Global Forum on Food Security and Nutrition (FSN Forum)

Official Comment United Cities and Local Governments

3.         Are the trends/variables/elements identified in the draft report the key ones to strengthen urban and peri-urban food systems? If not, which other elements should be considered?

Are there any other issues concerning urban and peri-urban food systems that have not been sufficiently covered in the draft report?

Are topics under- or over-represented in relation to their importance?

We believe reference should be made to the Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments within the report, specifically, within section 5.4.2. “Embedding cities in transnational networks”.

The Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments (GTF) is the coordination and consultation mechanism bringing together the major international networks of local and regional governments worldwide, to undertake joint advocacy related to global policy processes and amplify the voice of local governments in international policy making processes. Its very existence represents a landmark achievement for the

international municipal movement. Local and regional governments are the only UN non-state stakeholder to have a mechanism such as the GTF, to develop and coordinate inputs into global policy processes, among others, related to food security and urban food systems.

4.         Is there additional quantitative or qualitative data that should be included?

Are there other references, publications, or traditional or different kind of knowledges, which should be considered?

1. UCLG, Metropolis, UN Habitat, Ajuntament de Barcelona, Ajuntament de Valencia, CEMAS, Barelona World Sustainable Food Capital, 2021, Urban Food Systems: Nutrition and the Climate Emergency: Outcome Policy Recommendations, 2021;  Accessible: https://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/policy_recommendations_citiesarelistening_food_systems.pdf
2. UCLG, Metropolis, UN Habitat. 2020, Press Release: Access to health food: Lessons from a pandemic. Accessible: https://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/en_press_release_lle_food_systems_final.pdf
3.  UCLG, Ministère de L’Europe et Des Affaires Étrangers, Let’s Food Cities. 2024. Rising to the Challenges of Food Insecurity: Initiatives by Local and Regional Governments, Accessible: Forthcoming.
4. Global Platform for the Right to the City, 2022, UCLG GOLD VI Report on Pathways to urban and territorial equality: Case-based contribution to Chapter 8: Prospering: Inclusive Economy and Food Security, Accessible: https://strapi.goldvi.uclg.org/uploads/ch8_prospering_49_776a891481.pdf
5. Aguilar, Mercedes, Paula Bejarano, and Juan Carlos Díaz (UCLG Commission on Local Economic Development). 2022. Social, solidarity, and circular economy to build alternative economic paths”. UCLG GOLD VI Pathways to Equality Cases Repository: Prospering. Accessible: https://gold.uclg.org/sites/default/files/2022-06/ch8_prospering_48.pdf
6. CoHabitat Network. 2022. Fighting climate change in cities: urban agriculture, green AND affordable homes and neighbourhoods UCLG GOLD VI Pathways to Equality Cases Repository: Renaturing. Accessible: https://gold.uclg.org/sites/default/files/2022-06/ch7_renaturing_39.pdf
7. Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments (GTF). 2022. Towards the Localization of the SDGs: Local and Regional Governments’ 6th Report to the HLPF. Accessible: https://gold.uclg.org/sites/default/files/hlpf_2022.pdf

6.         Could you suggest case studies and success stories from countries that were able to strengthen urban and peri-urban food systems? In particular, the HLPE-FSN would seek contributions on:

a) evidence-based examples of successful interventions in urban and peri-urban food systems with the principles behind what made the process work;

An example is the Apici Project which aims to address the challenges posed by the lack of organization among farmers, inadequate rural infrastructure, and limited crop diversity in Siem Reap's food system. The Apici project fostered transformation of the agricultural sector to enhance the collective marketing of local products and lower production costs for local farmers while bolstering their bargaining power. This involved the establishment of three cooperatives, 36 credit and savings groups, and the initiation of a producers' market. The structuring of local value chains through cooperatives and the provision of accessible distribution spaces have effectively addressed market access issues for small-scale local farmers thus enhancing their negotiating power, and contributing to the strengthening of food security for both producers and consumers alike.

Reference: RISING TO THE CHALLENGES OF FOOD INSECURITY INITIATIVES BY LOCAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS - November 2023 - United Cities and Local Governments and Let’s Food

b) efforts made to enhance agency in urban and peri-urban food systems;

An example is São Paulo’s Municipal Council for Food and Nutritional Security (COMUSAN-SP) established in 2013 to ensure the effective implementation of proposed measures by various entities. COMUSAN-SP's activities involve proposing, monitoring, and inspecting municipal actions related to food and nutritional security, collaborating with civil society organizations and other municipal departments and actively engaging with residents in policy and decision-making processes.

Reference: RISING TO THE CHALLENGES OF FOOD INSECURITY INITIATIVES BY LOCAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS - November 2023 - United Cities and Local Governments and Let’s Food

c) efforts made to enhance the right to food in urban and peri-urban settings;

In Montpellier, a project called the "Common Food Fund" ("Caisse Alimentaire Commune"), inspired by a national policy to combat food insecurity and promote sustainable, high-quality food, is contributing to ensure access to quality food for all through a universal income that can be utilized for specific products. The initiative was shaped by a citizen committee, involving disadvantaged groups and following principles of participatory democracy, to ensure it reflected the diversity and will of the community.

During a trial period, residents received a monthly allocation of a currency equivalent to spend on approved food products while contributing to a mandatory monthly contribution.

The project securesd support from both public and private funding, as well as membership fees and collaborations with local food distribution outlets and the local public wholesale market.

Reference: RISING TO THE CHALLENGES OF FOOD INSECURITY INITIATIVES BY LOCAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS - November 2023 - United Cities and Local Governments and Let’s Food

d) examples of circular economy and urban and peri-urban food system and climate change adaptation and mitigation, preferably beyond issues of production; and

One example is the Agroforestry Program for Antananarivo (ASA Program) launched in 2014 which  aims to make a sustainable contribution to combating poverty and food insecurity in Madagascar, while also focusing on the preservation of the local environment. The program’s goal is to enhance the income of producers and ensure local communities have access to fresh food and wood energy products.

The program focuses on providing financial and technical assistance to local farmers to encourage the sale of high-quality and nutritious products to peri-urban and urban populations, addressing nutritional deficiencies often prevalent in these areas. These initiatives include building the capacity of producers, assisting in product marketing, the development of business plans, and post-harvest management to reduce food losses.

Beyond addressing immediate agricultural concerns, the ASA program tackles the issue of rural-urban migration, where many Malagasys migrate to Antananarivo in search of opportunities but often face unemployment, poverty, and food insecurity.

Reference: RISING TO THE CHALLENGES OF FOOD INSECURITY INITIATIVES BY LOCAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS - November 2023 - United Cities and Local Governments and Let’s Food

e) examples of national and local government collaboration on urban and peri-urban food systems.

In the city of Amman, Jordan, the escalating issues of food insecurity have prompted the emergence of urban agriculture. This practice has become an integral part of the municipal agenda since 2007 whereby the city implemented an urban agriculture and food security program, utilizing public land for cultivation. The municipality, through its "Office for Urban Agriculture" and through a collaborative Multilateral Forum involving public and private entities, NGOs, and citizens, has established partnerships with international organizations to encourage residents to produce their own food, supported by the cooperation of various stakeholders and backed by ministries such as Agriculture and the Environment.

Reference: RISING TO THE CHALLENGES OF FOOD INSECURITY INITIATIVES BY LOCAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS - November 2023 - United Cities and Local Governments and Let’s Food

Input from CANADA General points • Practitioners vs. Policy: The report could provide more useful analysis to practitioners of urban agriculture and not just facilitate a policy discussion on urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA). • Science context gap: There is a need for more agronomic measurement, assessment, scenario modeling discussion, need to identify key research questions, and the important role of technology and innovation. The report currently does a poor job of including this real-world context that is crucial to guiding sound policies and devising effective policy instruments. More specifically: o Agronomic Constraints: The report is lacking important analysis on the agronomic constraints to urban agriculture, in particular to specify key growth-limiting and growth-reducing abiotic and biotic factors. Strongly suggest inclusion of more thorough agronomic discussion on UPA (perhaps in section 4.5). Many key resources exist but are not referenced (Constraints to urban agriculture in southeast Nigeria | Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (nature.com); Agronomic considerations for urban agriculture in southern cities | 10 (taylorfrancis.com); Sustainability | Free Full-Text | What Constraints the Expansion of Urban Agriculture in Benin? (mdpi.com); Full article: Which urban agriculture conditions enable or constrain sustainable food production? (tandfonline.com)) o Research Agenda: The report seems limited to discussing policies that influence UPA and should provide some analysis and advice on what the key agricultural and economic research questions are that are needed to advance and improve UPA, or how best to frame a research agenda to support UPA. This is important to inform the research agenda of the CGIAR. For example, is UPA better served by research outputs that focus on the urban-rural linkages around local food consumption pathways or are there distinct research questions common across cities in different areas of the world. Propose another section (under 6.0 or new section) that specifies research technical questions for UPA and clarifies if UPA is a distinct area of research and independent of local context, or best addressed within local agricultural research agenda, but by elaborating the rural research agenda into specific urban contexts. o Emerging technologies: There is only a single sentence that mentions emerging technologies such as hydroponics and aeroponics systems, vertical farming, building-integrated agriculture, rooftop agriculture, and controlled environment agriculture. There is also no specific mention of smart farming, precision/decision agriculture, artificial intelligence-based tools for food supply optimization, data collection etc.. The report would be strengthened if it included a summary and context on the role of emerging technologies in supporting urban agriculture, resilient and sustainable food systems. The need to prioritize access to technology is highlighted in Section 4.5.1.3 Technology and innovation: drivers of transformation in UPA practices (page 61). Here there needs to be a broader discussion on ways forward for sharing of scientific and technological knowledge, data, tools linked with different technologies. • Urban agriculture growth and water demand: With an estimated 50% increase in urban water demands in the next 30 years, how water is managed is crucial. The report mentions this in different ways, but it would be informative to include available future outlooks on water demand linked with rural agriculture and urban agriculture. • Nature-Based Solutions: Including a section briefly discussing the role of Ecosystem/Nature-based solutions (EbS/NbS) as measures, from a whole-systems perspective, that seek to improve the efficiency, resiliency, and sustainability of food systems, would strengthen the report. Specific Points Section 1.3 Framing questions and core concepts (P.4) The questions seem comprehensive in addressing key aspects of urban and peri-urban food systems. However, there may be some elements that could further enhance the understanding or efficacy of strengthening these systems by drawing attention to cultural aspects as well as technology and innovation: On cultural Aspects, exploring how cultural preferences, traditions, and societal behaviors impact food systems can be crucial. This includes understanding the influence of cultural diversity, food habits, and preferences in shaping these systems. On technology and Innovation, investigating the role of technology and innovation in improving urban and peri-urban food systems can be valuable. This could involve looking at how technological advancements, such as vertical farming, precision agriculture, or food preservation techniques, can contribute to enhancing food security and nutrition. Chapter 4 | Urban and peri-urban food systems (related to question 3 (p.4)) The structure of this chapter is currently weak. Since this chapter aimed to address question (#3) of the framing questions {What are the characteristics of urban and peri-urban food systems, and what aspects of urban and peri-urban food systems need to be strengthened in order to achieve urban and peri-urban FSN?}, one could expect the report to consider the following key elements of the UPA : 1. Supply Chain Dynamics: Examining the complexities within the food supply chain, including transportation, storage, and distribution mechanisms, can offer insights into potential bottlenecks or inefficiencies that affect FSN outcomes. 2. Economic and Market Forces: Considering the influence of market dynamics, trade policies, and economic disparities on food access and affordability in urban and peri-urban areas can provide a holistic view of the challenges faced. Page 26- The report highlights the ‘view food insecurity through an intersectional lens’ stating that ‘Gender disparities in food insecurity result from shocks and differences in education, income, opportunities, social networks, and entitlements’ Because of the intersectional nature of Food security and Nutrition, there is an opportunity to integrate an intersectional approach throughout the whole report and explore how food insecurity is experienced differently based on overlapping identities. Moreover, the report states that “Explicitly integrating gender in urban food policy and governance through targeted initiatives, research and planning is vital”; However, the report misses an opportunity to mainstream gender throughout the whole document. Furthermore, the report could expand the use of language around gender transformative change in Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation. Since intersectionality is such an important factor, the report could mention this word more than once. To make it easier to the reader, the report could include boxes with concrete examples of how more than 2 axis of identity factors such as education, household income, age, disability, race play into the variation of food insecurity incidence. Page 34- C) Convenience: time use, women’s roles, and institutional environment shape urban dietary consumption patterns Canada appreciates that the report highlights how gender roles play a role within food security. Page 68 GENDER Canada is pleased to see the report has included a section on Gender However, as mentioned before, the report could consider mainstreaming gender and consider how gender disparities in urban and peri-urban settings influence food insecurity and nutrition. Gender and intersectionality should be informing the whole report. After page 68 the word ‘gender’ is no longer mentioned. Page 68- The sentence: …by harassment or violence from elements of the public It would be important to elaborate on what are the “elements of the public”. We would recommend being specific, and fully address Gender-Based Violence (GBV) including all forms of harassment and violence within this context. Women and girls are more at risk of GBV, and it should be noted as such, however, the report should be informed by the principles of intersectionality and explore intersection of disability, age, religion, caste and other factors with food insecurity and nutrition. The report continues with mentioning that…. women street vendors had been sexually harassed, with 5% reporting rape. Following, we would recommend rewording this sentence to make clear that women are experiencing Gender-Based Violence (GBV) and address the disturbing correlation between food insecurity and GBV. The sentence `Enabling environments...’ The section should also address GBV. There is vast empirical evidence to support and illustrate this issue. Examples (in a box) would allow the reader to have better understanding of the extent of this problem. This report could include inspiring examples, with stories that illustrates concrete actions to prevent, penalize GBV and advocate to transformative gender change Page 86 - According to the HLPE (2020: 14), “a food and nutrition policy approach that is grounded in a sustainable food systems framework embodies critical policy shifts that have been occurring in recent decades and which have been consistently advocated by the HLPE across all of its reports (HLPE, 2017d)”. This report builds on those six critical policy shifts and associated policy recommendations, making explicit what are the most salient characteristics of those changes for urban and peri-urban food systems, as stated below. It would be helpful to list the six critical policy shifts as a reminder to the readers, (e.g. a footnote or a box text) Related citable work from AAFC and FAO (forthcoming): 2024. N.K. Newlands, A. Alfarra, A. Kubursi, Urban Food Security in a Crisis Prone World: The Urban, Water, and Food Nexus AAFC-FAO Book. Springer Nature. New York. Forthcoming. 2024. A. Alfarra, A. Kubursi, N.K. Newlands. Summary, Recommendations, and Roadmap for Global Food Security. Chapter 15, In: Urban Food Security in a Crisis Prone World: The Urban, Water, and Food Nexus. A. Kubursi, N.K. Newlands, A. Alfarra (eds.) Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Springer Nature. New York. Forthcoming. 2024. N.K Newlands and A. Alfarra. Redesigning and Transforming Food Systems to be More Resilient to Disruption and Disaster: Lessons Learned from COVID. Chapter 2, In: Urban Food Security in a Crisis Prone World: The Urban, Water, and Food Nexus. A. Kubursi, N.K. Newlands, A. Alfarra (eds.) Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Springer Nature. New York. Forthcoming.

Thank you for this very interesting, comprehensive and timely document. Congratulations. Our research group reviewed the document, focusing on the prompting questions “Does the V0 draft cover sufficiently the implications of this broader definition of urban and peri-urban food systems?” and “Are there any other issues concerning urban and peri-urban food system that have not been sufficiently covered in the draft report?”. 

Specifically, we note that various aspects related to environmental constraints and opportunities for urban agriculture and foodsheds are not well represented. The environmental framing is noted on page 19, as is stated  “Therefore, better food waste management in urban areas represents an opportunity to cut into emissions while resolving other issues around energy, soil quality, waste management and human health.”. While highlighting here that urban and peri-urban agriculture may play a role in greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions, seemingly, there is an absence of a larger review of the environmental consequences and constraints of urban agriculture. More work is needed on the quantified GHG emission profiles, food production, and their respective drivers, and this could be enhanced in the document. With regards to GHG targets, urban and peri-urban agriculture can directly reduce GHGs through 1) nature-based climate solutions including carbon sequestration in crops and soils in cities; and 2) reductions in carbon emissions due to avoided land-use change and agricultural expansion, vis-à-vis food production on mixed-use lands. In the document, a review of urban soils in GHG emissions reductions, and other environmental constraints to strengthening urban agriculture, namely soil fertility, soil contamination and soil restoration, could be included. 

In regards to foodsheds, on the one hand, the document recognizes that cities' foodsheds range from local to distant lands (p. 62). Yet figures 1.2 and 1.3 for city foodsheds give the impression that an urban foodshed is local, or regional. But rather instead of a border, arguably, we need to be thinking of foodsheds from an ecosystems perspective. 

Finally, while diversity and resiliency is explored in section 4.6.5., the document lacks explicit emphasis on agrobiodiversity and pollinator diversity in cities, and the role of culturally appropriate crop diversity and diverse seed sources in cities. These agroecological aspects are key to strengthening the sustainability of urban and peri-urban agriculture.  

Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback. 

Sustainable Food and Farming Futures Cluster

University of Toronto Scarborough, Toronto, Canada

This is a thorough and extremely well-written report on urban food systems. It is comprehensive and yet clearly explains the complexity of urban and regional food systems and urban food policy choices. There are several areas in which I feel the report could be strengthened and made more relevant to policy makers and advocates:

While there are discussions throughout about social determinants of malnourishment like poverty and time scarcity, and a short section on the interconnectedness of food and other policies, the discussion of those upstream factors should be more central to the report, as issues of poverty, inequality, and the exploitation and oppression stemming from social determinants of health are key to addressing food security and nutrition. An upstream focus also suggests the need for new pathways to change food systems, such as immigration policy, civil rights laws, housing, education, childcare, and health services, and justice-focused climate policies.

Related to this point, the report should more clearly and prominently address the true cost of living in cities, which varies significantly North and South, from large to small cities, and between those connected to the global economy and those in “disarticulated” economies (c.f. Amin, de Janvry). There are movements to measure true costs, as opposed to conventional poverty measures, as a recent charter revision in NYC illustrates, and to identify necessary interventions (e.g., subsidized rents) to facilitate healthier, more equitable conditions.

The idea of social oppression (of women, people of color, immigrants, lower castes, etc.) as a root cause of food system inequities is woven throughout but I think deserves clearer articulation in the report.

The concept of the foodshed is a useful construct, yet more attention should be paid to their interactions with alternative geographies of food systems, e.g., transnational food supply chains, digitally mediated distribution channels, social-media information flows, cultural foodsheds experienced by migrants. Just as the concept of a foodshed, first articulated by Walter Hedden in 1929, was based on the technology of the time (e.g., milksheds were smaller than foodsheds due to the limits of refrigerated transport), foodsheds are evolving in response to digitalization. More deliberately discussing trends in food system geographies, e.g., digitalization and its effect on local food distribution and global shifts in food practices, would be valuable.

Economic inequality and social disparities are discussed throughout, but a more explicit discussion of food gentrification would help to explain food retail transitions (e.g., supermarketization), the consequences (intended or unintended) of infrastructure and housing investments on food prices and access, and the exacerbation of social disparities reflected in food availability as cities change, especially for pockets of low income people remaining within increasingly affluent surrounding neighborhoods (e.g., social housing residents in gentrified neighborhoods). The politics (e.g., rezoning, public investments) and impact of urban development on food environments of existing residents are rarely considered and this report should focus attention on the oversight.

While the report addresses the role of private business (e.g., supermarketization, marketing) in shaping food environments, I think a more explicit discussion of the commercial determinants of food security and nutrition is warranted. Food marketing is more than targeted, it often preys on low income, minoritized communities. The food system is one of the largest employers of low-wage, often disempowered workers in cities, and this is likely to accelerate as digital platforms become an increasingly common way to exploit vulnerable workers. Food corporations have shaped and increasingly shape food products, tastes, consumption patterns, and food buying and preparation practices. The report mentions interventions like soda taxes and controls on advertising, and incentives for healthy food, but a discussion of the role of corporations in shaping urban development, city infrastructure, the political process, policies like taxes, and therefore the food system – and the potential and limits of cities counteracting corporate power – would be a valuable contribution.

I would suggest more explicit and detailed attention to food labor, as it is both a source of exploitation and poverty but also could be a route to healthier food (e.g., in public canteens with upskilling of cooks) and higher wage jobs. The labor movement could be an ally of FSN advocates. Examples of food labor activism are most prominent in the Global North, but not exclusively.

Related to food labor, the report discusses right-to-food framing but should discuss the role of activism in reframing, making salient, and advancing policy in urban food systems. In my experience, food policy councils are helpful but inherently moderate voices for change. Food riots, strikes and boycotts, insurgent urbanism actions (e.g., taking over land to grow or sell food) put issues on the front burner and motivate lawmakers to act. How do activist movements relate to governmental and government processes? What strategies work? What support is needed to make them successful?

The report discusses future trends throughout, but it might be helpful to have a section on urban food futures. Climate change is obviously a game changer, both in terms of its impact on periurban agriculture but also its impact on urban budgets and priorities, development patterns, investment in risk mitigation, population migration, food safety, etc. But other trends are important as well: digitalization; AI and food knowledge; Ozempic and other new anti-obesity medications; political trends such as the rise of authoritarian governments and the potential for widening income inequalities.

Dear HLPE - FSN Team,

Thanks for the opportunity to comment.

The proposed framework is welcome and pertinent, particularly as it introduces a multi-scalar approach, engaging with a human rights perspective and community-based approaches.We particularly welcome the inclusion of the Right to the City framework, as to engaged with the terrtorial, political, social, environmetal and economic dimensions of food sovereignity. However, a more nuanced incorporation of community-based approaches towards food security and food sovereignty would benefit the analysis. We further detail these recommendations below.

Kind regards,

Sophia Torres and the Global Platform for the Right to the City team

The below listed comments follow and respond to the guiding questions provided in the e-consultation

• Responsible production and consumption: a critical and conscious attitude from consumers and companies based on the protection of the planet and the guarantee of human rights;
• Food sovereignty: which sees seeds, land, water, knowledge, biodiversity as common goods, recognizing the interdependence between (agro) biodiversity and cultural diversity, and fostering solidarity between producers and consumers;
• Defense and care of territories: drawing attention to the urgent need to eliminate the causes that destroy the material, social and cultural bases of a relational, dignified life in territories;
• Solidarity economy: built around a framework in which economic actions aim at satisfying the needs of human beings and protecting the environment, rather than prioritizing capital profits.

4. Are there other references, publications, or traditional or different kinds of knowledge, which should be considered?

Even though the publication mentions traditional markets, there’s no direct reference to the importance of indigenous and ancestral practices and knowledge. Inclusive urban-rural linkages should fully integrate and support such knowledge and practices through (but not limited to):

• • Ensure legal recognition of territories belonging to ancestral communities, including recognition and protection of collective tenure of land, organizational forms and endogenous instruments of spatial and territorial planning.
  • Establish national and local public policies for food and agriculture to promote the observation, preservation and value of the ancestral knowledge systems in food production, the defense of land and the care for the environment.
  • Outline institutional structures, local regulatory frameworks, programs and projects that support indigenous peoples, nationalities and communities, in the care and reproduction of common goods, safeguarding forms of communal organization for production, marketing and exchange of products, goods and services, under the principles of sustainability.
  • Create incentives and ensure public funding for academia to work with local communities in researching and developing epistemological frameworks that include ancestral knowledge and practices of indigenous peoples and local communities, thus helping create alternative models of organization, creation, participatory/collective decision making, production and commercialization of common goods and public services based on social, environmental and economic sustainability.

6.           Could you suggest case studies and success stories from countries that were able to strengthen urban and peri-urban food systems?

Across the global south and the global north, many inspiring efforts exist that seek to disrupt the unfair distribution of burdens and benefits of conventional development processes. The publication “Beyond urban-rural linkages, the defense of territories and cities for life” (Global Platform for the Right to the City, 2022) 2022, sheds light on examples regarding the aspects of solidarity economies, food sovereignty, responsible production and consumption, as well as movements focusing on bringing environmental and territorial justice. These experiences are rooted in the defense of the social and environmental function of territories, and present alternative actions based on more equitable, collective, and complementary approaches. Such examples make it possible to identify the types of actions needed to transform current patterns of production and consumption, and to reexamine the planning and management of territories. Examples can be found here: https://www.right2city.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/07_Right-to-the-City-Rural_EN_OK2.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) As mentioned in Utting, P. (2017) Public Policies for Social and Solidarity Economy. Assessing Progress in Seven Countries. Geneva: International Labour Organization. For more information on the ILO engagement in supporting the social and solidarity economy see https://unsse.org/about/members/ilo/.

2) ILO Promotion of Cooperatives Recommendation, 2002 (No. 193) and ILO Regional Conference on Social Economy, Africa’s Response to the Global Crisis, October 2009, cited on “Waste pickers’ cooperatives and social and solidarity organizations”. Cooperatives and the World of Work No.12. ILO (2019).

3) According to ILO, 61% of the workers in the world are employed in the informal economy (without social protection and/or official registration of the business they work for).

4) For more details about this initiative see https://www.wiego.org/ghg.

5) For its part, the New Urban Agenda (NUA) refers to cities and human settlements for all, with equality in their use and enjoyment, emphasizing inclusion, non-discrimination and an intergenerational perspective. The Agenda frames its common ideal in the right to the city. When considering the interaction and connectivity between urban and rural areas, the NUA also proposes to strengthen sustainable mobility and transportation systems, as well as technology and communications infrastructure networks, to make the most of the territorial potential, improving productivity, social and economic cohesion and environmental security and sustainability, based on planning instruments which focus on integrated urban and territorial development. Additionally, in 2019, UN-Habitat issued a document containing guiding principles for the generation of urban-rural linkages as a framework for action to advance integrated territorial development. This document proposes 10 principles which offer guidance on the implementation of the guidelines established in the NUA and articulated to the SDG. The principles revolve around: local interventions, integrated governance, spatial and functional systemic approach, financial inclusion, balanced partnerships, human rights, social protection and non-violence pact, environmental sustainability, active participation and data-driven decisions (UN-Habitat, 2019).”

6) Gutiérrez, Laura (2019). “Soberanía y autonomía alimentarias” In Kothari et. al. “Pluriverso. Un diccionario del posdesarrollo.” Pp. 439-442.

7) Del Bene, Daniela; Soler, Juan Pablo; Roa Tatiana (2019). “Soberanía energética.” In Kothari et. al. “Pluriverso. Un diccionario del posdesarrollo.” Pp. 435-438

8) Global Platform for the Right to the City. Right to the City Agenda. For the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the New Urban Agenda. Available at: https://www.right2city.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/A6.2_Right-to-the-city-agenda.pdf

9) As recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), the International Convenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) and other related international documents. After decades in the making, access to a clear, healthy and sustainable environment was declared by the United Nations General Assembly as a universal human right in July 2022. The right to the city and its components are included in the New Urban Agenda (2016), as well as in national and local instruments, such as the City’s Statute from Brazil (2001), the Constitution of Ecuador (2008) and the Mexico City Constitution (2017). The World Charter for the Right to the City (2005), promoted by social movements and civil society organizations, has played a crucial role in this process. Local and regional governments have also recognized the relevance of the right to the city, incorporating it as part of the World-Charter Agenda for Human Rights in the City (2011).

10) Over the past three years, the Global Platform for the Right to the City has facilitated the elaboration of a series of thematic papers that deepen the conceptualization of these components and provide related recommendations for public policies. The paper on rural-urban linkages is available at https://www.right2city.org/document/thematic-documet-beyond-urban-rural-linkages/

Dear HLPE-FSN team,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback, and thank you for considering my suggestions. Overall, the document is a thorough, thoughtful and well-written report. I have just a few comments I hope you will consider.

Re: the chart on page 4 (Sustainable Food Systems)- it might be wise to clarify which of the two blocks implies "economic viability": either Access (equitable) or Availability (productive and prosperous). It is clarified on p. 31 but not on the chart. 

This is a critical statement (p. 5): Definitions used and criteria created need to align with the questions to be asked of them. Central to this report is the notion that urban and peri-urban areas should not simply be viewed in technical terms. It could be useful to not only expand on this statement a little more, but to also shift this part to an earlier section of the document (i.e. the intro, 1.1). Section 1.3.3 is expansive on this subject, of course, but since it is the topic of the report, it could be shifted to the beginning, as well. 

P. 8 - An important statement here - "Relatedly, food systems in much of the Global South have been shaped by policy prescriptions that orient them towards production for export and reliance on imports, which undermines the potential of local production for local consumption. This raises important questions addressed in the report about the power of individual cities to shape their food systems in the context of global trade regimes."-- perhaps the added mention of covid and post-covid realizations about the priority of domestic food security for many of these countries has added value for future policy prescriptions. 

Figure 1.4: Conceptual framework for the report (p. 11) - the size of the font is making it very hard to read. 

p. 35- (D) on the topic of marketing to children. This is a critical topic and deserves significant expansion, particularly on the consumers of the future. Could data be included related to age and gender vis a vis projection of future nutritional statistics as it relates to the current food/nutrition marketing practices towards children and the future of FSN?

Lastly, I would like to make a serious recommendation for the inclusion of specialty diets and their link to strengthening the global supply chain and thus global food security and nutrition. This became even more evident during and post-Covid era. Throughout the document there is no mention of Halal, Kosher, vegan or vegetarian diets, yet the global demand for these types of ingredients and food products is rising rapidly, particularly in urban and peri-urban settings. The Halal sector is of particular economic importance due to its projected $2T market potential and the significant impact it has and will continue to have on the global supply chain. I'm happy to expand on this topic further and/or to contribute data and references should the HLPE-FSN team wish to include it in this report. 

Thank you very much for considering my feedback. I hope it provides helpful recommendations. 

Yvonne M. Maffei

Dear HLPE - FSN Team

Thank-you for the opportunity to provide feedback on this report. This report provides a much needed critique and synthesis of  urban, peri-urban (UPU) and rural food system elements s and relationships. Policy makers and development practitioners from a diversity of fields will find this report a key ''go to'' reference. As is the function of HLPE - FSN reports and given the complexity of the topic, the report brings together, in a succinct and coherent narrative, evidence of the character of UPU food systems across planning, policy instruments and institutional enablers including budgets, environment, nutrition, multi-level and scale governance, mobiilsing local agency and many more dimensions with address of cross cutting considerations e.g. inclusion and equity. Particular recognition of the experiences and vital role the informal food sector plays especially for low-income communities in urban areas who are the most vulnerable to all forms of malnutrition re: livelihoods, food safety, access and availability as well as informal - formal food systems relationships (e.g. Table  4.1) is acknowledged and much needed. This is also a push-pull systems opportunity between rural landscapes, communities and UPU spaces and one that as multiple transformative levers, local agency and resilience potential. Attached please find my responses to the questions posed by the HLPE-FSN team

Kind Regards, Dr Annie Trevenen-Jones

• Actors: The explicit choice of ''actors'' rather than stakeholders re: terminology and concept, offers clarity and guidance for many of us working in food systems who often grapple as to which term/concept to use - with many competing arguments for both.

• Innovative resources like FoodActionCities (GAIN, RUAF, Milan Urban Food Policy Pact) www.foodactioncities.org - unlock UPU information including learnings and sharing of tools and practices to decision makers across the world via mobile phones and computers with accessibility for new and older operating systems, is open to cities and other actors including city networks to easily submit content and promotes just food systems transformation.
• Food Systems Dashboard (John Hopkins University, GAIN, FAO, Columbia Climate School and CornellCALS ) -https://www.foodsystemsdashboard.org - is a quantitative and useful tool albeit providing aggregated national and global food systems data and policy options. Sub-national food systems dashboards are presently in development in several SSA and Asian countries that provide disaggregated and more granular systems data. Even so, it is important to recognize the political dimension of data when compiling open source dashboards that are widely accessible.
• City and UPU food systems data: this is unique and vital but lacking. It often has different formal and informal data forms (of which less if known about the informal food sector) which are administratively gathered and/or quickly aggregated into higher administrative quantifications and lost in terms of access to inform local decision making. Even less is known about rural – UPU systems data.

5.

• Importance of narrative local cultural food stories including that about gender and indigenous socio-ecological food systems knowledge.

Are there any redundant facts or statements that could be eliminated from the V0 draft? Nothing to add.

6.

Could you suggest case studies and success stories from countries that were able to strengthen urban and peri-urban food systems? In particular, the HLPE-FSN would seek contributions on:

a) evidence-based examples of successful interventions in urban and peri-urban food systems with the principles behind what made the process work; b) efforts made to enhance agency in urban and peri-urban food systems; c) efforts made to enhance the right to food in urban and peri-urban settings; d) examples of circular economy and urban and peri-urban food system and climate change adaptation and mitigation, preferably beyond issues of production; and e) examples of national and local government collaboration on urban and peri-urban food systems.

GAIN’s policy option toolkits and collaborative approaches, engaging government and traditional/informal food market actors in Mozambique, Kenya and Pakistan as part of COVID-19 and building back better responses could be of interest. See: https://www.gainhealth.org/resources/reports-and-publications/policy-options-toolkits Notably this work had moved on with further development and in places (including scaling) interventions to helps national and city governments (and parts of the informal food sector) implement countries UNFSS pathway commitments.

Dear HLPE-FSN team,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Please see the comments from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan below. 

We would like to request that the following sections be deleted or reconsidered on page 50, "The Japanese chain 7-Eleven is currently the largest in the world, surpassing even McDonald's in the number of stores worldwide (Bianchi, 2009)."

The reasons are as follows;

The first sentence, "their food offerings often consist of high-fat and high-sugar foods, fast food, and other unhealthy options, which is why greater access to these types of businesses is often associated with higher obesity rates," is a description of convenience stores in general, and does not necessarily apply to individual convenience stores.

However, mentioning the name of individual convenience stores in the second sentence could be misinterpreted as if those convenience stores offer unhealthy products. If the report wants to mention that the number of convenience stores is increasing, the description should be based on data for convenience stores in general, not for individual convenience stores.

Regarding 7-Eleven convenience stores in Japan, which are individually named, we would like to introduce that they are actively working to achieve sustainability by pursuing food quality and safety, such as selling health-conscious products, developing environmentally friendly products, reducing CO2 emissions, and taking measures to prevent food loss.

Kindly please see the reference links below (English, Arabic, Chinese, and Korean are available):

Seven-Eleven Sustainability | Seven-Eleven ~ Close-by, Convenient ~ (sej.co.jp)

Pursuit of quality and safety｜Seven-Eleven ~ Close-by, Convenient ~ (sej.co.jp)

Dr. Alison Blay-Palmer, UNESCO Chair on Food Biodiversity and Sustainability Studies. Waterloo, Canada

General Comments:

Thanks for the opportunity to comment.

This report is a much-needed call for policy-makers and decision-makers to pay attention to urban and peri-urban food systems. The authors do an excellent job focusing the reader’s attention on urban/peri-urban food security and nutrition including along the food chain. I do have one constructive suggestion that could improve the report and give it broader relevance. While Section 4.5 deals with food production in rural areas and also considerations national and other scales, this report offers a unique opportunity to build solidarity with those seeking to enhance sustainable territorial food systems (based on e.g. city region food systems, bioregions, foodsheds etc). Urban/peri-urban food security requires the production of adequate quantities of ecologically produced, healthy, culturally appropriate, affordable food to be delivered with minimal waste into urban distribution centres and local retailers to enable street vendors and low income/marginalized households, and others, to have food security and fair livelihoods. If the territory isn’t working as a system as much as possible, then urban/peri-urban food systems are ultimately at the mercy of the industrial food system. I appreciate this is not the focus of this important report but adding this dimension could make the report more impactful as it is published and considered by policy and decision makers.

In response to Question 3:

In addition to comments above, specific to Section 4.5.2 It is not clear to me how global food systems that either deliver expensive imported food or ultra-processed food helps with food equity in urban spaces. Does it make more sense, as you indicate elsewhere, to foster more vibrant territorial food systems that can deliver healthy local food that supports both consumers and producers (e.g. Brazil and the popular markets and/or restaurants). Perhaps the last sentence in this section could be reconsidered.

In response to question 4:

Re section 4.5.1: There is some research from Quito that could be relevant here where a key point is the importance of UA for women. Findings are available at –https://www.foodsystemsjournal.org/index.php/fsj/article/view/727/720

And a practice-based report here:https://journals.openedition.org/factsreports/5641

Work on food system assessment in urban contexts could also include:Valette, É., Blay-Palmer, A., Intoppa, B., Di Battista, A., Roudelle, O. and Chaboud, G., 2024. Evaluating sustainable food system innovations: A global toolkit for cities. Routledge.

The draft seems to provide a comprehensive insight into the discussion on urban and peri-urban food systems. The relevance of cross cutting issues such as gender, climate change and food loss and waste as well as circularity should be particularly highlighted.

A very important aspect is, that local and national policies are frequently considered separately, meaning that local decision-makers are not included in national consultations, although they often face identical challenges. Local structures, e.g. “food policy councils”, offer a platform for exchange and could hence be strengthened.  In these councils, local perspectives and voices of different stakeholder groups (marginalized groups, rural population, etc.) are heard and can subsequently be included in decision-making processes beyond local structures.

In order to facilitate the operationalisation of the report, the BMZ global project "Scaling digital agricultural innovations through start-ups" (SAIS) could serve as a project example (question 6). The project is implemented by GIZ (German Development Cooperation). The project supports the agtech start-up MyVarm in Egypt, which specialises in urban agriculture and offers hydroponic microkits for growing fresh produce. The innovative app offers technical support and connects users with consumers to sell or swap their harvest.