As no study on attitudes towards local food has compared “organic” and national quality scheme consumer segments, this study aimed to provide further insights and clarifications on the issue of consumer segmentation in terms of trust towards organic food and food of selected quality perceived as local, along socioeconomic characteristics, and other important determinants of this complex interaction. The research examines consumers’ attitudes and perceptions related to two quality schemes for special Slovenian foods: “Organic”, which relates to production methods; and “Selected Quality”, which relates to quality attributes. The study focused on two segments of consumers, who exhibit a high level of trust towards the two quality schemes. Comparative analysis of the consumer segments looked for the potential differences with respect to their sociodemographic profiles, as well as to their understanding of the definition of local food, attitudes towards local food, trust in actors and institutions, and willingness to purchase local food. The study combined qualitative approaches and a quantitative survey with a general population sample. The results showed that both consumer groups have similar understandings of local food, with region-based interpretations outperforming country-based interpretations. The “Organic” group was more cosmopolitan and supportive of the local community, regardless of geographic proximity, than the “Selected Quality” group. Older consumers occupy a larger share of both segments, with professionals and individuals with higher incomes more likely to be in the “Organic” group and retirees and students more likely to be in the “Selected Quality” group. To increase the consumers’ interest in food with the “Organic” and “Selected Quality” schemes, more specific product propositions should be developed.

Local livestock breeds in Slovenia have been eligible for financial incentives in the form of a fixed payment per livestock unit (LU) since 2002. The scheme has however not been successful in reversing the erosion of animal genetic resources (AnGR). This paper investigates an alternative, whereby incentive payments would better reflect breeders’ actual opportunity costs. The paper contributes to the limited existing body of knowledge related to the use of tender mechanisms in the design of the payments for agrobiodiversity conservation schemes (PACS), particularly for AnGR. Empirical findings draw on the results of a stated preference survey involving 301 farmers in Slovenia, engaging, or being potentially able to engage, in the rearing of local pig, sheep and goat breeds. Interval and logistic regression model results suggest that willingness to accept (WTA) conservation support significantly differs from actual payment levels. The estimated WTA was found to be 27% lower for the local sheep and goat breeds and 5% higher for the local pig breed, suggesting that differentiated incentive payments would provide a more cost-effective alternative. Additional analysis of breeders’ preferences and motives for engaging in local livestock breed production further informs understanding regarding AnGR conservation policy and the importance of accompanying actions to reverse negative population trends. These include reducing administrative barriers and enhancing the market valorisation of local breeds.

In the creation of this Special Issue, the editors identified circular bioeconomy, i

The bioeconomy occupies the centre of the Green Deal, the EU’s plan to support transformative growth following the COVID-19 episode. However, parts of the EU, such as countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) continue to lag behind in harnessing the potential held by the bioeconomy. This article argues that in CEE countries, where the primary and conventional bioeconomy sectors play a more important role, ‘early’ transition pathways such as improvements in productivity and practice- as well as commercialisation-oriented innovation (the do–use–interact model: DUI) are just as important as approaches based on (generally publicly supported) R&D, innovation adoption, and technology transfer (science–technology–innovation model: STI), typically associated with high-value bioindustrial applications. The argument is tested by conducting a survey of 352 experts in the region that gives an insight into the CEE macro-region’s assets with respect to deploying the bioeconomy’s potential and assessing the transition pathways relevant to the better performance of bioeconomy (primary, manufacturing, and other related) sectors. The results show the particular relevance of consolidating the primary and traditional sectors to support improvements in productivity based on the vertical and horizontal interaction typically associated with DUI, while the relevance of STI is mostly linked to advanced sectors, which are narrowly distributed across the region. The findings are relevant to policy given that the EU’s bioeconomy policy has thus far chiefly focused on STI support that better corresponds to the needs of countries at more advanced stages of developing the bioeconomy, but is less appropriate for the specific context and needs of CEE.