Please login first
Gianluca Brunori   Professor  Institute, Department or Faculty Head 
Timeline See timeline
Gianluca Brunori published an article in December 2018.
Top co-authors See all
Mario Giampietro

92 shared publications

Institute of Environmental Science and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain

Erik Mathijs

59 shared publications

Division of Bioeconomics, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium

T Lang

54 shared publications

City University, London, UK

Damian Maye

44 shared publications

Countryside and Community Research Institute, University of Gloucestershire, Gloucester, UK

Fabio Bartolini

29 shared publications

Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Pisa, Via del Borghetto 80, Pisa, 56124, Italy

Publication Record
Distribution of Articles published per year 
(2003 - 2018)
Total number of journals
published in
Publications See all
Article 0 Reads 0 Citations A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability Oriana Gava, Fabio Bartolini, Francesca Venturi, Gianluca Br... Published: 23 December 2018
Sustainability, doi: 10.3390/su11010071
DOI See at publisher website ABS Show/hide abstract
In pursuit of agricultural sustainability and food security, research should contribute to policy-making by providing scientifically robust evidence. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is an excellent candidate for generating that evidence, thereby helping the selection of interventions towards more sustainable agri-food. The purpose of this article is proposing a basis for discussion on the use of the LCA tool for targeting and monitoring of environmental policy interventions in agri-food. The problem of reducing the environmental burden in agri-food can be tackled by acting on the supply and/or demand sides and may benefit from the collaboration of supply chain stakeholders. Agri-food policies that most benefit from LCA-based data concern cross-border pollution, transaction costs following the adoption of environmental standards, adoption of less polluting practices and/or technologies, and business-to-consumer information asymmetry. The choice between the methodological options available for LCA studies (attributional, consequential, or hybrid models) depends on the purpose and scope of the study. The possibility of integrating the LCA with economic and social impact assessments—e.g., under the life cycle sustainability assessment framework—makes LCA an excellent tool for monitoring business or sectoral-level achievements with respect to UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.
Article 0 Reads 0 Citations Territorial agrifood systems: A Franco-Italian contribution to the debates over alternative food networks in rural areas Claire Lamine, Lucile Garçon, Gianluca Brunori Published: 01 December 2018
Journal of Rural Studies, doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.11.007
DOI See at publisher website
Article 0 Reads 0 Citations Adaptation strategies of small-scale fisheries within changing market and regulatory conditions in the EU Paolo Prosperi, James Kirwan, Damian Maye, Fabio Bartolini, ... Published: 01 December 2018
Marine Policy, doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2018.12.006
DOI See at publisher website
Article 0 Reads 0 Citations Linking Sustainability with Geographical Proximity in Food Supply Chains. An Indicator Selection Framework Oriana Gava, Francesca Galli, Fabio Bartolini, Gianluca Brun... Published: 24 August 2018
Agriculture, doi: 10.3390/agriculture8090130
DOI See at publisher website ABS Show/hide abstract
Despite policymakers’ promotion of food relocalization strategies for burden mitigation, the assumption that local food chains are more sustainable than the global ones might not hold. This literature review tries to highlight a possible framework for exploratory analyses that aim at associating sustainability with the geographical proximity of food supply chains. The purpose of the article is identifying a set of communicative and information-dense indicators for use by evaluators. Bread is the selected test food, given its importance in human nutrition and the relevance of some of its life cycle phases for land use (cereal farming) and trade (cereal commercialization). Article searching (including keyword selection, explicit inclusion/exclusion criteria, and computer-assisted screening using the NVivo® software) was carried out over the Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases, and returned 29 documents (refereed and non-refereed publications). The retrieved literature shows varied research focus, methods, and depth of analyses. The review highlighted 39 environmental, 36 economic, and 27 social indicators, along the food chain. Indicators’ reporting chains are heterogeneous; even the comparison of standard procedures, e.g., Life Cycle Assessment, is not straightforward. Holistic approaches are missing.
Article 0 Reads 6 Citations Sustainability of Local and Global Food Chains: Introduction to the Special Issue Gianluca Brunori, Francesca Galli Published: 08 August 2016
Sustainability, doi: 10.3390/su8080765
DOI See at publisher website ABS Show/hide abstract
Sustainability assessment is one of the keys to competition by food supply chains over sustainability. The way it is conceived and embodied into decision-makers’ choices affects the competitiveness of local and global chains. Science-based assessment methodologies have made substantial progress, but uncertainties—as well as interests at stake—are high. There are no science-based methods that are able to give an unchallenged verdict over the sustainability performance of a firm, let alone a supply chain. Assessment methods are more suited for medium-large firm dimensions, as planning, monitoring, and reporting are costly. Moreover, the availability of data affects the choice of parameters to be measured, and many claims of local food are not easily measurable. To give local chains a chance to operate on a level playing field, there is the need to re-think sustainability assessment processes and tailor them to the characteristics of the analysed supply chains. We indicate seven key points on which we think scholars should focus their attention when dealing with food supply chain sustainability assessment.
Article 1 Read 24 Citations Are Local Food Chains More Sustainable than Global Food Chains? Considerations for Assessment Gianluca Brunori, Francesca Galli, Dominique Barjolle, Rudol... Published: 06 May 2016
Sustainability, doi: 10.3390/su8050449
DOI See at publisher website ABS Show/hide abstract
This paper summarizes the main findings of the GLAMUR project which starts with an apparently simple question: is “local” more sustainable than “global”? Sustainability assessment is framed within a post-normal science perspective, advocating the integration of public deliberation and scientific research. The assessment spans 39 local, intermediate and global supply chain case studies across different commodities and countries. Assessment criteria cover environmental, economic, social, health and ethical sustainability dimensions. A closer view of the food system demonstrates a highly dynamic local–global continuum where actors, while adapting to a changing environment, establish multiple relations and animate several chain configurations. The evidence suggests caution when comparing “local” and “global” chains, especially when using the outcomes of the comparison in decision-making. Supply chains are analytical constructs that necessarily—and arbitrarily—are confined by system boundaries, isolating a set of elements from an interconnected whole. Even consolidated approaches, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), assess only a part of sustainability attributes, and the interpretation may be controversial. Many sustainability attributes are not yet measurable and “hard” methodologies need to be complemented by “soft” methodologies which are at least able to identify critical issues and trade-offs. Aware of these limitations, our research shows that comparing local and global chains, with the necessary caution, can help overcome a priori positions that so far have characterized the debate between “localists” and “globalists”. At firm level, comparison between “local” and “global” chains could be useful to identify best practices, benchmarks, critical points, and errors to avoid. As sustainability is not a status to achieve, but a never-ending process, comparison and deliberation can be the basis of a “reflexive governance” of food chains.