Contributions to the Discussion

Contributions September 16 - 22, 2000

From: Moderators
 To: "Urban Planning" <Urban-Planning-L@mailserv.fao.org
Subject: UPA-Planning - Short summary/session2/week2 Date: 18 September 2000 12:27
 
This message is sent in English, French and Spanish. 
Ce message est envoyé en anglais, français et espagnol. 
Este mensaje està enviado en inglès, francès y español.

 

Dear participants of the UPA-Planning group,

We are entering our third and last session of this interesting conference.

For discussion in Session Three (September 17 - 30) regarding action plans for UPA and urban planning, please consider the following questions:

* Which stakeholders should be involved in the development of a plan that includes UPA? 

* Which planning principles should apply, to integrate UPA into city planning?

Please use this week as well to put forward any other questions that have arisen from the discussion so far.

Best regards

Your moderators UPA-Planning

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

Summary UPA-Planning Session2 Week 2

Last week we had twelve interesting contributions to this session. Gerda Wekerle from Canada connects with Oliver Ginsberg's contribution from last week about the importance of political mobilisation and activism to institutionalise UPA in the planning process. She poses the question whether the term 'urban agriculture' may contribute to the view of a temporary land use through agriculture in cities - temporary until something more profitable comes along. She also encourages the idea of learning from the past experience in the creation of urban parks. Again, as Oliver Ginsberg pointed out, she suggests not to emphasise the poor only, but link the concept UPA with sustainability of urban development. Experiences from the United States show how empowerment of stakeholders can influence local policies towards a better understanding of what people want to see in their city. But still it seems even in Canada there is no appropriate way of how to preserve land for agriculture in peri-urban areas.

Private and community gardening on private property has so far received little attention in this conference and there are no policies to encourage private owners to convert their plots from grass to gardens.

The question of "how to sell the idea of UPA" to local governments - what are the benefits, advantages of supporting this activity was also brought forward by Leo van den Berg and Marielle Dubbeling. Examples from Latin America were reported from Marielle Dubbeling. An interesting one is the one from Camilo Aldao in Argentina: UPA can contribute to the welfare of the people in small cities there, thereby reducing the migration process from small towns to large cities. Eduardo Spiaggi from Argentina offers another example. He thinks that UPA not only contributes to food but also to an element of urban habitat improvement and bio-cultural diversity. Civil society and participation of the urban population is a crucial point in the formulation of urban policies.

[The moderators know about another example from Santiago de los Caballeros in the Dominican Republic, where the recycling of organic waste and the re-use of urban organic matter in agriculture is an enormous cost-reducing factor for the municipality.]

Gisèle Yasmeen's contribution from India refers to land and water problems regarding UPA in India. Land tenure is one of the crucial issues in Delhi and being a land-owner or renting the land makes the big difference in the profitability of UPA. Water is scarce in many places of this world and the need for new, locally adapted and accepted technologies is very obvious. In Mumbay/Bombay people have developed such solutions on the local level by using oil drums, plastic bags, or other containers to grow vegetables and trees on their rooftops and terraces. [The moderators think there is a high potential for participatory technology development in this field.]

An interesting debate, which we partly shared with the health and environment group, on the environmental effects of UPA started in this section. UPA [as any other type of agriculture] can have certain effects on the environment. One important question in this regard is certainly the parameters to look at and the conclusions to draw from measurements in the field. Complete pavement and sealing of the surface certainly causes higher run-off than agricultural land use, but wood cover would cause even less. But still the question is the same as it is for any other type of agriculture: how can negative impacts be reduced? Where no extension services are available - the impacts can be worse. In the urban environment, also due to the illegal character of UPA--hardly any agricultural extension takes place. The question is whether actual or potential land-environment impacts should be included in UPA planning.

Lena Jarlov points at the differences between the North and the South with respect to the economic structures and realities. Mainstream, Western style planning philosophy does not work everywhere [and is becoming more and more doubtful for the North as well]. Industrialised planning ideas cannot easily be transferred to countries dominated by agriculture. The immobility of the poor has to be taken into planning considerations. People who have no cars and no money for transport should be given an opportunity to produce food near to their houses. Lena Jarlov calls for a new planning theory and new concepts for town planning. Tanya Bowyer-Bower says that from her experience in Harare (Zimbabwe), the biggest need there is for a self-help strategy of the poor, because the economic situation (inflation, unemployment, political insecurity etc.) needs to be buffered. In other cities the main goal can be different. So we need to look at the local level.

Franz Greif speaks about "highest topicality" of the situation in and around fast growing cities in developing countries Urban and peri-urban areas are distinct and this needs to be reflected in planning. A good instrument for planning of UPA is Geographical Information Systems (GIS). Stefan Dongus explains in a few words the importance of this planning instrument. Examples from Dar es Salaam show that UPA is extensively happening in this city, in spite of the growing pressure on land by settlements. Using GI data (which can be of spatial, but also of socio-economic or of environmental nature) and trying to relate these data to each other offers much better understanding of the interrelation between urban agriculture, environmental and socio-economic factors.

Another dimension of urban planning was mentioned by Allison Brown: Marketing. She reports, that there are at least 16 ways of trading horticulture products, some of which are only possible when producers are physically near consumers. Market gardening is most successful at providing the widest range of products at the most competitive prices when growers have easy access to as many market channels as possible. Planners can have deep impact on marketing. [The moderators fully support this idea. There is a wide range of examples from cities where marketing does not work properly either because the availability of the products is limited or because the market structures are monopolised. Here we don't blame the planners. Where we blame the planners is the unavailability of marketing facilities, which can be a limiting factor to urban and peri-urban production and can negatively influence the market prices and thereby urban food security. Last but not least the whole marketing structure (production to consumer, including infrastructure, intermediaries, transport, buildings etc.) is an enormous economic factor of a city and very closely related to food and nutrition as well as to health and environmental issues.]

We thank you for your attention and we hope to see you during the coming two weeks back in the workshop.

Your Moderators UPA-Planning

[Moderators comments]

Español

BREVE RESUMEN AUP-PLANIFICACION 2ª SESION/2ª SEMANA (8-15 de septiembre 2000)

Estimados participantes del grupo de AUP-Planificación,

Estamos entrando en nuestra tercera y última sesión de esta interesante conferencia.
Para la discusión en la Tercera Sesión (17-30 de septiembre) referente a planes de acción para la agricultura y la planificación urbanas, les proponemos que consideren las siguientes preguntas:

* ¿Cuáles son los grupos de interés que deberían estar involucrados en el desarrollo de un plan que incluya la AUP? * ¿Qué principios de planificación se deberían aplicar para integrar la AUP en la planificación urbana?

Les sugerimos que aprovechen esta semana también para plantear cualquier otra cuestión o pregunta que surja de las discusiones hasta el momento.

La semana pasada hemos recibido doce interesantes contribuciones para esta sesión. Gerda Wekerle de Canadá se suma a la contribución de Oliver Ginsberg de la semana pasada sobre la importancia de la movilización política y el activismo para institucionalizar a la agricultura urbana en el proceso de planificación. Gerda Wekerle pregunta si es posible que el término 'agricultura urbana' contribuya a la visión de un empleo temporal de la tierra con fines agrícolas en las ciudades - temporal hasta que se presente un uso más rentable. También fomenta la idea de aprender de la experiencia pasada en la creación de campos urbanos. Nuevamente, como lo ha señalado Oliver Ginsberg, ella sugiere no poner el énfasis en los pobres solamente sino vincular el concepto de la AUP con la sostenibilidad del desarrollo urbano. Experiencias en Estados Unidos demuestran la manera en que el empoderamiento de grupos de interés puede influir en las políticas locales para lograr una mejor comprensión de lo que los habitantes esperan de sus ciudades. Sin embargo, parece que ni siquiera en Canadá se ha encontrado aún una manera apropiada de preservar la tierra para la agricultura en el área periurbana. La horticultura privada y comunitaria en terrenos de propiedad privada ha sido escasamente tratada hasta el momento en esta conferencia, y no existen políticas para estimular a los propietarios privados a convertir sus lotes de pastos en huertos.

La pregunta de "cómo vender la idea de la AUP" a los gobiernos locales - cuáles son los beneficios, las ventajas de apoyar esta actividad, también fue planteada por Leo van den Berg y Marielle Dubbeling. Dubbeling presentó ejemplos de América Latina. Un interesante ejemplo es el de Camilo Aldao en Argentina: la AUP puede contribuir al bienestar de las personas en las pequeñas ciudades de ese país, reduciendo de esta manera el proceso de migración de los pueblos a las grandes ciudades. Eduardo Spiaggi de Argentina ofrece otro ejemplo. Piensa que la AUP no sólo contribuye a la producción de alimentos sino que también es un elemento de mejoramiento del hábitat urbano y la diversidad biocultural. La sociedad civil y participación de la población urbana son un punto esencial en la formulación de políticas urbanas.

[Conocemos otro ejemplo de Santiago de los Caballeros, en la República Dominicana, donde el reciclaje de residuos orgánicos y el aprovechamiento de materias orgánicas urbanas en la agricultura son un importante factor de reducción de costos para la municipalidad].

La contribución de Gisèle Yasmeen de la India se refiere a los problemas de tierra y agua con respecto a la AUP en la India. La tenencia de la tierra es uno de los temas cruciales en Delhi y el hecho de ser propietario o arrendar la tierra significa una gran diferencia en el grado de rentabilidad de la AUP. El agua escasea en muchas partes de esta región y se necesitan obviamente nuevas tecnologías, adaptadas a las condiciones locales y aceptadas localmente. En Mumbay/Bombay han desarrollado soluciones de ese tipo a nivel local usando barriles de aceite, bolsas de plástico y otros recipientes para cultivar hortalizas y plantas en los techos y terrazas. [Los moderadores opinan que existe un alto potencial para el desarrollo de tecnologías participativas en este campo.]

Un interesante debate, que hemos compartido parcialmente con el grupo de salud y medio ambiente, sobre los efectos ambientales de la AUP, comenzó en esta sección. La AUP (como cualquier otro tipo de agricultura) puede tener ciertos efectos en el medio ambiente. Una importante cuestión en este sentido es, sin lugar a dudas, los parámetros que se deben estudiar y las conclusiones a extraer de mediciones en este campo. El asfaltado y sellado total de superficies causa seguramente un mayor derrame que el uso agrícola de la tierra, pero sería menor en superficies cubiertas con árboles. Sin embargo, la pregunta sigue siendo la misma que se aplica para otros tipos de agricultura: ¿cómo se pueden reducir los impactos negativos?. Allí donde no existen servicios de atención los impactos pueden ser más graves. En el entorno urbano, y debido también al carácter ilegal de la AUP - apenas se presta algún servicio de asistencia agrícola. La pregunta es si se deben incluir en la planificación de la agricultura urbana los impactos reales o potenciales sobre la tierra y el medio ambiente.

Lena Jarlov señala las diferencias entre el Norte y el Sur con respecto a las estructuras y realidades económicas. La filosofía corriente de planificación, de corte occidental, no funciona en cualquier parte [y se está poniendo cada vez más en duda en los propios países del Norte también]. Las ideas de planificación industrializada no se pueden transferir fácilmente a países dominados por la agricultura. La inmovilidad del sector pobre debe ser tomada en cuenta en los estudios de planificación. Las personas que carecen de automóvil y de dinero para el transporte deberían tener la posibilidad de producir alimentos cerca de sus hogares. Lena Jarlov propone una nueva teoría de planificación y nuevos conceptos de planificación urbana. Tanya Bowyer-Bower afirma que, por su experiencia en Harare (Zimbabue), la mayor necesidad es una estrategia de auto-ayuda para los pobres ya que la situación económica (inflación, desempleo, inseguridad política, etc.) debe ser compensada. En otras ciudades, el objetivo principal puede ser diferente. De modo que es necesario analizar las características locales.

Franz Greif se refiere a una "mayor tematización" de la situación en y alrededor de ciudades en rápido crecimiento en países en desarrollo. Las áreas urbanas y periurbanas tienen características propias y esto debe ser reflejado en la planificación. Un buen instrumento para la planificación de la AUP son los Sistemas de Información Geográfica (GIS en sus siglas en inglés). Stefan Dongus explica en pocas palabras la importancia de este instrumento de planificación. Ejemplos de Dar es Salaam muestran que la AUP se practica extensivamente en esta ciudad a pesar de la creciente presión sobre la tierra impuesta por los asentamientos. Utilizando datos de GIS (que pueden ser espaciales, pero también socioeconómicos o ambientales) y buscando conectar estos datos entre sí, se puede obtener una mayor comprensión de la interrelación entre agricultura urbana, factores ambientales y socio-económicos.

Otra dimensión de la planificación urbana fue mencionada por Allison Brown: La comercialización. Brown informa que existen al menos 16 maneras de comercializar productos hortícolas, algunas de ellas son sólo posibles cuando los productores se encuentran en la cercanía física de los consumidores. Los mejores resultados de la horticultura de mercado en la provisión de un amplio surtido de productos a los precios más competitivos se obtienen cuando los cultivadores tienen fácil acceso a la mayor cantidad de canales de mercado posible. Los planificadores pueden tener un fuerte impacto en la comercialización. [Los moderadores apoyan plenamente esta idea. Existe una amplia gama de ejemplos de ciudades donde la comercialización no funciona adecuadamente, ya sea por una limitada disponibilidad de los productos o porque existe un monopolio de las estructuras de mercado. En este caso no culpamos a los planificadores. Donde sí culpamos a los planificadores es en la falta de disponibilidad de facilidades de mercado, lo que puede ser un factor restrictivo para la producción urbana y periurbana, y puede influir negativamente en los precios del mercado y, por ende, en la seguridad alimentaria urbana. Y por último, aunque no por ello menos importante, mencionamos que la entera estructura de mercadeo (de la producción al consumidor, incluyendo infraestructura, intermediarios, transporte, edificios, etc.) es un enorme factor económico de una ciudad, relacionado estrechamente a la cuestión de alimento y nutrición, así como a los temas de salud y medio ambiente.]

Gracias por su atención y esperamos encontrarlos nuevamente en los talleres durante las próximas dos semanas.

Sus moderadores de AUP-Planificación

[ ] comentarios de los moderadores

Francais

Résumé AUP - Planification / Session2 / Semaine 2 ( 8-15 septembre 2000)

Chers participants au groupe de discussion sur l'AUP et la planification urbaine,

Nous abordons la troisième et dernière session de notre passionnante conférence. Afin de participer à la discussion qui aura lieu lors de la Session 3 (17-30 septembre) relative aux plans d'action pour l'AUP et la planification urbaine, veuillez réfléchir aux questions suivantes : * Quels intervenants devraient-ils s'engager dans le cadre du développement d'un plan incluant l'AUP ? * Quels principes de planification devrait-on appliquer pour intégrer l'AUP dans la planification urbaine ? Veuillez également mettre cette semaine à profit pour apporter vos éventuelles contributions et réactions aux discussions passées.

La semaine dernière, nous avons reçu 12 contributions très intéressantes à cette session. La contribution de Gerda Wekerle du Canada rejoint celle d'Oliver Ginsberg de la semaine dernière sur le thème de l'importance de la mobilisation et de l'activisme politiques afin d'intégrer l'AUP au processus de planification. Elle demande en outre si le terme ' agriculture urbaine' peut contribuer à l'approche d'une utilisation temporaire des terres par le biais de l'agriculture urbaine - temporaire, c'est-à-dire en attendant que quelque chose de plus bénéfique vienne prendre sa place. Elle prône également la prise en compte des expériences passées dans la création de parcs urbains. Comme le soulignait Oliver Ginsberg, elle suggère à nouveau de ne pas trop mettre l'accent uniquement sur les pauvres, mais plutôt de relier le concept de l'AUP à la notion de développement urbain durable. Des expériences menées aux Etats-Unis montrent de quelle manière le renforcement de pouvoir des parties prenantes peut amener les politiques locales à une meilleure compréhension de ce que les gens souhaitent voir dans leur ville. Toutefois, il semble, même au Canada, qu'il n'y ait aucun moyen adéquat de préserver les terres agricoles en milieu péri-urbain.

Les activités maraîchères sur un plan privatif et communautaire sur des propriétés privées ne sont pas encore incluses dans cette conférence et il n'existe pas de politiques pour inciter les propriétaires urbains à convertir leurs parcelles en jardins maraîchers.

Leo van den Berg et Marielle Dubbeling se sont également interrogés sur " la façon de vendre la notion d'AUP " aux gouvernements locaux - ainsi que sur ce qu'apporterait en terme de bénéfices et d'avantages le fait de soutenir cette activité. Marielle Dubbeling nous fournit des exemples d'Amérique latine. Un cas intéressant concerne celui de Camilo Aldao (Argentine) et nous apprend que l'AUP peut contribuer au bien-être des habitants des petites villes argentines, réduisant de ce fait les flux migratoires des petites villes vers les grandes agglomérations. Eduardo Spiaggi (Argentine) nous offre le second exemple. Selon lui, non seulement l'AUP contribue à l'alimentation, mais elle permet aussi d'améliorer l'habitat urbain et d'enrichir la diversité bio-culturelle. L'implication de la société civile et la participation de la population urbaine sont des éléments importants dans la formulation des politiques urbaines.

[Nous citerons un autre exemple de Santiago de los Caballeros de la République Dominicaine, où le recyclage des déchets biologiques et la réutilisation en agriculture des matières organiques urbaines contribue fortement à la diminution des coûts pour la ville.]

La contribution de Gisèle Yasmeen (Inde) traite des problèmes des ressources terrestres et hydrauliques dans le cadre de l'AUP en Inde. La propriété foncière est un des thèmes cruciaux à Delhi, et le fait d'être propriétaire ou locataire d'une terre représente une grande différence en terme de rentabilité de l'AUP. L'eau est rare dans de nombreux endroits du monde et la nécessité de techniques nouvelles, adaptées et acceptées localement se fait clairement sentir. A Mumbay / Bombay, les habitants ont développé des solutions locales visant à utiliser des bidons d'essence, des sacs en plastique ou autres récipients pour faire pousser les légumes et les arbres sur les toits et les terrasses de leurs logements. [Les modérateurs pensent que le potentiel de développement des techniques de participation est élevé dans ce domaine.]

Un débat intéressant sur les effets environnementaux de l'AUP a débuté dans cette section, thème que nous avons conjointement partagé avec le groupe sur la santé et l'environnement. L'AUP [comme tout autre type d'agriculture] peut avoir certains effets sur l'environnement. A cet égard, une question importante concerne les paramètres à prendre en compte et les conclusions à tirer des mesures prises dans ce domaine. Le pavage et le dallage complets de la surface risqueraient d'engendrer un taux de ruissellement des eaux de surface supérieur à celui généré par l'exploitation des terres agricoles, en revanche la plantation d'arbres permettrait de réduire le taux de ruissellement. Mais la question est la même que pour tous les autres types d'agriculture : de quelle manière peut-on minimiser les impacts négatifs ? Dans les endroits où aucun service de développement n'existe, les impacts peuvent être plus sévères encore. Le développement agricole est minimal en milieu urbain - en raison du caractère illégal de l'AUP. Il s'agit donc de s'interroger sur la nécessité d'intégrer dans le cadre de la planification de l'AUP les impacts réels ou potentiels de l'AUP sur l'environnement.

Lena Jarlov souligne les différences entre le Nord et le Sud en matière de structures et de réalités économiques. La philosophie de planification occidentale dominante ne fonctionne pas partout [et devient même de plus en plus un sujet d'incertitudes pour le Nord ]. Il n'est pas aisé de transférer la planification vue par les pays industrialisés aux pays dominés par l'agriculture. L'immobilité des pauvres doit être prise en compte dans la planification. Les personnes ne possédant pas de voiture et n'ayant pas d'argent pour le transport, devraient se voir accorder la possibilité de produire leur alimentation à proximité de leurs maisons. Lena Jarlov en appelle à une nouvelle théorie de la planification et à de nouveaux concepts de planification urbaine. D'après l'expérience de Tanya Bowyer-Bower à Harare (Zimbabwe), le plus gros besoin local doit correspondre à une stratégie d'auto-assistance destinée aux pauvres, étant donné qu'il convient de réguler la situation économique (inflation, chômage, insécurité politique, etc.). L'objectif principal peut varier selon les villes, c'est pourquoi il faut agir au niveau local.

Franz Greif parle d' "extrême actualité" de la situation à l'intérieur et autour des villes en développement rapide dans les pays en développement. Les zones urbaines et péri-urbaines sont séparées et cette différence de localisation doit se retrouver dans la planification. Un bon outil de planification de l'AUP est constitué par le Système d'Information Géographique (SIG). Stefan Dongus explique brièvement l'importance de cet outil de planification. Des exemples de Dar es Salaam montrent que l'AUP se développe massivement dans cette ville, malgré la pression croissante sur les terres exercée par la priorité au logement. L'utilisation des données d'information géographique (qui peuvent être de nature spatiale, mais aussi socio-économique ou environnementale) et les tentatives d'interconnexion entre elles de ces données permettent de mieux comprendre la corrélation entre l'agriculture urbaine et les facteurs environnementaux et socio-économiques.

Allison Brown nous parle d'un autre aspect de la planification urbaine : le marketing. Selon elle, il existe au moins 16 moyens différents de commercialiser la production maraîchère, dont certains ne sont possibles que lorsque les producteurs sont physiquement proches des consommateurs. Les activités commerciales de maraîchage offrent une large gamme de produits aux prix les plus compétitifs, lorsque les cultivateurs peuvent accéder facilement à un maximum de canaux de commercialisation. Les planificateurs peuvent ainsi influer fortement sur le marketing. [Les modérateurs soutiennent cette idée. Il existe de nombreux exemples de villes où le marketing ne fonctionne pas correctement soit parce que la disponibilité des produits est limitée, soit parce les structures du marché sont monopolistiques. Nous ne blâmons pas les planificateurs sur ce point, mais nous les rendons responsables de la non-disponibilité des structures de commercialisation, ce qui peut constituer un facteur restrictif à la production urbaine et péri-urbaine et avoir un impact négatif sur les prix du marché et donc sur la sécurité alimentaire urbaine. Enfin, l'ensemble de la structure du marketing (de la production au consommateur, en passant par les infrastructures, les intermédiaires, le transport, les bâtiments etc.) constitue un important facteur économique urbain, qui est fortement lié aux thèmes de l'alimentation et de la nutrition, ainsi que de la santé et de l'environnement.]

Nous vous remercions de votre attention et nous espérons que vous participerez à nouveau à notre atelier au cours des deux prochaines semaines.

Vos Modérateurs groupe AUP et planification 
[ ] Observations des modérateurs

**************************************************************************

From: "Berg, dr. L.M. van den" <L.M.vandenBerg@alterra.wag-ur.nl>
To: <Urban-Planning-L@mailserv.fao.org> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 4:06 PM Subject: 
Re: UPA-Planning/session2 Leo van den Berg reacts to Lena Jarlovs contribution
UPA and urban sprawl

Dear fellow-participants,

I'd like to react to Lena Jarlov's plea for lower-density housing areas, especially for the urban poor, so that they can grow more of their own food on their plots. I think this could be naive, but it depends on what densities we are talking about. When I worked in Lusaka (Zambia) the high-density townships built during the '60s were at a net 25 dwellings/ha (always single-storey), which was acceptable both to the residents and to the city council for providing services. Then can new, foreign consultants why tried to impose higher densities, which were widely disliked. On the other had, to think of lower densities than 25 dw/ha is unrealistic and inefficient, also for Port Elizabeth. We should not aim with UPA at most of the urban poor producing most of their food around their homes. That would make the urban infrastructure far too expensive. It would also encourage those who don't feel like farming to erect all kinds of other buildings for different economic activities on their plots that could be a nuisance or a threat to their neighbours. A better way to enable those urban poor (and others!) who have the relevant skills and/or commitment to do agriculture is to plan and build new urban neighbourhoods in strings, following wherever possible the slightly higher grounds, leaving "green corridors" between them for agricultural production, forestry, water conservation, sport fields, etc. This is the well-know urban planning model of "fingercity". It combines the advantages of efficient use of urban infrastructure (including public transport) with good access for all to fresh air and tranquility in green open space. The use of this green space (which is bound to change over the years, but also from season to season) should be supervised at least as closely as that of the built-up areas. I agree with Lena that urban planners need to be made more aware agriculture as an urban landuse category, but we should not exaggerate!

Greetings, Leo van den Berg dr. L.M. van den Berg ALTERRA, Wageningen-UR P.O. Box 47 6700 AA WAGENINGEN NL (tel: 31-317-474435) e-mail: l.m.vandenberg@alterra.wag-ur.nl

**************************************************************************

From: "Drescher, Axel (SDAR)" 
To: "Urban Planning" <Urban-Planning-L@mailserv.fao.org
Subject: UPA-Food contribution from Mandiou Gassama - forwarded to UPA-Planning 
Date: 15 September 2000 17:56

UPA-Food contribution from Mandiou Gassama - forwarded to UPA-Planning

Dear participants of the UPA-Planning group,

we found this contribution interesting and closely related to planning and therefore we to forward it to you
Your moderators
UPA-Planning

From: CEK - Kala Saba To: Urban Food Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 3:40 PM Subject: URBAN-FOOD SESSION 2

Chers participants

Cette contribution est en français et en Anglais

This contribution is in french and in english

a.. les contraintes des producteurs en AUP : Les enquêtes que nous avons menées dans l'AUP à Bamako montrent effectivement que les producteurs font face à une multitude de contraintes dont les principales sont les suivants :

a.. La sécurité foncière : En AUP le titre foncier définitif est très rare. Même s'il existe, il ne concerne pas les exploitants de petite et moyenne catégories. Ces derniers qui représentent un taux élevé (majorité) des exploitants en AUP sont propriétaires, en location ou en occupation anarchique. La caractéristique commune entre les exploitants de ces trois groupes et qu'ils peuvent à tout moment faire l'objet d'un déguerpissement quand l'Etat a besoin des terres qu'ils occupent : c'est l'insécurité foncière. Dans ce contexte, chaque jour qui commence est une nouvelle épreuve pour le producteur. b.. L'eau : En dehors de la saison pluvieuse, les exploitations en AUP sont principalement alimentées par trois sources : a.. L'eau courante (robinet) dans les élevages et certains cas de floriculture ; b.. Les eaux de surface (marigots - fleuve) ; c.. Les eaux souterraines (puits - forages). Dans certaines zones l'eau est disponible et suffisante durant toute l'année. Sur les rives du fleuve, les terres ne sont exploitées normalement qu'en période d'étiage. En période de hautes eaux, les surfaces cultivables sont inondées. En dehors du lit majeur du fleuve, certains puits et marigots tarissent en saison sèche, obligeant les exploitants installés dans ces zones de transférer leur activité dans une zone ou de l'interrompre.

a.. Les crédits : Les difficultés pour l'obtention de crédit sont immenses. Ici, on ne prête pas au pauvre, faute de garantie suffisante. Devant les difficultés d'obtenir des crédits individuels, les exploitants se sont organisés en Association, devant les mêmes difficultés, ces associations sont en cours de transformation en Coopérative. 1.4.La surveillance des exploitations : Les exploitants n'étant pas propriétaires définitifs de leur terre, ils ne sont en conséquence pas autorisés à faire la clôture. L'exploitation n'étant pas sécurisée, les exploitants sont alors très souvent victimes de vols. Pour réduire le risque de vol, ils doivent passer la nuit dans l'exploitation après une journée épuisante.

1.5. Les fraudes : Certains intrants disponibles sur le marché (semence, engrais, pesticides, herbicides) sont vendus après la date de péremption (après re conditionnement ou falsification sur l'emballage d'origine).

a.. Les solutions : a.. Le problème du foncier est très complexe. L'historique de AUP nous apprend que la carotte et la laitue ne cesseront de s'éloigner du centre ville tant que le béton continuera sa conquête. La création de zones dites "maraîchères" qui paraissent être la solution à ce problème, a montré ses limites. Je ne crois pas en l'existence d'une solution universelle des problèmes de l'AUP. Chaque cas doit être examiné dans son contexte. L'avis des divers acteurs est nécessaire. C'est pourquoi l'approche participative et une charte morale pour le respect des engagements pris apparaissent comme des points importants dans la solution des problèmes de l'AUP.

a.. Pour accroître l'emploi et le revenu en AUP, il faudra : b.. Faire reconnaître par les autorités locales la place de l'AUP dans la satisfaction des besoins de la ville. c.. Créer des zones de productions organisées, reconnues et désenclavées. d.. Accroître la compétitivité des produits de l'AUP. e.. Améliorer la conservation et la commercialisation des produits de l'AUP. f.. Faciliter l'accès à la terre et au crédit. g.. Assurer le contrôle de qualité des intrants utilisés en AUP. English version :

1. Producers constraints in U and Agriculture

Investigations we have carried out in Bamako show effectively that producers are confronted with many problems within main problems are the followings :

1.1. Land security : Definite land title is rarely delivered in urban and peri -urban agriculture. Even if it exists, it doesn't concern small and middle producers, those producers who represent the main part in urban and péri-urban Agriculture can be considered as owners, in renting or they sometimes are squatting. The common characteristics among the producers of those three groups are that they can be cleaned out of their plots at ones time when authorities need to develop the area occupied by the producers. : this is what we call land insecurity. In this context each new day can be considered as a new test for producers.

1.2. Water : Once the rainy season is over the farmers in U and PUA are mainly implied by three water sources.

a.. tap : in animal husbandry and in flowerculture b.. surface water : steam and rivers c.. under soil water : wells and drillings. In some areas water availability is enough during the year. On the river banks soils are normally exploited in low water period. In high water period, cultivation land is covered by water. With out river bank, wells steams are empty during the dry season. Then producers have to transfer their activity elsewhere or to interrupt it.

1.3. Credits : Difficulties related to credit obtaining are very great. Here, credit is not done to the poor because he has not sufficient guarantee. Due to difficulties to get individual credit; producers have organized themselves in Associations for getting credit. Due to the same difficulties the associations are being turned into cooperatives.

1.4. Overseeing the crop : Farmers are not definite owners of the soils that they work on. In this way they aren't allowed to enclose their field. Exploitation is not secured and robbery cases become frequently. Producers have sometimes to spend the night in the field to reduce robbery risks.

1.5. Cheating : Some inputs (fertilizers, weedkillers, pesticides, seeds) are often sold after their dates are expired. In this case the product is reconditioned or falsifications are operated on the original package in case is not changed.

2 Solutions :

1.. Land problem is very complex. UPA history shows that cultivation of carrot and lettuce will not stop to move away from the center of the town as long as the building of concrete homes will continue it's conquest toward the town periphery. Market gardening areas creation which was considered as the solution related land problem has shown it' limits. I have no faith in universal solution of AUP problems. Each case must be examined in each case must be examined in it's context. Different actors' opinion is necessary. That's why participatory approach and a moral charter for the respect of the commitments appear as important points in the solution of AUP problems.

2.. To increase employment and income in AUP we have to: a.. Bring local authorities acknowledge the role of AUP in satisfying the needs of the town b.. Create organized, recognized and opened up production areas. c.. Increase AUP agricultural products competitiveness. d.. Improve AUP agricultural produce preserving and marketing. e.. Make easier the access to land credit f.. Ensure quality control of inputs used in AUP Kinds regards

Mandiou Gassama

============================================== 
Cabinet d'Etudes Kéïta - Kala Saba "CEK - Kala Saba" 
B.P. : 9014 BAMAKO (République du Mali) 
BADALA SEMA GEXCO RUE 136 PORTE 501
Tél. : +223-238412 Fax : +223-238413
E-mail : kalasaba@malinet.ml E-mail : cek@spider.toolnet.org Site web : http://www.cek.com.ml ==============================================

**************************************************************************

From: "Lena Jarlov" <lena.jarlov@dfr.se
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2000 6:46 PM Subject: 
Re: UPA-Planning/session2 Leo van den Berg reacts to Lena Jarlovs contribution

Dear colleague and dear Leo van den Berg! I would like to comment on Leo van den Bergs reacts on my ideas about lower density. In the comprehensive urban plan for Port Elizabeth it is proposed that the densities in the new residential areas shall, on average, be at least 25-30 dwelling units per hectare. That means 200-240 squaremetres plot sizes. As this is average sizes, there will be bigger and even smaller plots. It is also explicitly stated in the plan document that for "low income housing the current practice of creating erven of 200 squaremeters is unsustainable from an economic and land utilisation point of view". So on less than 200 squaremetres plot the family shall have a house, paths, some space to stay outside the house and for the children to play, some trees to give shadow, a shed for tools etc. There will be very little left to grow food on for the low income and the no income families!

I agree with the idea of a planning structure with green strings, but I am convinced that even in such a green belt structure, it is beneficial for most of the household to garden on the home back yard. A great part of the potential gardeners are women and mothers and for them even a relatively short distance to the vegetable land causes great problems. As the criminality is very high, it is also more secure to grow close to the house.

I do not think that it is an ideal solution for the urban inhabitants to grow most of their own food, but as the situation is today, and obviously even more in the near future, the alternative for lots of people in growing cities like PE will be to starve. I think that the best thing would be to increase the efforts to create good conditions on the countryside and in the small towns, so people would be able to stay there.

I will also comment on Leo's remark about big plots: "It would also encourage those who don't feel like farming to erect all kinds of other buildings for different economic activities on their plots that could be a nuisance or a threat to their neighbors". I think on the contrary, that it could be a good idea to, in the plan, give people who want it possibilities to have bigger plots. Yes, it can encourage them to build sheds and workshops and even a new dwelling house to let, and have an income. Why not? It may very well be regulated that disturbing activities will not be permitted. Another reason for some people, even poor, to have bigger plots, is that the family sizes differ very much, from 1-about 15 persons. Many families consists of three generations or more, and sisters, and brothers and nephews.

Kindly regards Lena Jarlöv

**************************************************************************

From: R.M.Brook [mailto:r.m.brook@bangor.ac.uk]
Sent: 05 September 2000 18:19 
Subject: UPA e-conference   'Peri-urban book

 Dear Rachel,   I have been following the e-conference with interest. Here's an offer which  won't be repeated often - a free book on the peri-urban interface! I and a  colleague did a review of DFID's peri-urban research funded by the Natural  Resource Systems Programme, and they asked us to turn the final report into  a book for wider dissemination. DFID are paying for the dissemination. It  mostly covers the areas of natural resource management and its livelihoods  consequences for the two case study cities, Kumasi in Ghana and  Hubli-Dharwad in India. Projects reviewed have also touched upon planing  and health issues, so there will probably be something of interest to  subscribers in all three sections of this e-conference.   If anyone subscribing to the e-conference (all three sections) is  interested in receiving it, please e-mail me, using 'Peri Urban Book' as  the subject line, as soon as possible, please. Eventually we'll put it on  our web site, too. It should be back from the printers late September or  early October.   Please post this at/on/to the conference.   

Dr Robert M Brook,  Lecturer (tropical crops, agroforestry),  School of Agricultural & Forest Sciences,  University of Wales,  Bangor,  Gwynedd, LL57 2UW,  United Kingdom.   Tel: +44 (0)1248 382517 (direct line) or 382281 (office) > Fax: +44 (0) 1248 354997 > E-mail: r.m.brook@bangor.ac.uk >

**************************************************************************

From: "Frieder Thomas" <agland@hrz.uni-kassel.de
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 11:27 AM 
Subject: UPA-Planning/session3 Contribution from Frieder Thomas Concept of UA, some questions

Dear participants of the UA-planning section. I have been away from my desk/computer/email for some time; that's why I react to a comment from Jac Smit (28th of september) with some delay. Because of that comment I have a very basic question. As I joined the international debate about UA only a few month ago, I am still wondering: What is the concept of UA? What is the thing, that we all have in common?

J.S. mentioned some sub-categories of UA/PUA. A- Home garden, school garden, institutional garden B- Agroforestry C- Market gardens, truck gardens D- Small-scale small livestock/poultry E- Greenhouse, aquaculture, mushrooms F- Tourist/recreation farming

In the same contribution J.S. writes: How can city planners ethically ignore an urban activity and land use that ... constitutes three-fifths of Madrid's land use?

I do not know Madrid very well. But I know much about agriculture in German cities. An average of 30% of the land use within the boundaries of the German cities is agriculture. But 90% of the agriculture (in relation to area) that we find in our cities is NOT mentioned within the TUAN-categories: just "normal" agriculture: 50-hectare-farms with cows; 100-hectare-farms with pigs etc.

There is a contradiction that on the one hand side some of us talk about the functions of agriculture in Western Europe and North American towns like flood prevention, green belts etc (which are much related to the AREA of agriculture). On the other hand the TUAN-categories of UA exclude 90% of the area of agriculture. My question is: Why does UA in Northern America/Western Europe is not looking at ALL the kinds of agriculture that we have? And there is another question: All the TUAN-categories (A-F) we find in rural areas, too. For example a huge amount of the German apple-harvest is "informal" (home grown). But we find the apple trees as well in cities as anywhere in the rural areas. All the same with tourist/recreation farming, small scale livestock etc. That's why I do not understand the difference of "urban agriculture" and "agriculture".

I think, it is not AGRICULTURE which is different in towns and cities from that in rural areas (still talking about "western" countries). But the CIRCUMSTANCES to do agriculture within towns are different from those ones in rural areas. That is why planning is important. And I am convinced, that it is important to support agriculture within cities. But I do not know why there is a concept of agriculture which separates between urban and rural agriculture.

Frieder Thomas

Dipl. Ing. agr. Frieder Thomas Redaktion Kritischer Agrarbericht AG ländliche Entwicklung - Fachbereich 13 - Universität Gesamthochschule Kassel Gottschalkstr. 26 D-34109 Kassel Telefon: xx49 561 8043206 Fax: xx49 561 8043180

**************************************************************************
 
From: <gabbate@cetma.brindisi.enea.it 
To: <Urban-Planning-L@mailserv.fao.org 
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 12:36 PM Subject: Re: UPA-Planning/session3 Contribution from Giulia Abbate

Dear all, 

I have been reading contributions to this conference with much interest, as the subject is quite stimulating and has a direct impact on life of people in all types of countries, from very poor to very developed. Due to my job background, I agree with suggestion of using Geographical Information System (GIS), remote sensing and GPS (Global Positioning System) to collect accurate and geo-referenced information about main cities in the world. Data base should include socio-economic and health information (so this approach is of interest for all three groups in this E-conference). So it would help epidemiological studies on particular diseases or understanding issues regarding uneven distribution of food, social services, etc. As for UPA itself, I believe that aim of such a geographical data base should not be "planning", but rather "promotion" of activities which are half way between recreation-education-health care and food production. Promotion of these activities is promotion of human being, is caring ourselves, our relationship with Mother Earth, with cycles of Nature. Growing our own food is source of deep satisfaction; following rhythms of vegetal life helps understanding what really counts in life. I have to say that technical knowledge should go together with love and respect to land. I think that practical courses covering technical and operational aspects of vegetable and fruit growing for children and adults should be very appropriate. Otherwise costs may be much higher than product income. To save values of local traditions and experience, instructors should be local professionals in agriculture (i.e. retired or part-time), together with experts in new techniques ( national and/or international). But also internet and/or TV courses could be useful, at least in developed countries. Contribution for poor people/areas should be considered (i.e give them seeds/plants, little equipment, plant medicines, free training, help in digging wells, commercialize extra product, .... ). I myself spend most of my week-ends enjoying agriculture hobby, but without gaining a more technical expertise I could not survive out of it. Thank you for this opportunity of reading so many qualified interventions and sharing views.

Best regards. Giulia Abbate

Dr.ssa Giulia Abbate 

ENEA INN-DIFF Sede di Brindisi c/o Cittadella della Ricerca s.s. 7 Appia, Km 7.3 72100 Brindisi, Italy Tel.: +39 0831 507310 Fax: +39 0831 507 308/256 E-mail: gabbate@cetma.brindisi.enea.it giulia.abbate@casaccia.enea.it
E-mail: giulia.abbate@casaccia.enea.it

**************************************************************************

From: Arturo Perez-Vazquez pah98ap@wye.ac.uk
Subject: UPA-Planning/session3 Contribution from Arturo Perez-Vazquez (forwarded from UPA-Food) Date: 21 September 2000 09:11
Re: UPA-Planning/session3 Contribution from Arturo Perez-Vazquez (forwarded from UPA-Food)

Dear participants, we thought that this contribution would be interesting for this group as well.

Your moderators UPA-Planning

 Introduccion   La agricultura urbana es obvio que no podra suplir la totalidad de  alimentos que se consumen en la ciudad, pero si  puede contribuir a reducir la demanda de alimentos del exterior  (sea de las ciudades o del pais). En Inglaterra la  produccion de alimentos en ciudades y pueblos durante la primera  y segunda guerra mundial fue asegurada en parte  por la produccion en huertos familiares y en los allotments  (terrenos de agricultura en ciudades y pequellos pueblos  dedicados para la produccion de verduras y frutas para auto-  consumo). Se indica que alrededor del 10 % de los  alimentos producidos en esa fecha provenian de estos dos  sistemas agricolas.   Cabria aclarar que grandes nucleos de poblacion que viven ahora  en la periferia de las grandes y medianas ciudades  de los paises en desarrollo son gente que hasta hace algunos 10  o 15 anos habitaban en pequenos poblados y que  tenian un espacio para hacer agricultura o estaban mas  relacionados a las actividades agricolas. Sin embargo, las  politicas impulsadas en muchos paises pobres durante las ultimas  decadas ha sido la falta de un apoyo decidido y  comprometido con las actividades del sector agricola, esto ha  motivado la emigracion de un gran numero de gente  rural a las ciudades y/o al extranjero en busca de un "mejor futuro".  Seguramente algunos lo encontraron, pero  seguramente tambien fueron muy pocos. Los otros -la gran  mayoria- viven en esos cinturones de miseria tratando de  sobrevivir y sin servicio alguno. Por otro lado el gran impulso que  ha tenido la AU y APU en Cuba se debe no tanto a  que el gobierno tuviera esa conviccion sino mas bien debido a el  cerco impuesto (lease EUA) a este pais y al recorte  de subsidios por parte de la ex-URSS (Rusia). Por otro lado si  estas politicas han funcionado tambien es debido al tipo  de gobierno predominante. Seguramente hoy dia la gente esta  convencida de las bondades que esto le brinda. Pero  me pregunto se hubiera dado si las condiciones socio-economico-  politicas hubieran sido diferentes? Tal vez no.   Ciertamente se requiere de un esquema o una estrategia de  promocion de "Huertos Urbanos"que debiera de empezar  en crear conciencia de la necesidad de producir alimentos en las  ciudades, no importa en que escala. Si la gente esta  convencida de las bondades que ello le puede brindar y redituar,  seguramente idearan las formas y crearan los  espacios necesarios para desarrollarla. Ya sea en el patio, en la  azotea, corredor, en macetas o intercaladas con plantas  hornamentales del jardin, en el estanque.   Los espacios de agricultura urbana no debieran tener un proposito  selectivo sino mas bien de intencion "mutuo  propio". En otras palabras los espacios para desarrollar AU no  necesariamente debe ser elitistas y asignados  unicamente para los pobres. Aqui habria que diferenciar el  contexto social y economico de cada pais. Pero obviamnete  asi como la gente pobre necesita espacios para producir  alimentos y cubrir su demanda familiar o de ingresos  economicos, de la misma manera personas de clases medias  (altas o bajas) demandan espacios para llevar agricultura  urbana, Probablemnte no como una necesidad urgente para  satisfacer la demanda de alimentos o ingresos sino como  una necesidad urgente de salud fisica y mental y aun de alimentos  frescos para el/ella y su familia.   Mas abajo doy mi particular punto de vista sobre algunas  preguntas que se han hecho como parte de este evento.   Se necesitan mejores politicas para apoyar la APU (Agricultura  peri-urbana)?   Coincido con Francisco Arroyo, que en muchos de los casos  (paises) no existen politicas que pretendan apoyar la  AU en su conjunto. Y en otros paises aunque existen se requiere  actualizarlas a las condiciones presentes y en  algunos otros casos -en donde ya existen- se ha empezado ya su  analisis para determinar el futuro de este tipo de  agricultura. Este es el caso de los allotments en Inglaterra que en  el ano de 1998 se llevaron a cabo intensas sesiones  para plantear el futuro de los allotments y actualizar la legislacion  al respecto. Ademas los allotments esta incluido en  las politicas municipales como parte de la Agenda Local 21 (Local  Agenda 21).   Seguramente en tanto no exista un movimiento fuerte y  consistente de agricultores o productores urbanos las  autoridades municipales poco o nada se preocuparan por legislar  aspectos referentes a esta actividad. Cuando existan  organizaciones de productores urbanos, cabalmente organizados,  que presionen por mas espacios y por una  legislacional al respecto y que contribuyan con ideas y  planteamientos para la legislacion, entonces sera el momento  adecuado para ello. Aqui coincido con Olivier Ginsberg, de que tal  vez el papel que debieramos jugar algunos de  nosostros (quienes tengan los conocimientos, en mi caso caresco  de ellos para ser honestos) es la de dar los elementos necesarios  para contribuir a la organizacion  de los productores urbanos actuales o potenciales.   Que informacion se requiere para que las autoridades locales  formulen politicas adecuadas en relacion a la APU?   Ademas de la informacion que bien senala Francisco Arroyo  (dinamica espacial y temporal de la AU y APU,  ordenamiento territorial, tenencia de tierra, censos, propositos,  etc..) , considero conveniente agregar los siguientes:   Cual es la poblacion local y relacion con personas involucradas en  alguna actividad de AU o APU  Cual es la relacion entre espacios verdes: espacios no verdes  (casas, pavimento, etc..)  Niveles de contaminacion ambiental (aire, agua, suelos)  Nivel educativo de los productores urbanos  Numero de organizacions, afiliados, propositos, propustas y  prioridades  Demanda local de alimentos y cadenas de comercializacion  Instituciones(investigacion, servicio y/o ensenanza) que puedan  contribuir con propuestas   Ademas se debera de determinar y de asignar una area minima de  terreno que permita al productor urbano producir los  alimentos suficientes para una familia promedio, dependiendo del  pais de que se trate, y que le permita a la vez tener  excedentes para obtener ingresos ($$) extras. Si es que esta  persigue objetivos de mejora de la dieta e ingreso familiar.  Ademas se debera de legislar en el sentido de que cultivos se  debieran de sembrar, considerando las condiciones  agroclimaticas y que respondan a subsanar un minimo los  diferentes requerimientos alimenticios humanos (proteina,  vitaminas y carbohidratos). De otra manera podria ser que estos  espacios de agricultura se destinaran solo a producir  productos para el mercado, desvirtuandose su proposito original.   Cuales son las principales perocupaciones en AU y APU y cual es  la mejor forma para mitigar esto?   Una de las principales preocupaciones y ya senalados por otros  participantes es la tenencia de la tierra. Me parece que  hasta que no se mejoren aspectos de seguridad en la tenencia de  tierra en muchos paises y los niveles economicos de  la poblacion, la designacion de espacios por parte de los  municipios para AU puede tener dos vertientes, una  riesgosa y otra de mayor seguridad. Es bien sabido que cuando en  las ciudades existen areas municipales y aun de  particulares -practicamente abandonadas- la invasion de esos  predios es casi inminente. Porque mucha de la gente  carece de casa y aun de empleo para poder acceder a  financiamiento de vivienda. Para ellos espacios practicamente  abandonados y con propositos que consideren "no importantes"  (bosque, AU, etc..) pueden ser un buen pretexto  para invadir y establecerse. El,aspecto de seguridad de esos  predios puede fortalecerse por el hecho de que esos  espacios baldios se convierten en espacios verdes para  produccion de alimentos para la comunidad.   Otro aspecto que seguramente se enfrenta -en las condiciones  socio-economicas prevalecientes en paises en  desarrollo- es el vandalismo y robo. Aspectos que no estan  excentos en los paises desarrollados obviamente, pero  que se dan con menor incistencia. El robo de herramienta y de  productos de los huertos es algo dificil de evitar, aun  intra (dentro del mismo huerto comunitario) como de externos. El  robo interno puede evitarse a traves del  establecimiento de un "codigo de conducta interno" o en el mejor  de los casos con una reglamentacion" pero para los  casos externos solo a traves de una difusion de la importancia de  estos huertos a nivel comunidad y en casos  exepcionales solo a traves de la aplicacion de la reglamentacion  local/municipal. Parte de ello es confirmado por  Mandiou Gassama cuando senala que los casos de robo son cada  vez mas frecuentes y la gente tiene que cuidar sus  cultivos aun por la noche para evitar el robo.   En los paises pobres, particularmente en aquellos en donde el  recurso hidrico es escaso, se debera de legislar sobre el  uso del agua. Es conocido que la demanda del recurso hidrico  esta creciendo aceleradamente a nivel mundial y  aunque es un recurso natural renovable en muchas partes del  mundo se esta convirtiendo en un recurso no  renovable. Particularmente debido a las altas tasas de  deforestacion, y a la contaminacion del recurso. Por otro lado el  uso de aguas residuales conllevan el riesgo de contaminacion de  alimentos. De ahi la necesidad de capacitar a los  productores urbanos en tecnicas de cosecha de agua de lluvia,  tecnicas de tratamiento de aguas jabonosas y/o  residuales, practicas que reduscan la evaporacion (coberteras,  pajas, grava, abonos organicos, etc..) y aun en  sistemas de produccion inovativos (sub-irrigacion, capsulas  porosas, riego por goteo, etc..) de un mejor uso del  recurso.   Respecto al composteo o al producto organico resultado de este  proceso bioquimico, no hay duda de sus bondades.  Sin embargo, muchos agricultores urbanos carecen de los  conocimientos basicos y adecuados para llevar un  adecuado composteo de los residuos organicos, que permita  eliminar patogenos y a la vez producir un producto rico  en nitrogeno, fosforo y potasio principalmente. Estoy hablando  practicamente de los niveles de humedad, de pH,  tamano de particula, aireado, relacion C:N y otros factores que  contribuyen a llevar un efectivo proceso de  composteo. De otra manera lo que se estaria produciendo seria un  material parcialmente composteado, de baja calidad  nutrimental y con riesgos de contener patogenos.   Respecto a la preocupacion de agroquimicos en los alimentos y su  relacion con la agricultura organica permitanme  mencionar lo siguiente: La agricultura organica en espacios  urbanos de agricultura puede ser instruida pero lo mas  importante es que la gente por si misma reconosca la importancia  y beneficios que le puede aportar producir alimentos  organicos. No solo en terminos de salud para el y su familia, pero  de obtener ingresos extras. Pero es bien sabido que  aun en muchos paises pobres o en desarrollo el precio entre  productos organicos y convencionales no hay una gran  diferencia. Ademas la demanda interna de productos organicos no  es tan fuerte ni esta creciendo tan aceleradamente  como si sucede en algunos paises ricos.   Los factores que impulsan el desarrollo de la agricultura urbana en  los diferentes paises del mundo pueden responder  a diferentes necesidades sociales. En paises ricos la necesidad  de desarrollar la agicultura urbana no es tanto la  produccion de alimentos para comercializar (entiendase para  generar un ingreso extra) sino como una actividad  meramente de entretenimiento y de relax, dando un valor  importante obviamente a la produccion de alimentos frescos  y libres de residuos de agroquimicos y aun de contaminacion  transgenica. Pero en los paises pobres mas que "safety  food" lo que se busca es tener una mayor seguridad alimentaria  ("food security"). Por ejemplo, la agricultura organica  en los allotments en Inglaterra esta incrementandose cada vez  mas en respuesta a los temores de alimentos  transgenicos, de agroquimicos, preservantes y colorantes en los  alimentos. La agricultura organica en los allotments  es practicada principalmente por las nuevas generaciones y con  una inclinacion mayor entre las mujeres. Sin embargo,  muchos productores de allotments debido a su edad (debo de  mencionar que la edad promedio de la gente que trabaja  en los allotments es de 58 anos) y a lo pesado que resulta  controlar lo que se denomina como "malezas" hacen uso de  herbicidas y del rotocultor para roturar el suelo como una forma de  aligerar el trabajo. Pero ademas para muchos de  ellos el uso de agroquimicos en la agricultura es visto como algo  normal. Lo mas importante para ellos es saber que  producto quimico estan usando, usar la cantidad menos posible y  ademas cuando fue aplicado el producto.    

Saludos y muchos exitos!!  

 APV         

Arturo Perez Vazquez  
Research Student at Imperial College   8 East Street  Ashford, Kent  TN 23 1JZ  Tel 01233 63 42 11   Arturo Perez Vazquez  Research Student at Wye College  The University of London  8 East Street  Ashford, Kent  TN 23 1JZ  Tel 01233 63 42 11 

**************************************************************************

From: Kunze, Dagmar (FAORAF) 
Sent: 19 September 2000 17:13 
Subject: RE: actions/policies Urban-Food-L/Session Three/ Contribution from Dagmar Kunze

Dear Participants,

my name is Dagmar Kunze and I am working in Farming Systems Development for the Regional Office of FAO for Africa in Accra;

since working in the field of PUA, I keep thinking that a look at the history of PUA in Europe can help us to understand the development of this field in developing countries today and answer the question where best to support PUA.

In Europe, rural farmers in the vicinity of growing cities turned their production into specialised mostly horticultural products until transport costs became cheap and import tax was reduced and allowed southern European products, which could be produced comparatively cheaper (no heating of greenhouses, low labour costs etc.), access the market. Besides this commercial type of agriculture, homegardens where always important for subsistence (especially after the 2 wars) and later for recreation. Some examples are given under http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~garten/gartenkonferenzEnglisch.html a conference on small gardens. Here, papers discuss the economic importance of homegardens AT PRESENT for Eastern Germany (E. Meyer-Renschhausen, V. Benholdt-Thomsen), the eastern parts of Europe and the Balkans (Nigel Swain), Poland (W. Kniec) etc.

I find PUA in the developing world has many equal features (except the leisure aspect). Urbanisation changes consumption patterns, the demand for fruits (as gifts - the imported apple on streets in Western Africa is a good example) and vegetables (flowers in francophone Western Africa) is increasing with increasing purchasing power. Unless transport systems are improved, PUA will be competitive with rural agriculture in perishable goods, especially at rising energy prices. (Some inputs such as water might be more expensive in PUA in the longer run).

This means that even if no public support is given to PUA, people will take it up as an income earning activity, as long as they have access to land and it "pays better than other jobs", even if return to labour is low (as mentioned by on participant). In most places, unemployment is high (bringing down opportunity costs), which makes PUA attractive.

Homegardening and commercial production is not so much separated as in Europe it seems, but the former certainly has economic impact, even if it serves subsistence and social exchange purposes (can be counted as "income" in kind). It will improve the diet in nutrients as well.

Export production is another field, which is developing in some countries such as Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Benin, (Nigeria?). Although plantations are often involved, some small and medium scale production is taking place as well, in Ghana in form of an established "outgrower system", mainly in the peri-urban areas.

Let us not forget that in some places fisheries are considered the largest percentage of PUA farmers (Accra, Abidjan(?)) and that livestock plays an important role, of course.

In the frame of field work undertaken in Accra, we tried to identify issues where farmers invest their time in improving their own situation. Preference was given to: - formalising of associations to improve the handling of common issues such as insecure tenure and marketing; - input requirements, especially safe water and seeds; - contacting government or NGOs for advice and support in the often very specialized fields of PUA production (training and extension from government, NGOs and private sector such as retailers).

Trying to answer Rachel's 2nd question, which steps are most important: Depending on our objectives and which "group" should be targeted, PUA can be supported in various ways: the consumer side, with low cost, safe products by food control mechanisms; marketing infrastructure; the producer side, with development of farmer associations, capacity building of individuals and groups, low cost inputs, distribution systems establishment, tenure arrangements, marketing and market information support (export), specialised extension, business planning; the governmental side in agricultural policy planning, town planning, legal support, extension, marketing (infrastructure);

With Leo van den Berg, I agree that as government (or a government supporting agency) you would support the various fields and try to maintain some balance, in which tenure is probably the most sensitive one and since PUA farmers are rather not supported at all (we read about it being illegal in Harare from Tanja, in Accra the use of sewerage water is illegal, which rules out a lot of farmers), the propensity of governments to solve any tenure problem is low. PUA could be supported and viewed as "maintaining open space" which would otherwise become waste dumping sites (ornamental plants producers along river banks of Bamako). Consumer health is rated important in public perspective (+ tourism). Of course, governments have to balance PUA with rural agriculture. PUA would be viewed as specialized, perishable and high value production. Farmers could be supported (most likely by NGOs) in building farmers association to better lobby for their issues, specialized extension in crop choice, farm management and planning, input acquirement, veterinary services (already privatised in many places), marketing etc.

Last issue is a question to other participants: do you know of any "water certification scheme" to certify the use of clean water for production in any country? How this can be set up? Accra tourism board and farmers are worried with the safety of products by the use of polluted water. We have a request to look into this issue by introducing a "certificate". In fact, clean water products can be bought at a comparatively high price (typical expats shops), but the farmer association and ministry are rather looking at a certification program for "all" farmers. Any ideas on this issue are welcome.

______________________________

Dr. Dagmar KUNZE 
Farming Systems Development Officer FAO - Regional Office for Africa POB 16 28 Accra, GHANA Tel.: 00233-21-701 09 30 or 675 000 ext. 3137 (operator) email: dagmar.kunze@fao.org Visit our website: http://www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/agricult/ags/AGSP/

**************************************************************************

From: Moderators
To: "Urban Planning" <Urban-Planning-L@mailserv.fao.org
Subject: UPA-Planning session3 Moderators comments Date: 22 September 2000 15:52

Dear participants of the UPA-Planning group,

in the panos briefings no. 34 http://www.oneworld.org/panos/briefing/brief34.htm#keyfacts, written by Prof. Graham Haughton, Head of the Centre for Urban Development and Environmental Management (CUDEM), Leeds Metropolitan University, we read the following:

.....Development professionals increasingly agree that the traditional hierarchical systems of city management cannot cope with the needs of today’s urban populations. Some planners insist that a decentralised decision-making process is fundamental to ensuring that cities work for and not against the people. It is hoped that through a more people-based decision-making system, and with the help of a mediator, traditionally conflicting interest groups can learn to work together. The stimulation of informed debate and decision making is fundamental to the decentralisation of power. .....

Improving use of land and land-use planning

In too many cities in the South parallel planning systems appear to exist, one reflecting former colonial standards and technologies, the other local standards. The result can be a muddle of approaches and regulatory conflict, allowing people to circumvent building and planning controls. For instance, in some parts of a city wooden shacks may be treated as undesirable and subject to removal, while similar developments elsewhere attract improvement support. However, in recent years there has been a growing awareness of the need to improve urban planning and design and to explore use of locally appropriate materials and technologies rather than uncritically accepting imported solutions and standards. Increasing numbers of professionals now seek to work with nature and to improve community involvement in their designs. This can result in simple but significant improvements, such as providing shade and improving solar capture, or positioning natural vegetation to act as wind breaks....

This leads us again to the question we asked in the third session of our conference.

* Which stakeholders should be involved in the development of a plan that includes UPA? This connects to the question: How to modify efficiently the traditional hierarchical systems of city management? If we try to plan decentralized, participatory and on a people-based decision system: who are the stakeholders and how to mobilize them ?

The second question: * Which planning principles should apply, to integrate UPA into city planning? is closely related to the second cited sentence of the panos briefing above and poses the next questions: are planners in the South aware of parallel planning systems ? What are the conflicts resulting from this and how can solutions be mediated. How can major stakeholders like the urban farmers themselves be involved in planning processes - what steps to go ?

Best regards and pleasant weekend

Your Moderators UPA-Planning

**************************************************************************

From: Manuel BEGUIER 
To: <urban-planning-l@mailserv.fao.org> Subject: 
 UPA-Planning session3 Contribution from Manuel Beguier Date: 22 September 2000 17:11

Dear particpants of the UPA-Planning group,

Manuel Beguier sent a message and a paper on UPA in Paris to the group. Please see the abstract and the message below. The paper will be made available on the information market www.ruaf.org/info_market.html or send by request from urbanag@fao.org (send paper Berguier).

Your moderators UPA-Planning

Résumé L'agriculture péri-urbaine d'Ile-de-France est une agriculture performante qui, sous la pression de l'urbanisation tend à disparaître. Des acteurs publics (région et Etat) ont adopté une démarche d'audit patrimonial afin de les aider à orienter leur politique d'investissements agricoles. Cette analyse système-acteurs a mis en lumière les enjeux et les stratégies de l'agriculture péri-urbaine francilienne. La nécessité de négocier un contrat de qualité d'agriculture péri-urbaine à l'échelle régionale est apparue. Des expériences locales de gestion patrimoniale et des négociations à l'échelle régionale sont actuellement en cours en vue de poser les premières pierres de ce contrat.

Abstract Paris' near urban agriculture is, though its high productivity, currently declining under urban pressure. Some public authority decided to test a patrimonial audit process in order to help them for their investment policy. This analysis showed stakeholders strategies and the games played between them. It was brought out that a global quality of near urban agriculture contract has to be negotiated. Based on growth of local projects, the whole necessary stakeholders will have to qualify and negotiate tomorrow agriculture, before it is too late. Discussion are currently going on for building local experiments of patrimonial management and on a regional scale in order to initiate the contract.

Dear participants: 

The regional council is working on the future of its periurban agriculture. We used therefore a new approach, the "approche patrimoniale", and a useful tool the patrimonial audit. It helped us to know more about the stakeholders strategies and develop a common management approach with all the actors, both urban and rural including the farmers.

I think it is far from the developing countries context, but the fact is that some of the problems are the same : spatial planning, land owning, retailing, urban wastes reclycling... The patrimonial approach helps the stakeholders to find a common frame of negotiation to make demands and offers of quality (not only products, but also services, amenities...) meet one to the other. The enclosed paper, prepared for the planetary garden conference in Chambéry in 1999, details this approach and the case study of the Ile-de-France periurban agriculture.

**************************************************************************

From: Marielle Dubbeling
To: Urban Planning Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 6:47 PM 
Subject: Re: UPA-Planning session3

Contribution from Marielle Dubbeling, Urban management programme for Latin America and the Carribbean.

I apologize for not having been able to contribute to the last weeks discussions and neither will I be able to contribute the coming week, due to various travels abroad. As such, I already want to thank the moderators and participants for there contributions and will certainly contact several of you after the conference to maintain communication.

What I would like to share with you all right now is our idea to develop a specific project on integration of UPA into land use and urban planning. We have the request from several Municipalities in the Region to support them in this (Cuenca and Quito -Ecuador; Texcoco -Mexico, Maranguape -Brasil; Teresina-Brasil, Havana-Cuba, Santiago de los Caballeros- Dominican Republic amongst others).

Based on a quick review of the conference contributions we would like to: elaborate a resource document on the incorporation of UA in urban planning, from the viewpoint of sustainable land and water use, that may serve as a reference guide for local urban planners and city governments in the region and provides structures, mechanisms and instruments that facilitate incorporation of UPA in urban planning and management.

To be able to answer these questions it is foreseen to:

- Describe the actors and the urban planning process, its objectives, strategies and policy instruments in for example 4 cities in the LAC region.

- Construct in each of the cities a "urban territorial map", including a spatial classification of different (peri)urban land and water bodies and its uses: (Actors: Municipality + research institute )

*Elaborate a classification and land use map of different urban and peri- urban spaces (using GIS)

*Identify the characteristics of productive land use (production, transformation and commercialization, type of production, temporal or permanent land use, access and land tenure)

- do an analysis of existing and future municipal planning ideas, norms and regulations for land and water use (land use plans, territorial plans, strategic plans). Actors: Municipality

-Analyze and classify spaces where UPA could be converted into a sustainable and viable land use (compared to other forms of land use) * do a participatory analysis of demands and ideas for land and water use. Actors: farmers, consumer groups, agro industry, market-cooperations, NGo and community based organizations

* do an analysis of potential land and water use for agricultural production, processing and marketing and its implications for urban planning: Actors: research, NGO and Municipality

* Reflect on the implications of a productive land and water use for urban planning

*Propose structures, mechanisms and practical instruments for a better incorporation of UA in urban planning

* Validate the results of the research with a group of 30 cities interested in the topic and working with UMP

Anybody interested in the proposal or in direct or distant participation, is welcome to write me directly.

Sincerely, 

Marielle

======================================================= 
Marielle Dubbeling Asesora en Agricultura Urbana PGU-ALC/IPES Dirección: Garcia Moreno 751 entre Sucre y Bolivar Casilla 17-01-2505 Quito-Ecuador Tel./fax 593-2-583-961, 282-361/364/371 E-mail: marid@pgu.ecuanex.net.ec =========================================================

**************************************************************************

<END>