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.

Climate change is a global phenomenon. Its impact on agricultural activities in developing countries has increased dramatically. Understanding how farmers perceive climate change and how they adapt to it is very important to the implementation of adequate policies for agricultural and food security. This paper aims to contribute to an understanding of farmers’ adaptation choices, determinants of the adaptation choices and the long-term implications of the adaptation choices. Data were collected from 120 respondents in the Zou Department of Benin. A binary logit model was used to analyze the factors influencing household decisions to adapt to climate change. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was estimated to analyze the factors influencing households’ choice of adaptation strategies to climate change. The results show that farmers have a developed perception of climate change. These changes are translated by rainfall disturbances (rainfall delays, early cessation, bad rainfall distribution etc.), shortening of the small dry season, increasing of temperature and sometimes, violent winds. The survey reveals that Benin farmers adopt many strategies in response to climate change. These strategies include “Crop–livestock diversification and other good practices (mulching, organic fertilizer),” “Use of improved varieties, chemical fertilizers and pesticides,” “Agroforestry and perennial plantation” and “Diversification of income-generating activities.” The findings also reveal that most of the respondents use these strategies in combination. From the binary logit model, we know that “farming experience” and “educational level of household head” positively influence adaptation decisions. The result of the multinomial logit analysis shows that farming experience, educational level, farm size and gender have a significant impact on climate change adaptation strategies. Based on in-depth analysis of each strategy, we identify crop diversification and agroforestry as being the most promising strategies with benefits for farmers, the environment and future generations.