdifferentiatedbetweenneighborhoodswithinthecity.ThefoodcommunityinAarhusreceivedsignificantassistancefromtheactivistsinCopenhagen,whenstartinguptheirownnetwork.Thebasicorganizationofthefoodcommunitiesisthatthey(asagroup)sourcefreshvegetablesfromregionalfarmers.Theregionalfarmers(typicallyplacedintheurbanperiphery)deliverstheirproduceonceaweektoadistributioncentralinthecity,operatedbytheconsumer‐activists.Itisthentheresponsibilityoftheconsumer‐activiststopackthevegetablesinboxeswhicharepickeduponthedistributioncentralbyeachindividualmember.Inthatmanner,thefoodcommunitiesseektomeetoneoftheirmainobjectives,toprovideaffordable,freshandorganicallyaswellaslocallygrownvegetables.TheDanishfoodcommunitiesarebasedonasetofcommonprinciples2.Theprinciplesstatethat:

(1) Foodshouldbegrownandproducedinorganicquality(2) Foodshallbeaslocalaspracticallyfeasible(3) Foodsupplyshallmirrorseasonalvariation(4) Tradeshouldbefairanddirect(5) Productionandconsumptionshallbeenvironmentallyfriendly(6) Thefoodcommunitiesshallraiseawarenessaboutfoodandorganics(7) Thefoodcommunitiesshouldbeeconomicallysustainableandindependent(8) Thefoodchainshouldbetransparentandtrust‐building(9) Foodshouldbewidelyaccessibleandaffordable

1SeecommonwebsitefortheDanishFoodCommunitiesathttp://døff.dk/2Seehttp://kbhff.dk/om‐kbhff/10‐grundprincipper/

6

(10) Thefoodcommunitiesshouldbepoweredbylocal,collaborativecommunities

Thefoodcommunitieshaveestablisheddistributioncentres,shops,inAarhusandCopenhagen,wherethefarmesdelivertheirproduceeachweek.Eachmemberofthefoodcommunitytakesturnsintheshoppackingthevegetablesinboxes.Theoperationoftheshopsiscoordinatedbytheindividualneighborhoodgroups.Sofar,onlyCopenhagenisdividedintosuchgroups.Apartfromthelocalgroups,thefoodcommunitiesaredifferentiatedfunctionallyintheshapeofworkinggroups,whichmanagedifferentaspectsoftheoperationofthenetwork.Examplesofworkinggroupsincluderetail,communication,finance,eventsandmanyothercategories.Theactivistsintheworkinggroupsarerecruitedamongthefoodcommunitymembers.

3.2Basicfacts

Inthissection,trytopresentasmuchbasicfactsaspossibleaboutyourcase.Dependingonthematerialyouhavebeenabletoretrieveaboutthecase,presentthefactsintablesandfigures.Ifpossible,refertothedocumentfromwhichyouhavethefigures/data.Growthmayrefertoturnover,tovolumeand/ortoversatilityoftheproducts,tonumberofactors,todeliveryareaetc.Thedescriptionofthedevelopmentingrowthshouldincludeandpresenttheavailabledataonthecaseinformoftablesand/orasgraphicalpresentations.Thevariouscasesofthevalue‐basedsupplychainsareofverydifferentsizes.Givingthefiguresforgrowthinpercentagesornormalisingthevaluesagainstabaselinevalue,allowsdirectcomparisonamongthem.Chosethefiguresthatinthebestwaydescribethegrowthanddevelopmentprocessofthecase.Alsoseeattachedexcel‐file(timelinetemplate).Answerthefollowingquestionsifapplicableforyourcase:

3.2.1Howhasproducerpriceschanged(farmgateprices,in%ifpossible)?

3.2.2Howhasconsumerpriceschanged(in%ifpossible)?

3.2.3Howhasturnover,numberoffarmsinvolved,productrange,marketingchannelsandoutletschangeduntilpresent?

TheFoodCommunitiesseektoapplyanationalfairtradeprincipleintheirbusinessmodel,whichinpracticemeansthattheyaimtopayfarmersafixedpricepremiumwhichislinkedtoareferencepricelistfromamajorDanishorganicwholesaler,Solhjulet.Inthatway,theFoodCommunitiesmakesurethatthefarmersarepaidaratewhichisappr.25%abovethemarketpricefororganicproducts.ThepricelistfromSolhjuletspansawiderangeoforganicproductsbeingsourcedfortheDanishfoodmarket.Pricevariationsfollowinprinciplethemarketprice,butthepremiumismaintained.However,somechangesdoestakeplace.Assomethingnew,theactivistsfromtheFoodCommunitiesinCopenhagenmetwiththeproducersinlate2012todiscusswhetherthepricesshouldbeadjusted.Severalmodelsforpriceformationwerediscussed,includingthepossibilityoflong‐termagreementswhichweresupposedtoextendcollaborationbeyondshorttimespans,butthemeetingdidnotreachaclearconclusion,andsofarthe‘equilibriummodel’isstillinuse.

3.3Stakeholdernetwork

Themainobjectivehereistodescribethestakeholdernetworkofthecaseusingtheconstellation/stakeholderanalysisasanillustrativetool(useattachedstakeholderanalysistemplate).Thestakeholderanalysisisasnapshotofthepresentsituation.Youcancompletethepictureintheaccompanyingtextbydescribinghowactorsarelinkedtoeachother,andiftherearedifferentcategoriesofactors(roles,functions).Ifyouhaveinitiatedanationalstakeholdernetwork(WP6)youcandescribethathereaswell.Inthiscase,also

7

describehowthenetworkcameabout,whatactorsparticipate(d)andwhatissuesthatyouhavediscussedinthenetwork.

4.Analyticalperspectives1‐6

4.1Organisationandgovernance(Tasks1aand1b)

Analyticalquestion4.1.1:Whatarethemainvaluesputforeheadbythedifferentstakeholdersoftheorganization(ornetwork),thedifferencesandcontroversiesoverthesevaluesandthepossibleadjustmentsovertime?TheindividualFoodCommunities(inCopenhagentheFoodCommunitiesconsistsofdifferentassociations,placedindifferentsuburbsandpartsoftheinnercity)aregovernedbytheirannualgeneralassemblies,andhavealargedegreeofautonomyinchoosingwhichpartsoftheoverallvaluestheymaywishtoemphasize.Thismakesindifficulttodeterminespecificallywhichvaluesamongthe“tencommandments”oftheDanishFoodCommunitiesarethemostimportant(seesection3.1).However,accessibilityandaffordabilitywasanoftencitedvalue.GiventhatorganicfoodisamainstreamcommodityinDenmark,beingabletooffereconomicallyaccessible,fresh,seasonalorganicvegetablesappearedtobeamajorprioritytotheFoodCommunitiesstudied.Analyticalquestion4.1.3:Whatkindofagreementsandarrangements(bothformalandinformal)wereestablishedinordertosecurelongtermstrategiccooperationalongthevaluechainandtosecureproximityandtrust?Howweretheyadjustedovertime?TheFoodCommunitiesrecruitproducersrelativetotheirpastknowledgeorpersonalconnections.Insomecasesthechoiceofproducerswerenarroweddowntobeingaquestionoffindingfarmsofrequireddiversityandscale,whichcouldmatchtheneedsoftheconsumeractivists.SomeoftheactivistsinAarhusdescribedthisprocessasamatterof“findingsomeonesuitableontheyellowpages”,meaningthatselectionintheircasewasperceivedasbeingmoreorlessrandom.Analyticalquestions4.1.4:Howistheoverallinfluenceofpublicpoliciesontheinitiativeanditsvaluesseen?(e.g.changesintheEUorganicregulationmighthavehadsomeimpact)Whatrelationshipsandalliancesdidtheorganizationestablish(atthebeginning,andalongitstrajectory)withthecivilsociety,eitherlocally(localCSOs)oratthewider(national/international)scale,e.g.organicorganizations?Andhowdiditinfluencethewayvalueswerediscussedandmaintained?Thereisonlyanindirectinfluence,insofarthatregulationandpoliciesmightinfluenceorganicstandards.However,theFoodCommunitiesarenotnecessarilyinfluencedbydevelopments,astheyhavethepossibilityofmakingdirectagreementswithfarmers.TheFoodCommunitiesareinthemselvesanNGOorganisation,butwithnoextensive‘upscale’links.Someoftheactivists(especiallyinthecaseoftheAarhuschapter)havesomeconnectionswithintheorganicmovement,buttherearenoformallinkageswiththeestablishedorganicNGOs,suchasthenationalassociationfororganicagriculture.Theirmainlinks,asindicatedbytheinterviews,istosimilar(grass‐rootdriven,communityscale)initiatives.OneexampleistheurbangardeningprojectHimmelhaveninAarhus,withwhomtheAarhuschaptersharesexperiencesandideas.Another

8

exampleisfromNorth‐westCopenhagen,wherethelocalFCchapterwereallowedtouseworkshopspaceatUngdomshusetatDortheavej,whichisaworkshopareafortheautonomousmovement.ThatparticularassociationwouldcontinueuntilthetwohappenedtodisagreeonsourcingherbsfromDanishprisons,whichinpracticemeantthattheFCchapterwasbannedfromUngdomshusetandhadtofindnewspaceforpackagingtheirweeklybaskets.

4.2Businessandmanagementlogics:theprocessbehindensuringeconomicperformanceandefficiencyinmid‐scalefoodvaluechains(Task2)

Descriptivequestions(internalorganisationofchainmember(s)(management)):4.2.1.1Whatisthelegalformofthebusiness(es)/initiative(ltd,coop,assoc.,trust?)TheFoodCommunitiesisanetworkofassociations,eachofthemhavingverylittlephysicalinfrastructure,astheirdistributioncentrestendtoberentedspaces.Theyarecooperativelyorganised,andintermsoflegalstructure,eachoftheassociationsformingtheoverallDanishFoodCommunitiesareorganizedasseparateassociations.Eachofthemhasseparateeconomy,eventhoughsomeofthemshareworkshopspace.OneexampleisthattheCopenhagenchaptersusecommondistributioncentres,thusmakingitmorefeasibleforthefarmerstodelivertheirproduce.4.2.1.2Doestotalsalesrevenuecoverall(monetary)costs?TheFoodCommunitiesisinpracticaltermsanon‐profitenterprise.Ifcostsrise,theweeklypricepaidbytheconsumerwillbeadjusted.4.2.1.4Isawrittenstrategyofthebusiness/initiative/chainavailable?(yes/no;explanation)Onlyintheshapeoftheoverallmissionstatement,seesection3.14.2.1.5Whatisthecoresentence/motto/philosophy?(pleasequote)See4.2.1.44.2.1.7Howimportantaretransparency,communication,fairness,trust,responsibilities,contracts/formalagreementsandparticipationfortheinternalorganisationofbusinesses/initiatives(employees/members“versus”managementboard)?AstheFoodCommunitiesarebasedonvolunteerwork,thereisnoformalboard,andallmembersareputtingworkintoupholdingthecommunities,andtheboardisonlyelectedfor2years,inshiftingrotation.Inthatregard,thereisahighlevelofaccountabilityintermsofhowtheactivists’workisbeingvaluedamongtheothermembers.SeveraloftheactivistsexpressedtheirconcernaboutusingsocialmediasuchasFacebookinadynamicandforthcomingway.Specifically,thatinvolvesdoingfrequentupdatesoftheFacebookgroup,throughwhichtheycommunicatewiththeotheractivists.4.2.1.8Howdidthemanagementofthefarms,business(es)orinitiativechangeduringthegrowthprocessorinchallengingperiods(organisationofinternaldecisionmakingprocesses,definitionofcorestrategies,selectionandapplicationofbusinessstrategies/instruments)?Please,tellthestoryabouttheimportanceofbusinessstrategyandmanagementadaptationsthathelpedtoovercomechallengingperiods.Thefarmersarenotformallyapartofthenetwork,butarerecruitedonanad‐hocbasis.Deliveriesareagreeduponthroughoralagreements,andtheydon’tworkoutwrittencontractsandstateformalqualitycriteria,apartfromthebasicrequirementthatthe

9

foodshouldbeproducedaccordingtoorganicstandards(certifiedornot,eventhoughalloftheproducesinterviewedwerecertifiedorganicproducers).4.2.1.14Isthereapricepremiumpaidtoprimaryproducers?Alternativequestion:Areproductpricespaidwithinthevalues‐basedchainhigherthancommonorofficiallypublishedmarketpricesfortheproductinthecountry/region?Yes,seesection3.2.34.2.1.15Howaremarginshandled?(splitupequally?).Alternativequestion:Iftheproductsaresoldaspremiumproductsrealisingconsumerpriceswhicharehigherthanaveragemarketprices:Doallchainmembersprofitfromthe“over‐average”productpricesorwillselectedchainmembersprofitmainlyfromthepremiumprice?Is“Fairness”betweenchainmembersanissueforchainpartners?Ifyes,whathappenedinperiodsofcrises?Seesection3.2.34.2.1.16Whichactorsareconsideredstrategicpartnersfromtheperspectiveofthechainmembers?Thefarmers/producersareseenasstrategicpartners.Oneexampleofhowtheyseektointegratefarmers,isthemeetingbetweenmembersandproducersintheCopenhagenFC(mentionedinsection3.2.3).Atthismeeting,theperspectiveofenteringalong‐termstrategicpartnershipwasdiscussed.However,theydidnotreachaconclusiontothesediscussions.4.2.1.17Howdependant/independentiseachbusinesspartnersfromthedown/upstreambusinesspartner?(Dependencyrisk)Thefarmersexpressedduringtheinterviews,thatacorestrategicconcernontheirbehalfwastoensureasuitablediversitywithregardstodistribution,astheyhadnointerestinbeingdependentonjustonedistributionnetwork,suchastheFoodCommunities(FF042012;FF072012).4.2.1.19Canyouidentifyanoverarchingbusinesslogicthatlinksbusinessgoals,strategiesandinstrumentsinternallyinthecorebusinesses/initiativesand/orwithinthevalues‐basedchain?(yes/no;explanation)Yes:thelogicofsupplyingaffordable,seasonalorganicfood(vegetables).Annex1Listof(potential)businessobjectives/goals(pleasefillinandtick/checkrelevantboxes;then,pleaserankthem)

Ranking1=highpriority

objective…2,3,4,5=little

importanceProfitability:Maintainingprofitabilitymeansmakingsurethatrevenuestaysaheadofthecostsofdoingbusiness;Focusoncontrollingcostsinbothproductionandoperationswhilemaintainingtheprofitmarginonproductssold.

3

Employeeretention:Employeeturnovercostsalwaysmoneyinlostproductivityandthecostsassociatedwithrecruiting,whichincludeemploymentadvertisingandpayingplacementagencies.Maintainingaproductiveandpositiveemployeeenvironmentimprovesretention.

5

10

Growth:Growthisplannedbasedonhistoricaldataandfutureprojections.Growthrequiresthecarefuluseofcompanyresourcessuchasfinancesandpersonnel.

2

Maintainasolidfinancialbase:Evenacompanywithgoodcashflowneedsfinancingcontactsintheeventthatcapitalisneedede.g.toexpandtheorganisation.Maintainingtheabilitytofinanceoperationsmeansthatthemanagementteamcanprepareforlong‐termprojectsandaddressshort‐termneedssuchaspayrollandaccountspayable.

5

Altruisticobjectives:Apartfromthementionedaboveobjectives,businessesorinitiativesmighthavealtruisticobjectiveswhicharetoachievewhentheeconomicviabilityisensured.Forexample:

o Ensuring(family/peasant/small)farmers’existenceo Contributiontoincomeandemploymentintheregion(strengtheningthe

ruraleconomy)

o Protectionofthenaturalenvironment(water,soil,ecosystems,landscape,climate)

o Animalwelfareo Realisingthe“organicidea”o Socialcare

1

Other(pleasespecify):______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Annex2Listof(possible)business/managementstrategies(pleasetick/checkrelevantboxesandaddfurtherstrategiesifneeded;then,pleaserankthem)

Ranking1=highpriorityobjective…2,3,4,5=littleimportance

o Supplyingaparticularlyhighproduct/servicequalityo Goodcustomerservice:Thishelpstoretainclientsandgeneratelasting

revenue

o Maintaininggoodandtrust‐basedlong‐termbusinessrelationshipso Productdifferentiationo Buildingonabetterunderstandingofconsumertrendso New/alternativemarketingchannelso Maintaininglocal/regionalproductionbaseo Reductionoftransportso Ensuringtransparencyo Professionalizationofmanagemento Maintainingofsocialstandardso Collaborationalongchainandwithmarketpartners,developingbusiness

partnerships

o Promotionofinnovationo Networkingo Highanimalwelfarestandardso Preparingthebusiness/initiativeforgrowth

5

11

o Creatingadynamicorganizationthatispreparedtomeetthechallengeso Other(pleasespecify):

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Annex3:Listof(possible)managementinstruments

Ranking1=highpriorityobjective…2,3,4,5=littleimportance

o Qualityassurancesystemso Qualitytesting(ownlaboratory)o Regularnegotiationof'fair'priceso Top‐upofconsumerpricetransmittedtolocalproducero Competitionanalysistobetterunderstandwheretheproductsrankinthe

marketplace

o Preferenceforlocalchainpartnerso Transparencysystemssuchasmarkingofdeliveryunits,animalpassportsetc.o Forwardcontractingofsupplyvolumeso Paymentwithinafewdayso Supplyuptoneedsofchainpartner(quality,quantity,intime)o Controlofsocialstandardso Jointmarketingo Chainpartnermeetingsandculturalorregionaleventso Knowledgetransfero Qualificationmeasureso Sharingstallsatafair,joinedorganisation/sponsoringofseminars/eventso Animalwelfarestandards,definition,control,communicationo Opencommunicationwithintheorganisationo Flathierarchieso Clearresponsibilitiesoneachlevelo Definitionofsocialstandardspluscontrolso Kindergarten,healthcare(familyfriendly)o Informativeattitude(ownmagazine/journal,newsletteret.)o Profitingfromownproduction(freebreakfastinbakery,contingentofbeerin

breweries,reducedvegetablepricesofshopassistantsetc.)

o Annualteambuildingeventso Regularsponsoringofevents/projectsinthecommunity(localsportsteam,

localnatureconservationproject,youthprojectetc.)

o Other(pleasespecify):____________________________________________________________________________________

5

12

4.3Thebalance/trade‐offbetweenqualitydifferentiationandvolumeandeconomicperformance(Task3)

Analyticalquestions4.3.1:Whichqualitydifferentiatingstrategiesistheorganicmid‐scalevalue‐basedfoodchainfocusingoninrelationtoconventionalandmainstreamorganicfoodchains,andhowandwhereinthechainarethesequalitiesdevelopedandhowaretheymaintained?Whichchanges/strategicchoicesaccordingtovolumegrowthhavechallengedqualitydifferentiationstrategiesandeconomicperformanceamongchainactorsthathaverequiredadaptationsinordertoachieveabalance?Whichstrategies/activitiesdidthevaluechainactorschoosetosolve/adapttomeetthesechallengesandthusmanagetocombinetheconcernsofvolume,qualitydifferentiationandeconomicperformanceinanewandsustainableway?Byofferingregionallyembedded,fresh,seasonalorganicvegetablesatanaffordableprice,theFoodCommunitiescreateadistinctioninrelationtosupermarkets,whereevendiscountretailerswillneedtomaintainacertainlevelofpremiumpricespaidbytheconsumer.Theseconddistinctionismadebytheconsumersparticipatinginanurbancommunityofconcernedconsumers,whotakedirectcontrolovertheirsupplyofvegetables.Byinvesting3hoursofvoluntaryworkeverymonth,theactivistsare(accordingtostatementsmadeduringtheinterviews)providedwithasenseofbeingabletomakeadifferencewithregardtoseizingcontroloftheirsupply.BoththeAarhusandCopenhagenchaptersexpressedanotherobjective,whichmembershipoftheFoodCommunitiesweresupposedtoyield:learninganddisseminatingknowledgeonsustainablefood.However,accordingtheinterviewees,thisobjectivehasbeenhardertomeet,asmostmemberswerecontentbydoingvoluntarywork.OneexamplewastheactivistinAarhusworkingwithstagingeventswithintheAarhuschapter(FF022012),whostatedthattherewasverymodestinterestinparticipatinginevents.Themembersdidnotshowanyinterestingoingonfarmvisits,andveryfewwantedtotakepartineventsinvolvingguestspeakers,workshopsetc.

4.4Communicationofvaluesandqualitiesamongthemembersofthefoodchain(Task4)

Analyticalquestions4.4.1:Howisthecommunicationbetweensupplychainactorsstructured?ThememberoftheFoodCommunitiescommunicatequitefrequentlyviasocialmediasuchasFacebook.OneoftheAarhusactivistsevendescribedthecommunityinAarhusslightlyironicasa“Facebookcommunity”,indicatingthattheprimarysocialintegrationafterhisopiniontookplaceviasocialmedia.BothchairsfromtheAarhuscommunityputgreatemphasisonmaintainingacontinuousflowofinformationamongthemembersviasocialmedia.Inhowfararetheprimaryproducersknowntoconsumers?TheFoodCommunitieshavebeenconcernedwithpresentingthefarmersviatheirwebsiteandviaFacebook,thusallowingthefarmertoassumeadistinctidentityinrelationtothemembersofthecommunity.InAarhus,theyputadistinctemphasison

13

thefarmers’accountofwhytheyconvertedtoorganic.Indramaturgicalterms,theywereveryconcernedaboutstagingacertainimageofthefarmer–inthiscaseapersondevotedtoorganicfarming,followingpersonalmotivationsandbeliefs.Whichmeansareinplacetoallowconsumersarticulatehis/herwishes/desires/concernsupwardsthefoodchaintotheproducers?ViatheFacebookcommunications,thesupplyworkgroup(bothAarhusandCopenhagen)presentthefarmerswiththefeedbackacquiredfromthemembers.Thefarmersthentrytoaccommodatetheconcerns.Thecaseswhichemergedfromtheinterviews,was,amongothers,questionsregardingthephysicalqualityofvegetables.InAarhus,someofthememberswonderedwhythevegetableswereofmoderatesizecomparedtoearliergrowingseasons,andhadaskedviaFacebookandemailstothesupplygroup.ThefarmersreplywasapostonFacebooktryingtoexplainwhythecabbagewasmoderatelysized,whichhadsomethingtodowiththeparticulargrowthconditionsthatyear.Which(unique/innovative)communicationmethodsareused?Socialmedia–eventhoughithardlycountsassomethinguniqueorinnovative,giventhatsocialmediahasfoundwidespreaduseduringrecentyears.Communicationwithfarmerstakeplaceviaphoneoremails,notviasocialmedia.Descriptivequestions:4.4.1.1Whatisthecommunicationbetweenyou(thestakeholder)andyour(stakeholder’s)partnerswithinthesupplychainabout?Someoftheactivistsexpressedtheirconcernwithfacilitatingsociallearningonfoodandsustainabilityissuesinmoregeneralterms.However,thatparticularaspecthadshowntobehardtoaddress.Oneofthemembersexpressedthattheremightbeseveraldifferentfactorsinplay.Oneofthefactorshementioned,wastheleveloffoodliteracyamongtheconsumers.Heperceived,thatfewmembersfeltconfidentstagingdialoguewithfarmersorevenotheractivistsregardingfoodqualityandwiderissuesofsustainability.4.4.1.2Viaorthroughwhichchannelsdoyou(thestakeholder)andyour(stakeholder’s)partnerscommunicatewitheachother?Socialmedia(Facebook),phone,email4.4.1.3Howoftendoyou(thestakeholder)andyour(thestakeholder’s)partnerscommunicatewitheachother?Communicationisquitefrequent,severaltimesperweek.4.4.1.7If,inhowfardoesgrowthandrespectivelyalsothetypeofgrowth(scaleorscope)haveaninfluenceonthecommunication?No.4.4.1.8Aretherefeedbackloopsinstalledforconsumerstochannelappreciationorcritique?Yes,the‘lineofcommand’isthatthesupplygroupreportsbacktothefarmer.Thefarmerthenrespondsbyphonetosupplygroup,whointurncommunicatesthefarmerfeedbackonFacebook.Thistypicallytakesplaceinthematterofafewdays.4.4.1.9Arethereanymeetings,seminars,workshops,events,fairsetc.whereactorscanexchange,interactetcoutsideusualstructures?

14

Yes,buttheinteresthasbeenverylimitedonbehalfofthemembersofthecommunity.Giventhattheremaining15DanishFoodCommunitieswerenotcoveredbythisstudy,itishardtoclaimgeneralvalidityofthatstatement.

4.5Qualitydimensionofprimaryproductionandmediationthroughthechain(Task5)

Analyticalquestion4.5.1:Whatarethequalities(valuedimensions,aestheticetic,healthetc.)relatedtotheprimaryproduction?Asthefarmersarenotformallymembersofthenetwork,andasnoneofthefarmersaredependentontheFoodCommunitiesastheirmainsalesoutlet,thereisnotinstricttermsmuchco‐evolutiontakingplacebetweenproductionandconsumption.However,thefarmersdotakeupchallengesposedbytheconsumers.Requestsfornewvarietieshavebeenmetbythefarmers,whosubsequentlytriedtointroducenewcrops.Inthatregard,therelativelysmallpartofthedeliveriesfromthefarmerswhicharebeingsourcedbytheFoodCommunities,canserve(andhas)asatestlaboratoryforintroducingnewcrops.Duringtheinterviews,theinterviewersposedquestionsregardingqualitydevelopmenttoallinterviewees.Manyofthemembersexpressedthattheydidnotfeelqualifiedtoprovidedetailedrequestsfornewproducts,includingseasonalcrops.Ensuringjustpriceswereamoretangiblepursuit,forwhichtheysawthemselvesbettersuited.

4.6Resilienceofthevaluechainandtheinitiative/business–longtermperspective,changeandsocial‐ecologicallinks(Task6)

Asmentionedabove,TheFoodCommunitiesseektoapplyanationalfairtradeprincipleintheirbusinessmodel,whichinpracticemeansthattheyaimtopayfarmersafixedpricepremiumwhichislinkedtoareferencepricelistfromamajorDanishorganicwholesaler,Solhjulet.AmeetingwasheldbetweenactivistsfromtheFoodCommunitiesinCopenhagenandtheirZealandproducersinlate2012todiscusswhetherthepricesshouldbeadjusted.Severalnewmodelsforpriceformationwerediscussed,includingthepossibilityoflong‐termagreementswhichweresupposedtoextendcollaborationbeyondshorttimespans,butthemeetingdidnotreachaclearconclusion,andsofarthe‘DanishFairTrademodel’isstillinuse.Thismeetingindicatesthatawarenessregardingestablishinglong‐term,reciprocalrelations(strategicpartnerships)betweenmembersandproducersdoexist,eventhoughnospecificinitiativeshavebeeninitiated.Thesuccessofstagingsociallearningprocessesthroughoutthenetworkhasbeensomewhatlimited.Still,giventhatmembersinvestworkhoursatthelocaldistributioncentres,theFoodCommunitiesdocontinuetoforge‘weak’linksbetweenurbanconsumers.Inaresilienceperspective,theFoodCommunitiesareorganizedinflexiblemanner,allowingthenetworktosourcevegetablesfrommanydifferentproducersacrossorevenbeyondtheir‘home’region.Thedecentralizedprincipleoforganisationallowsforahighdegreeofflexibility,aswhennetworksreachagivensize,theysplitupinsmallerunits,whichmightrestorethemutualfeelingofresponsibilityamongthemembers.

5Futureorientationoftheinitiative/businessandthevaluechain

TheFoodCommunitymembersintervieweddidnothaveahistoryofbeingactiveinorganicgrassrootsorganizationssuchastheNationalAssociationofOrganicAgriculture.Giventhat,theydidnotrelateverymuchtothehistoryoforganic

15

agriculture,eventhoughtheyputgreatemphasisoncertifiedorganicsasthebackboneofproductquality.Regardinggrowth,themembersdidnotperceiveanylimitstohowmuchtheycouldgrow,duetotheprincipleofconstantlybranchingoutinnewchaptersanddivisionsthroughouttheland.Inthatregard,theyperceivedthattheywouldnotfaceanysignificantobstacleswithregardstoscale,atleastaslongastheykeptsourcingfrommedium‐sizedorsmallfarms.Oneoftheproducerswereamajoroperatorwithinthefieldoforganicvegetables,butwereabletogrowcropsinsmallerbatchessotheycouldmatchthescalerequiredbytheFoodCommunities.InCopenhagen,someissuesofscalewereencounteredduringthegrowthphase,somethingwhichwasaddressedbyusingcommondistributioncentresforvegetables.Theactivistsfromtheindividualneighbourhood‐basedassociationswouldthengotothedistributioncentrestopickuptheirproduceandtakeittothelocalworkshopspacetopacktheproduceinindividualbags.

6Verificationoftheresultsandconcludingreflections

TheFoodCommunitiesareagrass‐rootsdriven,decentralizedorganization,whichposessomechallengeswithregardtogeneralizationofobservationsofproducer‐consumerlinkages.Themainchallengeisthatthemultiplenetworkswhichcomprisetheorganization,arenotinscribedviaagenericbusinesslogic–rather,thenetworkevolvesthroughmultiplenegotiationsofmeaning.Thisposesamethodologicalchallenge,asvalid,generalclaimsshouldbesupportedbyempiricalinquiryintoabroader,representativerangeofFoodCommunitiesthaninthepresentstudy.Anotherdistinctfactoristhatthefarmersarenotpartofthecorecase,iftheassociationsconstitutethebordertothesurroundingworld.Wecanthusnotidentifylong‐termengagementssuchasstrategicpartnerships,andstudytheco‐evolutionbetweenconsumptionandproductiondynamicsandhowtheymightbeabletoco‐evolve.Insteadthefarmersinterviewedperceivedtheirindividualfarmautonomyasbeingveryimportant.NoneofthemperceivedanyneedtobecomefurtherintegtratedwiththeFoodCommunities,astheyalreadyhadwell‐establishedmarketchannelssuitableforsmall‐scalesupplies.Still,thespatialstructureoftheFoodCommunitiesareveryinterestinginthecontextofHealthyGrowth.Thenotionofdecentralizinggrowthprocessescanbedescribedasasortof‘metastatic’growth,wherethenetworkwillbranchoutintonewchapterseverytimeathresholdscalehasbeenreached.ThathasbeenthecasefortheFoodCommunitiesinCopenhagen.Thatraisessomeinterestingissuesregardingscalarpolitics,which,however,cannotbeaddressedbythepresentreport.

References

Dalgaard,T.,C.Kjeldsen,I.T.Kristensen,andI.S.Kristensen.2008.Potentialetfor

omlægningtiløkologiskjordbrugiDanmark.InUdvikling,VækstogIntegritetidendanskeøkologisektor.,eds.H.F.AlrøeandN.Halberg,131‐150.Tjele:InternationalCentreforResearchinOrganicFoodSystems(ICROFS).

DKFF.2014.DanmarksØkologiskeFødevarefællesskaber|Økologitilalle!DanmarksØkologiskeFødevarefællesskaber[accessedSeptember282014].Availablefromhttp://døff.dk/.

DST.2007.Omsætningaføkologiskefødevareridetailledet.DanmarksStatistik[accessed.Availablefromhttp://www.statistikbanken.dk/OEKO3.

FF01.2012.InterviewwithchairpersonoftheFoodCommunityinAarhus,eds.M.H.ThorsøeandC.Kjeldsen.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

FF02.2012.InterviewwithactivistfromtheeventsworkgroupoftheFoodCommunityinAarhus,eds.M.H.ThorsøeandC.Kjeldsen.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

16

FF03.2012.Interviewwithvice‐chairpersonoftheFoodCommunityinAarhus,eds.M.H.ThorsøeandC.Kjeldsen.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

FF04.2012.InterviewwithproducersupplyingtheFoodCommunityinAarhus,eds.M.H.ThorsøeandC.Kjeldsen.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

FF05.2012.InterviewwithactivistfromthesourcingworkgroupoftheFoodCommunityinCopenhagen,eds.M.H.ThorsøeandC.Kjeldsen.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

FF06.2012.InterviewwithproducersupplyingtheFoodCommunityinCopenhagen,eds.M.H.ThorsøeandC.Kjeldsen.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

FF07.2012.InterviewwithproducersupplyingtheFoodCommunityinCopenhagen,eds.M.H.ThorsøeandC.Kjeldsen.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

FF08.2012.InterviewwithactivistfromtheFoodCommunityinCopenhagen,ed.M.H.Thorsøe.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

FF09.2012.InterviewwithactivistfromtheFoodCommunityinCopenhagen,ed.M.H.Thorsøe.Aarhus:DepartmentofAgroecology,AarhusUniversity.

Ingemann,J.H.1999.Thepoliticaleconomyofsatietyandsustainability‐evolutionaryexperiencefromDanishagriculture.Aalborg:AalborgUniversity,DepartmentofEconomics,PoliticsandPublicAdministration.Availablefrom.

———.2002.AgriculturalPolicy.InConsensus,cooperationandconflict:thepolicymakingprocessinDenmark,ed.H.Jørgensen,210‐225.Cheltenham:EdwardElgar.

Ingold,T.2000.ThePerceptionoftheEnvironment:EssaysonLivelihood,DwellingandSkill.NewYork:Routledge.

KBHFF.2014.KøbenhavnsFødevarefællesskab.KøbenhavnsFødevarefællesskab[accessedSeptember282014].Availablefromhttp://kbhff.dk/.

Kjeldsen,C.2005.Modernitet,tid,rumogøkologiskefødevarenetværk[Modernity,time,spaceandorganicfoodnetworks].Ph.D.thesis,DepartmentofEconomics,PoliticsandPublicAdministration,AalborgUniversity,Aalborg.

Kjeldsen,C.,andJ.H.Ingemann.2009.FromtheSocialtotheEconomicandBeyond?ARelationalApproachtotheHistoricalDevelopmentofDanishOrganicFoodNetworks.SociologiaRuralis49(2):151‐171.

———.2010.TheDanishorganicmovement:fromsocialmovementtomarketmainstreamandbeyond..?InInterrogatingalterity:Alternativeeconomicandpoliticalspaces,eds.D.Fuller,A.E.G.JonasandR.Lee,175‐190.Aldershot:AshgatePublishing.

Krippendorff,K.2004.ContentAnalysis:AnIntroductiontoItsMethodology(2ndedition).ThousandOaks,CA:SAGE.

Michelsen,J.2001.Organicfarminginaregulatoryperspective.TheDanishcase.SociologiaRuralis41(1):62‐84.

ØL.2009.Økologiskmarkedsnotat2009.ØkologiskLandsforening[accessed.Availablefromhttp://www.okologi.dk/media/229957/markedsnotat2009.pdf.

AA01_direktør.2002.InterviewmedstifterogtidligeredirektørforAarstiderne.Barritskov,12‐08‐2002.

AAFF.2014.AarhusØkologiskeFødevarefællesskab.AarhusFødevarefællesskab[accessedSeptember282014].Availablefromhttp://www.aoff.dk/.

aarstiderne.com.2003.Vorhistorie‐dervarengangengrønsagskasse.Aarstiderne,Barritskov[accessed.Availablefromhttp://www.aarstiderne.com/default.asp?path=%7B1AEF2486‐A7D7‐4594‐A169‐C266C8432CB9%7D.