Skip to main content

The Agri-Food Market and Eco-Oriented Consumer Law: Towards a New Model

  • Chapter
Law and Agroecology
  • 1252 Accesses

Abstract

The agri-food sector requires a comprehensive and cross-cutting policy that also meets the needs of environmental protection. Environmental issues are always dealt with in different ways, depending on the socio-cultural context at any given time. One salient element that emerges, however, is the overexploitation of land, and permanent environmental damage is closely linked to an approach that considers agriculture exclusively as a question of producing goods. The increasing levels of welfare in industrialized countries and the ability to produce a surplus over and above domestic demand have led policymakers and practitioners to neglect the basic function of agricultural activities: providing food for people. Taking this function as a starting point, we can demonstrate the need to regulate agricultural activity in a way that goes beyond the demands of market logic. We must also recognize the importance of standards in agri-food law that enable consumers to make informed choices. In contemporary society, consumers often choose products not only for their quality or price but on the basis of other intangible values. A growing share of consumption choices take into account the environmental impact of production processes or, more generally, their compliance with ethical rules also linked to energy consumption and the proximity of the market to the area of production. In this sense, we can detect a clear spread of aggregation methods that go beyond the usual patterns [of consumer behavior] and the [growing] role of the consumer in the shift from market-oriented to eco-oriented choice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    On this point, see Jannarelli (2013a), pp. 11–35; Bologna (2010), pp. 359–362; Maddalena (2007), pp. 477–482.

  2. 2.

    Jannarelli (2013b), pp. 405–438.

  3. 3.

    Jannarelli (2013a), p. 22.

  4. 4.

    Jannarelli (2013a), p. 24.

  5. 5.

    Jannarelli (2013b), p. 405.

  6. 6.

    Leccese (2011), p. 45.

  7. 7.

    COM (2011) 631 final.

  8. 8.

    Tamponi (2011a), pp. 579–616.

  9. 9.

    Cf. http://eur-lex.europa.eu. Accessed 2 Oct 2014.

  10. 10.

    For the previous programs, see White Paper Together for Health: A Strategic Approach for the EU 2008–2013 COM(2007) 630 final and to Decision 1350/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 establishing a second programme of Community action in the field of health (2008–2013). http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/consumers/consumer_safety/I28153_it.htm. On this point see Sirsi (2011), pp. 496–523.

  11. 11.

    Cf. http://eur-lex.europa.eu. Accessed 2 Oct 2014.

  12. 12.

    Jannarelli (2012), pp. 38–46; Canfora (2012), pp. 114–138; Costato (2011a), pp. 1–18; Ragusa (2011), pp. 457–487.

  13. 13.

    On this point, see Jannarelli (2011), p. 144.

  14. 14.

    Article 1 of Regulation 178/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of Council, of 28 January 2002, stipulating general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and stipulating procedures in matters of food safety, in http://eur-lex.europa.eu.

  15. 15.

    On this point, see Costato (2008), pp. 299–316.

  16. 16.

    Jannarelli (2012). Regulation 1169/2011 is read in the more general framework of regulation in order to give direct orders to information processes that are the basis of market relations. Albisinni (2012), pp. 66–78; Canfora (2012); Giuffrida (2012), pp. 79–93; Forti (2012), pp. 94–113; Ragusa (2011), p. 480, which points out that the regulation concerns allowing consumers to obtain relevant information about the products they’re interested in, apart from labeling, which, although a necessary tool, is not the only one possible or necessarily desirable because it is not usable for nonprepacked products; Russo (2012), pp. 47–65.

  17. 17.

    Jannarelli (2012), p. 41.

  18. 18.

    Whereas 3) Regulation 1169/2011/EC.

  19. 19.

    Whereas 4) Regulation 1169/2011/EC.

  20. 20.

    Carmignani (2012), p. 98.

  21. 21.

    Bigliazzi Geri (1987), pp. 495–507.

  22. 22.

    Carmignani (2012), p. 155.

  23. 23.

    Carmignani (2012), p. 91.

  24. 24.

    Cf. Tamponi (2011b), pp. 481–495.

  25. 25.

    Canfora (2011), pp. 304–329.

  26. 26.

    Brambilla (2013), pp. 406–421. The significant point is on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—Flagship initiative under Europe 2020 Strategy, COM(2011) 21 final, where we read that in order to operate appropriate choices, even over longer distances, we need to examine the entire cycle of how we use resources, including the value chain and trade-offs among different priorities. To have the necessary information in order to evaluate different choices will help policymakers to decide where to focus their action. Among many examples, reference is made to the fact that the use of the land to produce foodstuffs may compete with the use of the land for energy, and both uses may be an obstacle to the competitive use of soil that encourages biodiversity or acts as an ecosystem, for example by absorbing carbon from the atmosphere.

  27. 27.

    Adornato (2008), pp. 5–8.

  28. 28.

    On these issues, and the case law of the Constitutional Court on the point, see Canfora (2011), p. 311; De Leonardis (2005), pp. 889–914, he shows that if, in fact, on the one hand, those that, with an effective metaphor, have been called “windmills” of our century can contribute greatly to the reduction of greenhouse gases, on the other hand, it can have a negative effect on the landscape: it is well known that the areas of greatest wind potential are those of the ridges, hills and mountains, all extremely scenically relevant.

  29. 29.

    Jannarelli (2013b), p. 405.

  30. 30.

    Germanò (2011), pp. 589–603. A particular attention to safeguard production methods and traditional recipes is found in Art. 17, Regulation (EU) 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs, where it is stated that a scheme for traditional specialties guaranteed is established to safeguard traditional methods of production and recipes by helping producers of traditional product in marketing and communicating the value-adding attributes of their traditional recipes and products to consumers. On this point, see Costato (2012), pp. 648–667.

  31. 31.

    On the important profiles regarding the “option quality terms” (according to the terms of Regulation (EU) 1151/2012), as related to the Commission’s resistance to any initiative by the Member States for further indications on labeling, see Costato (2012), p. 660.

  32. 32.

    Canfora (2013), pp. 149–161.

  33. 33.

    Canfora (2013), p. 151.

  34. 34.

    Canfora (2013), p. 150.

  35. 35.

    Koo and Jiang (2014), pp. 279–302.

  36. 36.

    Italian Constitutional Court, 6 December 2013, n. 292.

  37. 37.

    On the need to strengthen the position of consumers with clear information, see Rubino (2012), pp. 668–679; Jannarelli (2012), p. 38. On the notion of consumer, see Costato (2011b), pp. 19–52; Lucifero (2011), pp. 321–422; Saija and Tommasini (2011), pp. 493–532.

  38. 38.

    Li et al. (2014), pp. 69–87; Costantino (2013), pp. 166–189.

  39. 39.

    Carmignani (2012), p. 155.

  40. 40.

    In http://www.synergy-net.info/default.cfm?fuseaction=link&id=3,39160, 9. Accessed 10 Oct 2014.

  41. 41.

    On the point, see Rubino (2012), p. 668; Ragusa (2011), p. 457; Jannarelli (2012), p. 38; Korn (2012), pp. 663–709.

  42. 42.

    In http://ec.europa.eu/consumers, 2. Accessed 10 Oct 2014.

  43. 43.

    Decision 1926/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 establishing a programme of Community action in the field of consumer policy (2007–2013).

  44. 44.

    COM(2011) 707 def. 2; COM(2012) 225 final.

  45. 45.

    COM(2012) 225 final.

  46. 46.

    Proposal for a Regulation establishing a framework program for research and innovation, COM(2011) 809. On this point, see COM(2012) 225 final, 1.

  47. 47.

    Cohen (1998).

  48. 48.

    COM(2012) 225 final, 4, stipulates that consumers should be empowered, assisted and encouraged to make sustainable and healthy choices that will lead to cost saving for themselves and for the society as a whole. Consumers have the right to be informed on the environmental impact throughout the life cycle of the products (goods and services) they intend to buy. They should be supported in identifying truly sustainable choices. Effective tools are needed to protect them against misleading and unfounded environmental and health claims.

  49. 49.

    Tamponi (2011a), p. 593.

  50. 50.

    On this point, see Costantino (2011), pp. 230–247.

  51. 51.

    In http://eur-lex.europa.eu. Accessed 5 Oct 2014.

  52. 52.

    On the impact of the Directive in the food sector, see Di Lauro (2011), pp. 547–578.

  53. 53.

    Tamponi (2011a), p. 593.

  54. 54.

    For the necessity of following new legal perspectives, see Adornato (2012), pp. 405–414; Borghi (2012), pp. 3–36.

  55. 55.

    Bologna (2010), p. 359.

  56. 56.

    Jannarelli (2013a), p. 12.

  57. 57.

    COM(2010) 672.

  58. 58.

    Ascarelli (1959), p. 39. On the point, see Jannarelli (2013b), p. 405.

References

  • Adornato F (2008) Farina o benzina? Il contributo dell’agricoltura ad un nuovo modello di sviluppo. Agricoltura Istituzioni Mercati 5:5–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Adornato F (2012) La sicurezza alimentare tra primato della tecnica e crisi del diritto. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:405–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Albisinni F (2012) La comunicazione al consumatore di alimenti, le disposizioni nutrizionali e l’origine dei prodotti. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:66–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Ascarelli T (1959) Ordinamento giuridico e processo economico. Giuffrè, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigliazzi Geri L (1987) Divagazioni su tutela dell’ambiente ed uso della proprietà. Rivista critica di diritto privato 5:495–507

    Google Scholar 

  • Bologna G (2010) Biodiversità e scienza della sostenibilità. Ital J Forest Mountain Environ 65:359–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borghi P (2012) Diritto alimentare italiano e integrazione europea. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:3–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Brambilla P (2013) Produzione di energia da fonti rinnovabili e tutela delle aree protette: le nuove frontiere del bilanciamento degli interessi. Rivista Giuridica dell’Ambiente 28:406–421

    Google Scholar 

  • Canfora I (2011) Agricoltura, tutela del paesaggio e sviluppo delle energie alternative. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 90:304–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Canfora I (2012) La responsabilità degli operatori alimentari per le informazioni sugli alimenti. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:114–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Canfora I (2013) I marchi regionali di qualità e la correttezza dell’informazione dei consumatori: libera circolazione delle merci vs. tutela dell’agricoltura locale? Rivista di Diritto Agrario 92:149–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmignani S (2012) Agricoltura e ambiente (Le reciproche implicazioni). Giappichelli, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1998) Quante persone possono vivere sulla terra. Il Mulino, Bologna

    Google Scholar 

  • Costantino L (2011) Il ruolo dell’Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato nel settore agroalimentare. In: Costato L, Germanò A, Rook Basile E (eds) Trattato di diritto agrario, vol 3. Utet, Torino, pp 230–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Costantino L (2013) La tutela del contraente debole nelle relazioni negoziali lungo la filiera agro-alimentare nelle più recenti esperienze giuridiche europee e statunitensi. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 92:166–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (2008) Le indicazioni nutrizionali nel reg. n. 1924/06. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 87:299–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (2011a) La politica agricola comune nel settore dell’alimentazione. In: Costato L, Germanò A, Rook Basile E (eds) Trattato di diritto agrario, vol 3. Utet, Torino, pp 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (2011b) Principi e requisiti generali della legislazione alimentare. In: Costato L, Germanò A, Rook Basile E (eds) Trattato di diritto agrario, vol 3. Utet, Torino, pp 19–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Costato L (2012) Il regolamento n. 1151/2012 del Parlamento Europeo e del Consiglio sui regimi di qualità dei prodotti agricoli e alimentari. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:648–667

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leonardis F (2005) Criteri di bilanciamento tra paesaggio ed energia eolica. Diritto Amministrativo 13:889–914

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Lauro A (2011) La comunicazione e la disciplina della pubblicità dei prodotti alimentari. In: Costato L, Germanò A, Rook Basile E (eds) Trattato di diritto agrario, vol 3. Utet, Torino, pp 547–578

    Google Scholar 

  • Forti A (2012) Determinazioni nutrizionali. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:94–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Germanò A (2011) Le nuove sfide del diritto dell’agricoltura (nuovi cibi e nuove norme). Rivista di Diritto Agrario 90:589–603

    Google Scholar 

  • Giuffrida M (2012) Pratiche leali di informazione e informazioni volontarie. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:79–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Jannarelli A (2011) Profili giuridici del sistema agro-alimentare tra ascesa e crisi della globalizzazione. Cacucci, Bari

    Google Scholar 

  • Jannarelli A (2012) La fornitura di informazioni sugli alimenti ai consumatori nel nuovo reg. n. 1169/2011 tra l’onnicomprensività dell’approccio e l’articolazione delle tecniche performative. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:38–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Jannarelli A (2013a) Il divenire del diritto agrario italiano ed europeo tra sviluppi tecnologici e sostenibilità. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 92:11–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Jannarelli A (2013b) I prodotti agricoli tra alimenti e merci: alle radici moderne dell’‘eccezionalità’ agricola. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 92:405–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Koo WW, Jiang Y (2014) Estimating the local effect of weather on field crop production with unobserved producer behavior: a bioeconomic modeling framework. Environ Econ Policy Stud 16:279–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korn R (2012) Tutela dell’ambiente, consumatori e responsabilità sociale d’impresa: i nuovi strumenti della sostenibilità aziendale. Contratto e impresa Europa 17:663–709

    Google Scholar 

  • Leccese E (2011) Danno all’ambiente e danno alla persona. Angeli, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Clark CD, Jensen KL, Yen ST (2014) Will consumers follow climate leaders? The effect of manufacturer participation in a voluntary environmental program on consumer preferences. Environ Econ Policy Stud 16:69–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucifero N (2011) La comunicazione simbolica nel mercato alimentare: marchi e segni del territorio. In: Costato L, Germanò A, Rook Basile E (eds) Trattato di diritto agrario, vol 3. Utet, Torino, pp 321–422

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddalena P (2007) L’ambiente: riflessioni introduttive per una sua tutela giuridica. Ambiente e sviluppo 21:477–482

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragusa VE (2011) I prodotti alimentari ‘preincartati’ e gli alimenti ‘preimballati per la vendita diretta’, alla luce del regolamento n. 1169/2011 relativo alla fornitura di informazioni sugli alimenti ai consumatori. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:457–487

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubino V (2012) La responsabilità degli operatori del settore alimentare per violazione degli obblighi informativi del consumatore dopo il regolamento (UE) n. 1169/2011. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:668–679

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo L (2012) Deleghe normative e atti di esecuzione nel reg. UE n. 1169/2011. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 91:47–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Saija R, Tommasini A (2011) La disciplina giuridica dell’etichettatura degli alimenti. In: Costato L, Germanò A, Rook Basile E (eds) Trattato di diritto agrario, vol 3. Utet, Torino, pp 493–532

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirsi E (2011) Il diritto all’educazione del consumatore di alimenti. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 90:496–523

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamponi M (2011a) La tutela del consumatore di alimenti nel momento contrattuale: valore delle indicazioni obbligatorie e volontarie nella formazione del contratto. In: Costato L, Germanò A, Rook Basile E (eds) Trattato di diritto agrario, vol 3. Utet, Torino, pp 579–616

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamponi M (2011b) I diritti della terra. Rivista di Diritto Agrario 90:481–495

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Tommasi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tommasi, S. (2015). The Agri-Food Market and Eco-Oriented Consumer Law: Towards a New Model. In: Monteduro, M., Buongiorno, P., Di Benedetto, S., Isoni, A. (eds) Law and Agroecology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46617-9_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics