The article focuses on the role of Localized Agri-food Systems (LAFS) in the provision of environmental and social benefits (ESBs) in peripheral areas, by comparing two case studies in Italy: bergamot production in Grecanic area (Calabria region) and a basket of local products in Garfagnana area (Tuscany region). On the basis of the evidence collected through semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, the paper shows the different mechanisms by which LAFS may stimulate the provision of ESBs in such areas. In both case studies the provision of ESBs was the result of the interplay among three different types of drivers: markets factors, the set of policies implemented in the specific territorial context and collective actions performed by local actors to promote new governance patterns and new institutions. The article shows that in peripheral areas LAFS, alongside food production, have a strong potential in delivering a broad range of environmental and social benefits, which are highly valued by local communities and consumers. However, this potential varies to large extent according to the socio-economic and institutional settings, as well as on the type of interactions of market drivers with public policies and collective action.

This article explores the role of a specific Localised Agri-food System (LAFS) in the provision of Environmental and social benefits (ESBs) in densely cultivated, industrialised, and populated areas by analysing the core of the processing tomato supply chain of northern Italy (Parma and Piacenza). The research examines how the interplay of market drivers, public policies, and collective actions favoured farming, technological, and organisational innovations geared to support long-term economic growth and tackle, at the same time, environmental challenges. The tomato supply chain is characterised by a favourable convergence of attitudes, policies, and market conditions that over time allowed for fruitful interactions between private stakeholders and between the supply chain and public players. Decades of key stakeholders’ interconnections within the tomato supply chain led to a success story of economic growth and attention to a new balance between agro-industry and environment, for the benefit of producers/processors, consumers, and natural resources. Profitability strategies inevitably imply intensification of farming in order to maximise profit levels per hectare, however, the tomato supply chain found a collective motivation that could grant profitability and concurrently reward producers and processors for attention paid to safeguarding the environment—giving evidence that intensification does not necessarily conflict with requirements in support of sustainability.

At the EU level, agricultural and rural development policies are increasingly oriented and targeted to the provision of public goods associated with farming. While most analysis focuses on the efficiency and effectiveness of specific types of interventions, this paper aims at exploring the role of policy mixes in stimulating the provision of environmental and social benefits (ESBs) associated with agriculture. The role of policy mixes in determining the provision of ESBs to farming is a complex matter, since different types of policies may have synergistic, overlapping and/or contrasting effects. On the basis of a comparative analysis of six case studies in different European countries, the analysis shows interesting solutions already being experimented with in the field by local actors working together through some form of cooperative action, highlighting how public intervention is often a combination of different policy instruments that may vary according to the type of socio-economic and institutional settings as well as according to the type of ESB targeted. The effectiveness of policy mixes depends not only on the design and implementation phases, but also on new governance arrangements stimulating alternative mechanisms of public goods provision, including market mechanisms and collective action.

This study aims to answer the following research questions: (a) to what extent do EU rural development supports for investments address territorial differences of rural areas, especially concerning the differences between rich and intensive areas, on one hand, and marginal and peripheral rural areas on the other hand; (b) how does present governance and the delivery system of measures supporting rural investments contribute to the financial support of marginal and peripheral rural areas? To respond to these questions, the research examined 747 calls for tender in all Italian regions related to 16 types of investment measures and a global amount of EUR 67 billion Euros and 49,410 representative projects approved in 17 Italian regions during the period 2014–2020. Delivery mechanisms included the rules that have been set up to define recipient eligibility and selection criteria of the rural development programmes. The distributive effects of RDP investment support measures appear evidently uneven, especially in agricultural and agro-industrial competitiveness measures, which are mainly allocated in already dynamic and strongly competitive areas. Delivery mechanisms boost disparities when funds are allocated through the “open competition” approach. Instead, the modulation of territorial criteria in the implementation phase can provide effective results in terms of reducing disparities in fund allocation and outreaching the most lagging areas. There are two main novelties of this research: (a) the analysis of territorial criteria in the calls for tenders for investment support, and (b) the effects of these criteria on expenditure distribution at the municipal level (LAU2 in the EU nomenclature). This study has been carried out outside the formal methodological approaches promoted by the European Commission for RDP evaluation and might be considered a complementary approach to evaluation reporting activity. This study might provide two significant contributions to the debate on rural areas. First, a “combined” approach to the definition of rurality (mixing “structural” and “locational” approaches) might provide a better analytical framework in line with the evolution of the literature on rurality. Second, the delivery systems that put more emphasis on territorial targets, as they were presented in this study, might be an essential component of a place-based policy.