Local food program
 |
AgroBRIDGES Good Practice Recording Template |
| Author(s) | Kaisa Vehmas and Minna Kulju |
| Insert photo or any visual image or diagram e.g. /Word or Image Collage | |
| Choose a primary theme that the Good Practice adheres to (three themes can be considered: | Education and awareness raising practices |
| If relevant choose a secondary theme that the Good Practice adheres to | |
| If relevant choose a tertiary theme that the Good Practice adheres to | |
|
EIP Practice Abstract Format:
Short summary for practitioners in English on the (final or expected) outcomes (1000-1500 characters, word count – no spaces).This summary should be as interesting as possible for farmers/end-users, using a direct and easy understandable language and pointing out entrepreneurial elements which are particularly relevant for practitioners. Research oriented aspects which do not help the understanding of the practice itself should be avoided. |
Short description of the ‘Good Practice’: The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry has prepared a Local Food Programme (Lähiruokaohjelma) in collaboration with different stakeholders. Objectives of the Programme are: • to diversify local food production and to increase it to meet the demand, • to enable the development of new sales and distribution channels, and to increase the degree of processing of local foods, • to improve opportunities for small-scale food processing and sales through legislation, advice and research, • to increase the share of local foods in public procurement by improving procurement competence, qualitative criteria and procurement requirements, • to intensify cooperation between actors in the local food sector and to increase the appreciation and visibility of food and food chain actors. In addition, as part of the Rural Development Programme in Finland, there is a nationwide Food Sector Coordination Project, which aims to increase and intensify co-operation between those operating in the local food sector and to increase the sector’s competitiveness through networking. (Aitojamakuja.fi) |
| Main results/outcomes of the activity (expected or final): | |
| Local food program – For the consumer three short instructional videos have been compiled, which can be used, for example, in high school to lead a discussion about the origin of food. Ruokatieto ry’s website contains high-quality, food-themed educational material for lower and upper grades of primary education and secondary school students, including information on the route of milk, vegetables, fish, meat and grain from field to table (https://www.ruokatieto.fi/ruokakasvatus). For the local food entrepreneur a workbook has been compiled. The workbook helps to develop business models and find development targets and strengths (https://issuu.com/mttelo/docs/lahiruokayrittajan-tyokirja). Aitojamakuja.fi web page contains a search function from which consumers can search local or organic food producers according to product or location (region or city). For local food producer/operator the web page contains a lot of material to gain information on developing business. | |
| Further information/Reference: Local food program: https://mmm.fi/lahiruoka; https://aitojamakuja.fi/ | |
|
Short summary for practitioners in native language on the (final or expected) outcomes (1000-1500 characters, word count – no spaces).
This summary should be as interesting as possible for farmers/end-users, using a direct and easy understandable language and pointing out entrepreneurial elements which are particularly relevant for practitioners. Research oriented aspects which do not help the understanding of the practice itself should be avoided. |
|
| Pearls, Puzzles, Proposals? | “Pearls” -Guidance for producers to market their products. In addition, raising knowledge of consumers to understand what is the difference between local and traditional food. “Puzzles“ – Concrete effect of produced materials on producers’ business. “Proposals” – Visibility of the produced material to be increased among consumers and producers. Concrete action points should be useful for producers. |
| What needs did the ‘good practice’ respond to? | Producers/operators do not have knowledge how to market their products via SFSCs. Consumers, especially younger ones, are not aware of local food/producers. |
| Methodology Used: | desk based, one-on-one interview (interview with representative of local food program) |
| Sector | All Sectors |
| Actors/Stakeholders involved. Who are key actors in the supply chain AND who are key enablers of the process? | Local food producers/operators, consumers |
| What needs did the ‘good practice’ respond to? | For consumers sharing information of local food and local producers/operators, for producer/operators means to develop their business |
| Is the good practice supported by an IT application? If yes please describe and collect the TRL | Prolocalis & aitojamakuja.fi offer tool to find out the local producers. |
| Media attachment (e.g. video link) or other attachment describing/depicting the Good Pratice | |
| Key words | Local food, business development, education, awareness |
| Additonal ifnromation for reporting purposes | |
|
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020
research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 101000788 |
|
Join Our Newsletter
Do you want to know more about the project? Do you want to be update? Subscribe now!
"We connect producers and consumers in new business and marketing models for Short Food Supply Chains"