Arianna Francioni – Regional Urban Preparedness Coordinator / Urban Workstream Focal Point
United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) - Regional Office Johannesburg
Do you find the proposed scope comprehensive to analyze and discuss the key issues concerning the role of urban and peri-urban food systems in achieving food security and nutrition? Are there any major gaps or omissions?
The scope of the report is comprehensive, however, the following areas have been identified for possible expansion:
Leverage Connectivity in Urban Areas to shorten then producer/consumer distance: information delivery and digital technology platforms can facilitate communication, marketing and distribution of foods produced by local smallholder farmers to interested urban consumers. Advocacy and advertising of these platforms would be needed. Internet connectivity and telecommunication coverage would make this possible and easier than in rural areas.
Use of tech for food storage and safety: smart integration of technology can help create sustainable urban food ecosystems (UFEs). For example, blockchain technology is becoming increasingly integrated in the food supply chain to enhance traceability and safety. With blockchain food traceability systems, every step of the journey from farm to consumer can be recorded and easily accessed, thus helping to effectively contain contamination outbreaks, enabling people to trace a product within seconds instead of weeks, creating an auditable trail of accurate data in a tamper-resistant way, and significantly lowers costs.
Importance of nutrition education for behavioral change and increase consumption of healthy foods: to open more and more market opportunities for healthy foods in urban areas, especially amongst the most vulnerable often used to consume heavily processed foods for reasons of storage capacity and affordability, change consumers' purchasing and eating habits is key. Nutrition education especially focused on children, youth, and women, coupled with healthy school meals and integrated into a broader perspective with health, hygiene and environmental education, should be the foundation of any initiative related to food systems in urban areas.
Rural/coastal – urban linkages: the intersection between urban with rural and coastal spaces should be investigated to understand how potentially urban and peri-urban spaces can drive changes in the behavior of consumers that then encourage investment across the value chain and impact on rural production which would continue to need to produce and adapt for cities and towns. This would include looking at what level of investment within value chain development in urban and peri-urban spaces can drive the creation of jobs, industry and consumer demand for products that are produced within these locations or add value to rural production. Urban and peri-urban centers that have coastal connections should be furtherly studied in order to understand how sustainable fisheries would need to be included in the idea of the circular economy.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Share good practices and successful experiences on strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems in the context of urbanization and rural transformation, including in the case of emergencies or conflicts.
The cases below listed have not been directly implemented by WFP but they have been identified as good practices through thematic literature for the purpose of this e-consultation.
Urban food programmes benefit from an institutional home. Depending on which urban food system approach may be prevalent in a Country (e.g. Nationally influenced approaches guided by strong national policies, programmes and plans, City-led approaches driven by civil society, dynamic mayors and city councils, who set an agenda in response to concrete urban problems, Hybrid Approaches, benefit from a combination of the two approaches, meshing strong municipal government and civil society leadership with national policy and financial support), urban food programmes benefit from an institutional home. Local governments may embed food units in diverse municipal departments, may create dedicated food divisions, units or agencies; they may design interventions implemented by separate departments coordinated by a senior municipal or county official; or they may use informal structures before establishing formal units. Some cities may start out with informal structures (e.g. working groups, committees, task forces) on pilot interventions before deciding to create formal food divisions or departments. Urban food institutions and processes in city-led approaches tended to develop organically and iteratively. Task forces and food units may be established within the Department of Planning: in the city of Toronto, a municipal food policy leader, with a long history working to ensure access to healthy, affordable, sustainable and culturally acceptable food, the Toronto Food Policy Council was established as an advisory committee to report directly to the Board of Health and the Mayor on issues relating to food security. On the other side, in Shanghai, municipal departments or commissions (e.g. commerce, agriculture) design and implement their respective programmes, with coordination provided directly by the Mayor’s office, rather than a separate urban food unit.
The Transformative Impact of Quito’s Resilient Food Security Program. Local food production has become a cornerstone of Quito’s Agrifood resilience work approach, and have already transformed people’s lives. Quito’s transformative planning process is supported, on the one hand, by the civil society sector mobilized through the proposals of the multistakeholder platform Agro-Food Pact of Quito (PAQ), including a draft Food Policy and Action Plan for consideration by the local government. The PAQ prepared and approved a Food Charter for the city that was signed by the Municipality and presented publicly. On the other hand, the city’s planning process is supported by its incorporation of food into city planning instruments such as Quito’s Vision 2040, the Resilience Strategy and the guidelines of the Metropolitan Development and Regulation Plan 2015-2025, and Quito’s Agrifood Strategy. The Strategy aims to address problems related to food insecurity, obesity, diet-related diseases, nutrition, health, environmental and waste management, and generating income and employment opportunities through support to local food value chains and sustainable agriculture to bring local economic development in both rural and urban territories. Quito has assisted an average of 4,500 people per year, a combination of those receiving urban farming support and the families that benefit directly from these farms, supported the creation of new farms, bringing the total to 1,529 orchards in Quito’s urban, peri-urban, and rural areas—70 of those just between November 2019 and March 2020 (when they conducted the last census). These result in about 640 tons of fresh and healthy food reaching Quito, with more than 11 tons destined specifically for the city’s most vulnerable neighborhoods. The increase in access to healthy food and diversification of the local food supply chain, coupled with the elevated importance placed on fresh produce, has empowered the city’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic as well. For example, the Food Bank of Quito, part of the Agri-food Pact of Quito (PAQ), has distributed over 440,500 Kg of food to over 193,000 people with low incomes. Cross-sectoral collaboration was essential to increasing food system resilience : the emphasis on a new, cross-sectoral collaboration to address urban food issues in Quito has transformed the landscape and potential for future outcomes, including shifting the perspectives and priorities of key organizations in Quito’s food system. It strengthens the longstanding AGRUPAR (Participatory Urban Agriculture) project, by embedding Quito’s food system in the city’s priorities, which helps ensuring it has the resources necessary to address their food challenges, despite municipal budget constraints and the importance of funding COVID-19 response.
Training Human Resources to build Government Capacity in Integrated Planning: eThekwini Municipality and Baltimore. Increasing the number of staff working on food issues and strengthening the capacities of municipal food units to mobilize and disburse financing facilitates food systems delivery and builds legitimacy. This translates in institutionalize planners, urban policy coordinators and food policy directors, who are indispensable in designing and facilitating policies, programmes and initiatives across food systems and different city agencies. They can help cities design food systems solutions by mediating conflict, facilitating collaboration and making synergistic connections across departments, food systems sectors and government agencies. Effective collaboration requires these food professionals to understand urban planning and development processes, and for urban planners to learn about the perspectives, challenges and opportunities linked with food systems. For example, South Africa’s eThekwini Municipality established a Municipal Institute of Learning to build local government capacity. Since 2009, it has trained 3600 local government practitioners in strategic planning, water and sanitation, solid waste management and revenue management. The Institute fosters collaboration and learning partnerships and networks with local and international universities, research institutes in Africa and international development agencies and trains urban planners to address issues related to the informal sector, land use planning, governance and food security (Smit, 2016).
Another interesting case is the one of Baltimore, where it was understood that food does not fit squarely within one government agency, so the city hired a full-time Food Policy Director to build stakeholders’ capacity and foster interagency collaboration. The position is based in the Baltimore Department of Planning’s Office of Sustainability, which enables close ties to the mayor, municipal departments, and the multistakeholder platform BFPI, which enables frequent interaction on food issues and the sustainability of the food agenda.
The importance of Monitoring and Evaluation to Track Progress and guide decision making: Milan Urban Food Policy Pact (MUFPP). Cities are often challenged to develop monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems because they do not have sufficient human and financial resources to collect the necessary information to construct baselines and track progress. Launched by the Milan Municipality in 2015, the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact is an international agreement among cities from all over the world, committed "to develop sustainable food systems that are inclusive, resilient, safe and diverse, that provide healthy and affordable food to all people in a human rights-based framework, that minimize waste and conserve biodiversity while adapting to and mitigating impacts of climate change”.The Milan Urban Food Policy Pact (MUFPP) provides a comprehensive indicator framework for cities to benchmark. It highlights six key dimensions with a list of 42 quantitative and qualitative indicators measuring: governance; sustainable diets and nutrition; social and economic equity; food production and rural-urban linkages; food supply and distribution; and food loss and waste.
____________________________________________________________________________
1. What are the main bottlenecks hampering the contribution of urban and peri-urban food systems to food security and nutrition?
Limited Interjurisdictional mechanisms: a system based approach to integrate different levels of government on the territory across multiple municipalities, such as city-region systems stems from the recognition that urban food issues must often be addressed from a larger regional or territorial perspective. The concept of system-based approaches is still nascent in many countries: it promotes integrative and inclusive urban, territorial and rural policy and planning, supporting the analysis of the flow of resources such as people, water, biodiversity and food. This will translate into considering the different scales of urban and rural settlements and the related ecosystem-based interlinkages.
Limited Integration of Food Systems into urban planning: Urban planners may not perceive the benefits of horticulture and so it may be seen as a conflicting activity where only the perceived threats to health are considered. The integration of food into urban development, land-use or sector-specific plans is often the starting point for cities’ urban food interventions. Integration of food issues in urban planning aligns food system goals with broad city goals. Integration of food into municipal department sector plans helps facilitate access to financing and broadens support for food across diverse thematic areas and with a larger and greater variety of public, private and civil society actors.
Limited Cross-sectoral policies and collaborations: mainstreaming urban food systems into health, hygiene, water, waste, environment, and resilience policies and regulatory framework, through ongoing dialogue and collaborations between stakeholders can guarantee an integrated approach to health, food, and urban environment. In this sense, planners should capitalize on the communities’ skills and city authorities should ensure that the appropriate legal, financial, technical and support structures are in place.
Data Gaps and Evidence Generation: The lack of available valid, reliable baseline data in urban areas represents a real problem for cities’ engagement in urban food issues. Cities have a poor understanding and knowledge of many of the basic building blocks of food systems (e.g. knowledge of what consumers are eating, how much food is wasted, urban production systems, costs and capacities for scaling up investments).
Lack of infrastructure: Access of urban and peri-urban growers to resources, like urban organic waste and wastewater, is usually restricted due to government regulations and economic policies that are biased toward large-scale waste management. Recycling of urban waste is often limited by price structures that favor large-scale landfill operations. Unless instruments (taxation, subsidies, etc.) are put in force by central/local government it is difficult for municipalities to afford ecological waste management systems. The correct use of organic solid wastes, stormwater and wastewater for growing food requires technical assistance from professionals to continually monitor safety. Lack of transportation systems, farm-to-market connecting roads, as well as safely managed territorial markets represent further barriers to availability and access of locally grown products. Infrastructure for vertical farming, household level farming infrastructure, storage, and processing equipment at small scale level for the informal sector are also limited and hindering the contribution of urban food systems to food security.
Limited inclusivity and enabling environment to maximize the potential benefits of the informal food sector: well-designed institutional and policy frameworks and an appropriate enabling environment (legal, regulatory, and taxation) are needed to leverage the benefit of the informal food sector in urban and peri-urban areas. In particular, inclusive institutions and cooperation in the design of informal sector regulations are important. In some countries, municipal governments establish independent government bodies to assist and promote the informal sector, serving as a centralized hub for implementing diverse support programmes.
_________________________________________________________________________
2. How can urban and peri-urban food systems be transformed and made more equitable and accessible both for food system actors and in terms of food security and nutrition outcomes?
The operationalization of rural-urban linkages is key to diversifying sources of food supply and improving accessibility and affordability of nutritious food while strengthening local livelihoods and food systems’ resilience. This operationalization could be implemented using different and integrated entry points:
Governance, Planning, and Logistics: Municipalities to create institutional and infrastructural conditions to forge closer links between local producers, consumers, and service providers along agri-food value chains, with potentially high returns. This would include tailoring interventions in planning and governance of territorial markets to benefit micro-, small- and medium-scale enterprises (MSMEs), going beyond food market/supply chain efficiency: i) balance offer of local shops with the development of superstores; ii) support the growth in farm shops where farmers sell mainly their own products directly to consumers and educate farmers to new methods for distribution and promotion; iii) plan shop developments that reduce the need to travel, support better public transport to local shops and improve logistics to increase access e.g. bus services and home deliveries for those unable to get to shops regularly; iv) reduce the local shops’ cost of vegetables and fruits, to make them more competitive in respect to supermarkets.
Access to Credit and Financing: i) Create incentives for those in the finance and investment community, with support from national policy and development banks, to work together to meet the financial needs of, for example, smallholder producers, micro, small- and medium-sized enterprises. Promising examples are emerging in social or impact financing, circular and solidarity economy initiatives; ii) Simplify procedures to encourage private actors and public institutions to improve access to (micro) credit for small-scale entrepreneurs and smallholder farmers, particularly women who may have fewer assets and informal land ownership. Youth and start-up entrepreneurs are important connectors between rural producers and with new markets for healthy food as well as for import/export. Financing for the acceleration and growth of new business and employment opportunities across the urban-rural continuum is vital. Recognize that incorporating effective actions to create jobs and improve working conditions in rural areas contributes to the livelihoods of the stewards and protectors of ecosystems. This then contributes to the food security and nutrition of rural and urban populations.
Mainstream health and well-being, including food security and nutrition issues, throughout all public service planning: It needs to be ensured that all initiatives, policies and programs for integrated territorial planning evaluate potential positive and negative impacts on health, giving special attention to the most vulnerable groups in cities, and in particular slum-dwellers, for whom food and nutrition security, access to health services and sanitation are a challenge. Institutional food service (schools, hospitals, etc.) may be used as a lever to increase access to sustainable, healthy diets while providing markets for smallholder producers. Re-shape public food service and procurement regulations to respond to sustainable goals would enable the provision of nutritious and safe foods from regional seasonal produce, increase the visibility and awareness of rural livelihoods in urban areas, acknowledge indigenous knowledge and experience, preserve regional environments and farmlands, and enhance livelihoods and local economies in disadvantaged rural areas.
Inclusivity: the growing potential of collaboration between local producers and urban communities should be explored and leveraged. Growers, small-holders and horticultural businesses have the opportunity to promote and respond to community needs and can play a unique educational and recreational role in the community while closing the gap between producers and consumers. Visits to schools, and hospitality businesses, teaching horticulture skills and organizing evening classes could be only some of the activities to get the community involved. At the same time, communities can work in partnership with local growers. For example, food retailers, especially supermarket chains, are a dominant force in shaping the preferences and demand for goods. Supermarkets can greatly improve their customers’ access to vegetables and fruit by i) offering an increased variety of fresh vegetables and fruits on sale, ii) guaranteeing accessibility to the supermarket for people with disability, iii) offering small reasonably priced packs or unpackaged affordable vegetables and fruits sold singly for small households, iv) offering loyalty cards or stamps that offer discounts on vegetables and fruits, v) guaranteeing home-service deliveries for locally produced foods.
_______________________________________________________________________
3. How can urban food supply chains, formal and informal, local and global, be made more resilient to ensure food security and nutrition within urban settings?
Essential food system infrastructures, including markets, storage, refrigeration, processing, hygiene and sanitation, are largely inadequate for growing cities and vulnerable to severe disruptions from natural to man-induced hazards. Urban food systems and supply chains must be able to withstand and rebound from acute disruptions such as civil unrest, cyber-attacks, or cyclones, as well as those with more gradual impacts, such as drought, sea-level rise, or economic shocks. I) Location in at-risk areas exposing food distribution to floods, ii) power outages caused by cyclones and resulting in major food-safety hazards, iii) transport disruptions caused by pandemic lockdown restrictions or political unrest, iv) formal and informal food retail decrease induced by major economic shocks and absence of safety nets, are all potential threats to urban food supply chains. Populations with social and economic disadvantages are particularly vulnerable to the impact of food system disruptions, including low-income individuals, food desert residents, the elderly and disabled, those with medically-restricted diets, and those experiencing homelessness.
Four recommendations could help policymakers and researchers in the early stages of considering ways to improve resilience across the food systems:
Broadly incorporate Food System Risks in Emergency Preparedness Plans and Disaster Recovery Plans: Cities’ resilience and disaster recovery plans should directly address disruptions to all aspects of the food system, from recognizing the concentration of food distribution networks and food access points in at-risk areas, to identifying risks from power outages, transit impairment and staff attendance.
Build Cross-Sectoral Collaboration And Communication Network Between Formal And Informal Food Systems Actors: Given limited food bank capacity in the aftermath of disasters, cities must build a strong communication network across government agencies, NGOs, non-profits, and food businesses to ensure that local organizations have the capacity to meet physical and economic food access challenges for vulnerable, food-insecure populations. This should include effective communication of (and resource distribution for) personal and household food disruption preparedness.
Plan for Redundancy: Redundancy is the intentional duplication of system components in order to increase a system’s resilience to change or failure. Redundancy may refer to infrastructure: this may include back-generators for refrigeration or propane grills and butane burners for cooking during power outages, intra-nets during cyber-attacks, water harvesting systems during water disruptions. Redundancy may refer to Inventory and Supplier Diversity: the amount of food that an organization has on hand in advance of an event and the organization’s ability to quickly restock may determine how successfully it withstands a disruptive event. Redundancy may refer to the location: Organizations that work closely with other institutions that provide similar services or that have multiple locations may be more resilient.
Endorse a Systemic Concept of Risk: Systemic risk is associated with cascading impacts that spread within and across systems and sectors (e.g. ecosystems, health, infrastructure and the food sector) via the movements of people, goods, capital and information within and across boundaries (e.g. regions, countries and continents). Systems can be affected by critical events or shocks that occur outside or within the system. Furthermore, the design and evolution of systems, like in the case of the food system, can create risks as well as opportunities that make elements of the system more or less resilient towards external shocks. For example, the pursuit of ever more efficient food systems has resulted in greater reliance on trade to compensate for local or national production gaps or to absorb over-supply. This so-called efficiency of the system contributed to reduced grain storage and thus to a reduced buffer against unplanned outcomes, which likely contributed to price spikes and cascading risk throughout and beyond the food system in 2008–2012. Evidence generation in a systemic concept of risk is key. Data-driven or empirical approaches are important to build coherent and robust theory; however, a lack of data and theory makes model development challenging. In the context of systemic risk, a shift in perception from elements to patterns, and from interconnectivity to interdependence, is necessary.
_______________________________________________________________________________
4. What changes are needed in urban planning to better support all dimensions of food security – including support for human rights, agency and sustainability? Which are some of the measures that can strengthen the agency of local actors in urban and peri-urban food systems?
Integrating the food dimension with other components of the human systems and eco-systems according to a territorial approach: Use territorial system-based approaches to promote integrative and inclusive urban, territorial and rural policy and planning to support the analysis of the flow of resources such as people, water, biodiversity and food. Use the agriculture and food, water, energy and health security systems and their underlying ecosystem functions as unifying frameworks to strengthen urban and rural synergies. Integrate issues of health, migration, food imports, climate change and conflict with job creation and funding for ecosystem services. This could promote and protect natural resources and biodiversity conservation, reduce waste, increase food security, improve nutrition and address gender equality, etc.
Recognizing the added value of combining vacant spaces with growing food in or near cities: Planners are increasingly recognizing urban agriculture as an important component of sustainable and resilient environments. Vacant land in cities represents a huge potential for this purpose: these are the weed lots, garbage-strewn undeveloped spaces, and high crime areas that most urban residents consider blights on the neighborhood. In some cases, neighbors have organized to transform these spaces into community amenities such as shared garden spaces, but all too often these lots persist as unrecognized opportunities for urban gardening and farming on vacant or underutilized lands to stabilize neighborhoods and foster a sense of community. This approach addresses contemporarily issued related to food systems, nature-based solutions for resilience, climate change action and greenhouse emission reduction. It should be underpinned by clear zoning regulations and by a comprehensive approach to the integration of food-system considerations in municipal policy decision-making processes and explicit acknowledgment of the connections between urban agriculture and sustainability, neighbourhood liveability, urban greening, community building, social interaction, and crime reduction.
Harness the power of civil society through participatory engagement: Create spaces and mechanisms as needed to engage in political dialogue and planning processes for women, Indigenous Peoples, children, youth, elders, persons with disabilities, slum dwellers, smallholders and the forcibly displaced and others at risk of being left behind. Protect and respect local and indigenous cultures. Recognize that the relation of culture to migration, mobility and displacement is critical for social protection and resilience, and is a key factor in the design of appropriate urban strategies and interventions. Ask urban food stakeholders to serve in a consultative role to review municipal ordinances, whether through a hearing process, working group, food council or commission. This option will incorporate opinions of interested groups in the formulation process and also serve to strengthen local ownership in the resulting policy.
Exchanged knowledge through multi-stakeholder platforms: Establish ongoing knowledge exchange, platforms, dialogue and capacity development to strengthen urban-rural linkages that drive sustainable and inclusive growth (honoring the territory’s carrying capacity). Support ongoing dialogue between stakeholders through dedicated and innovative training curricula for regional planners and cross-sector collaboration with academia, non-governmental partners and those most likely to be left behind.
Generate Evidence and Manage Data through Mixed Methods: Establish or improve knowledge systems and fill data gaps by developing participatory models and mix-methods (quantitative model / qualitative data collection) that map and describe complex urban systems Based on the integration of social, economic and environmental dimensions. This will generate evidence to support urban and food systems planning methods that will reinforce the urban-rural continuum and improve territorial cohesion. Improve and collect, where needed, disaggregated territorial data, including for age, gender and socio-economic status of producers and consumers. Collect urban, peri-urban and rural disaggregated data and indicators on both national and subnational levels (addressing appropriate scale and including quantifiable and qualitative data). Incorporate nonstate and grassroots knowledge. Facilitate knowledge sharing, monitor performance and evaluation, and make information accessible, transparent, interactive and available for all.
____________________________________________________________________________
5. How can national and municipal governments strengthen the potential for low-carbon, inclusive, relatively self-sufficient and resilient cities and towns to drive improved food security and nutrition in the wake of climate change and other crises?
Food Systems Vulnerability Assessments: Resilient food systems are increasingly becoming an entry point in urban areas as cities have declared climate change, food safety, and pandemic-related emergencies. Food systems can be linked to cities’ efforts to develop and implement comprehensive resilience plans and related response. Understanding which kind of food systems, we have and which kind of food system we want is the base for decision-making. Cities such as Baltimore, Quito and Toronto are but a few that have undertaken food systems vulnerability assessments as the basis to develop such plans.
City Region Food Systems: The impacts of climate change and emerging public health issues are disrupting food systems all over the world, affecting food and nutrition security of millions of people. In a rapidly urbanising world where 70 percent of the global food supply is consumed in urban areas, city region food systems are especially affected by shocks and stresses, but they also present the answer to the problem. This territorial approach, developed by FAO and RUAF, included mapping food flows and food system stakeholders, and identifying food needs as well as potential production areas and capacities within the city region. The results of this analysis may inform the design and implementation of a ‘post-COVID-19 strategy’ for enhanced resilience, linking responses to climate and epidemic vulnerabilities to more resilient food systems.
Use of nature-based solutions and green infrastructures to build climate-resilient circular food systems: Nature-based solutions (NBS; solutions that are inspired by, supported by, or copied from nature) can overcome system challenges related to the functioning of the biosphere, society, or economy (including governance arrangements), and support a transition to sustainable climate-resilient food systems. Different types of NBS can be used to support the transition needed to address food system failures and reach the SDGs. Example that can be mentioned are: i) Rain Water Harvesting practices for Irrigation (RWHI), which implies harvesting, storing, and conserving rainwater directly at the farm or the run-off derived from a catchment area or reservoir from which individual farmers can benefit; ii) Agroforestry as the practice to integrate agriculture into forests and trees environments improve soil fertility and reduce erosion, reduce pests infestation, contribute to nature conservation and ultimately reduce disaster risk and mitigate climate change; iii) Integrated Pest Management (IPM), a holistic approach to combat plant pests with minimal applications of crop protecting agents, reduce the negative impacts that derive on human health and the environment from agro-chemicals.
_______________________________________________________________
6. What are the most appropriate policies (and gaps in existing policies) along the rural-urban continuum to address issues of land tenure, urban expansion into farmland and the growing competition for natural resources?
Interjurisdictional Multiscale Policies and Programmes: city-region food systems should be underpinned by inter-municipal cooperation and associative inter-jurisdictional governance mechanisms to integrate different levels of government and to bring together government planning authorities. This may lead in some cases to new, integrated agencies or associations (e.g. starting with waste, water, public transport or land management). Special attention should be given to the financial, cultural and institutional dimensions and needs of rural settlements, small towns and intermediate cities. Strengthen their capacities to engage in integrated territorial development, for example through territorial associations between small towns and cities.
Sustainability Policies: innovative policy tools not mandated by law, allow for a flexible and integrated approach, that can tie together issues related to: Health and wellbeing (e.g. improve the health of the population as a whole, increase the welfare of society at large; Environment (reduce negative environmental impacts of the food system, e.g. reducing carbon emissions, being more energy efficient); Economy and community development (support a vibrant local economy, green economy, e.g. by supporting local growers, retailers, markets, and employment); Social and cultural aspects (support resilient, close-knit communities, food-friendly neighborhoods, e.g. by celebrating and promoting local food culture); Food security/social justice (e.g. fight food poverty, improved access for affordable, culturally diverse and healthy food, fairness in the food chain, a just food system); Learning/empowerment (e.g. life-long learning, empowered residents); Urban-rural linkages (i.e. connect city and the countryside through food). These long-term policies specifically aimed at securing sustained economic growth, a healthy environment or an inclusive social development are unfortunately still in a nascent state, especially in developing Countries.
Land governance and zoning: land governance, zoning and regulations for Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture are the custodians of a balanced and integrated land use, that may follow a unique vision implemented by Municipalities and urban stakeholders. A thorough review of land zoning and regulations is necessary to assess their context-specific adequacy to frame the current dynamics of urban expansion into farmland and to eventually update them to the human and eco-systems interlinked development.
_____________________________________________________________________________
7. How can urban and peri-urban food systems ensure that food and nutrition needs of specific groups of people, such as migrants, the internally displaced, children, adolescent, etc., are met?
Leave No-one Behind Approach to Food Systems and Urban-Rural Linkages: Embed Leave No-One Behind approaches in all policy instruments and actions to ensure that development initiatives and processes do not negatively affect anyone’s needs across the urban-rural continuum. Interventions should respect, promote and fulfil the basic essential needs of diverse categories of vulnerable populations, such as employment, education, health, adequate and affordable housing, and food. Protecting an area’s natural biological diversity should complement and contribute to meeting population’s essential needs in that area.
Do no harm and provide social protection: Strengthen urban-rural linkages to overcome conflict, recognize cultural diversity and reduce inequalities. This can be done through the promotion of well-being, health, food security and nutrition, and the protection of water, energy, mobility and shelter, biodiversity and land tenure in initiatives, policies, programmes and service provision. Strike a balance in measures and social protection programmes affecting men and women, and different age and socio-economic groups across the urban-rural continuum.
Inclusivity: Develop a framework for the inclusion of urban and rural at-risk populations. Include vulnerable and marginalized people in the planning, decision-making and design of governance platforms and programmes to promote holistic understanding of issues. Increase accountability through monitoring and evaluating processes to ensure the inclusion of urban and rural communities, for example, developing tools for impact assessment of policies, strategies, programmes and initiatives to strengthen territorial integration.
Data Collection and Evidence Generation: Collect and make available disaggregated data and knowledge on peoples’ mobility (including women, youth and people living with disabilities) across the urban-rural continuum (including international migration flows). This should especially focus on mobility in relation to the growth and transformative potential of small and intermediate towns and cities, including both daily and seasonal commuting as well as longer-term movement. Analysis focusing on jobs, health, food security and nutrition, and strategic environmental assessments of resource use and distribution can guide planning on different scales for dynamic mobility-based services such as training, finance and information for rural and urban multi-spatial households.
Tackle all form of malnutrition: Institute policy interventions that effectively tackle all forms of malnutrition (i.e. the presence of undernutrition, deficiencies in vitamins and/ or minerals, and the presence of overweight or obesity). Of the top 15 disease risks in 2017, four are dietary (alcohol use, low wholegrains, high sodium, and low fruit). Another seven are nutritional or health indicators that are highly responsive to diet. Investing in measures to address malnutrition can significantly impact health, reduce healthcare costs and is linked to better productivity. Focus attention on making nutritious and safe foods more affordable, available and desirable by collaborating with food systems partners for solutions at levels of the food supply, the food environment and the consumer. Start with the promotion of local diets and local production of diverse and nutritious food as a cost-effective strategy to reduce non-communicable diseases. This will also generate employment and income for low-income groups (e.g. Indigenous Peoples, youth, women, migrants etc.)
_________________________________________________________________________
8. What are the potential benefits and challenges of territorial markets for strengthening food security and nutrition for urban populations?
Global supply chains have been rocked in the last few years. From lockdown measures in 2020 and 2021 creating logistical challenges for farmers and traders to skyrocketing fuel prices from the Russia-Ukraine war, food supply lines in Africa were badly disrupted. The impacts ranged from high prices faced by consumers to drastically reduced incomes for farmers, as well as the loss of fresh produce at different points along the value chain. The recent droughts especially in the horn of Africa have seen similar effects on both consumers and producers alike, with a handful of large multinational distributors, processors, and retailers hoarding super profits along the way.
Challenges:
Lacking adequate infrastructures: poor and often temporary or semi-permanent infrastructures, territorial markets lack adequate organization, such as water supply and disposal systems, access to electricity, access to bio-inputs, and adequate storage facilities, especially cold warehouses. This limits the preservation of perishable foods in these markets, thereby impacting not only food safety but also availability and desirability.
Poor Waste Management: territorial markets generate a relevant amount of organic and inorganic waste. Unfortunately, they are rarely framed within an efficient circular system of waste management and recycling. On the contrary, they end up being neglected areas with high environmental risks.
Insufficient Government Attention: territorial markets are often neglected in policy development and plans targeting nutrition – usually due to information gaps or a lack of understanding of their potential.
Benefits:
Livelihoods Creation: territorial markets contribute to creating livelihood opportunities for smallholder farmers to directly sell their products. Community-led waste management and recycling as well as provision and maintenance of basic services/infrastructures supporting market development and management could also represent livelihood sources.
Facilitate access to a healthy diet and contribute to behavioural change: territorial markets have the potential to directly impact and benefit local diets and consumption, especially for low- and middle-income consumers, by improving the availability, accessibility, and desirability of locally produced, seasonal and diverse, healthy and nutritious food.
Reducing greenhouse gasses emissions: The transportation for long distances and transformation of foods into ready-made and canned meals and snacks for supermarket stacking requires energy in the form of carbon. The packaging processes and distribution process also generate huge amounts of carbon emissions. Safely managed territorial markets with adequate infrastructure and waste management provisions are environmentally friendly.
Building climate resilience: Territorial markets have the potential to improve food systems' resilience to external shocks and improve food and nutrition security by reducing dependency on imported foods and increasing the availability of locally nutritious options.
Build identity: More than location, they represent these people’s shared identity and values built through trust and relationships. They are also defined by the diversity of commodities and inclusive participation.
Open knowledge sharing: territorial markets are organic in ways that characterize indigenous commerce, whose fundamental principles include low barriers to entry, open knowledge sharing and generational transfer of business practices. Since they bring together many people and diverse food commodities they promote cultural exchange and societal openness.
_________________________________________________________________________
9. In what ways can the incorporation of climate-resilient agricultural and circular economy practices in urban and peri-urban agriculture provide climate co-benefits for all and enhance climate resilience?
There is a need to clearly focus on how food systems function within urban and peri-urban spaces in order to understand the possible leverage points and circular economy options. Understanding consumers demand in urban spaces is important to design approaches that link to projected change such as increasing demand for convenience food, and higher incomes driving demand for high-value products and meats. Circular economy practices that also drive behaviour change especially linked to the types of products demanded have a huge potential to benefit climate resilience. This includes options such as insect farming, and developing value chains that reduce the need for fishmeal-based animal feed, fertilisers etc.
__________________________________________________________________________
10. How can citizens be engaged and empowered to drive inclusive, transparent, participatory processes for urban transformations, ensuring synergies and complementarity with city councils?
Adopt participatory methodologies such as cross-sectoral surveys, partnership guides, participatory budgeting and assessment tools, to stimulate equity and shared knowledge management across institutions and power hubs. Examples are food policy councils and multi-sector associations between government, citizen groups and business communities.
Establish local governments and institutions inclusive of working groups, thematic clusters, or partnerships of actors with representatives from the private sector (where appropriate and preventing or addressing conflicts of interest) and civil society groups in the rural-urban continuum and between larger and smaller cities and towns and rural authorities (including regional cross-border or trans-jurisdiction boundaries).
Establish a framework for enhancing cooperation among communities and other actors in urban and rural areas that facilitates the flow of investments, knowledge, and skills necessary for addressing spatial, economic and social disparity between urban and rural peoples and territories. This could be done through surveys, campaigns, and tech platforms to share knowledge and services.
Arianna Francioni