Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page

Annex 5. Annexes to Chapter 2

A5.1 City and Local Authorities can play five major roles in alleviating the food insecurity of low-income urban households
A5.2 Institutional aspects
A5.3 Urban markets: responsibility for providing infrastructure, facilities and services
A5.4 Methods for collecting data
A5.5 Presentation of problems, constraints and critical points, expected results and remedial measures
A5.6 Problem analysis: an approach
A5.7 Check list for identifying and formulating a market infrastructure development project
A5.8 Making decisions about market infrastructure interventions
A5.9 The external review
A5.10 Workshop agenda and report format (phase 1 and 2)

A5.1 City and Local Authorities can play five major roles in alleviating the food insecurity of low-income urban households

Promote supportive attitudes and policies towards food producers, processors, traders, shopkeepers, street vendors, transporters and consumers

This requires:

Promote private investment

The development of food supply and distribution systems requires augmenting the investment in food production, marketing and processing. This may be beyond the ability of the public sector to afford.

For private investment to emerge, there is the need for an economic and political environment conducive to private sector risk-taking accompanied by credible assurances by the state that the "rules of the game" will be honoured.

You can stimulate private investments by:

Intervene in food supply and distribution



Infrastructure, facilities and services


Coordinate public interventions and private initiatives

Conflicts in the implementation, by different institutions and NGOs, of their programmes limit the impact of development initiatives. Effective coordination is required to avoid this condition. You are in the best position to coordinate the area under your jurisdiction.

You need to:

Intermediate between central government and the private food sector

You can frame interinstitutional dialogue by:

(For details, see Argenti, 2000).

A5.2 Institutional aspects

A.5.2.1: The Interinstitutional Steering Committee (ISC)

The ISC will comprise representatives of the major local and central, and public and private institutions directly interested in the study:

  • the Municipal Authority of the city affected;
  • the ministry in charge of the municipalities;
  • the Ministry for Agriculture;
  • the Ministry for Trade;
  • the Ministry for Planning;
  • the Ministry for Health/nutrition;
  • the Chambers of Commerce and Agriculture;
  • occupational associations (e.g. traders, transporters, food producers and consumers);
  • the universities and research institutes.

The ISC, preferably chaired by the mayor of the city concerned, shall:

  • supervise and support the team’s research activities;
  • ensure the effective cooperation of the national institutions implicated;
  • facilitate team members’ access to all necessary data;
  • periodically check the progress and assess the results of the team’s work;
  • ensure the effective deployment of interinstitutional study groups;
  • promote the formulation of sectoral policies and programmes based on the case study findings, and their adoption by their respective institution.

A.5.2.2: The Institutional Framework

Several partners are usually involved in programme implementation, e.g. government bodies, local authorities, chambers of commerce, private associations, NGOs and national financial institutions.

Each element of the action plan (subprogrammes, sets of remedial measures and, even, specific measures) is often implemented under the responsibility of a specific institution (the lead institution), but the work per se is entrusted to several institutions which will be identified and their respective responsibilities described with respect to:

1) the implementation of each programme element:

  • define the roles and responsibilities of the partner institutions to ensure efficient implementation and management;
  • determine the degree to which management has been decentralized in favour of local authorities and how active a role the players (consumers, traders and service providers) have in FSDS management;
  • determine, in particular, the level of technical expertise and experience required of the institution to ensure satisfactory implementation of each specific measure;
  • identify the external technical assistance requirements to cover any possible deficiencies.

2) decision-making capacity:

  • measure the urban institutions’ influence on the scenario as a whole, on the strategy tools and on funding;
  • assess the degree of freedom to obtain internal and external funding, and whether municipal borrowing is authorized and practicable;
  • assess the determination to solve the problems.

The description of the institutional framework should include an analysis of the structure, the staff and the partner organizations’ and funding agencies’ management capacity, and an assessment of their strengths and weaknesses.
Source: Willahert, 1998.

A5.3 Urban markets: responsibility for providing infrastructure, facilities and services

Infrastructure, Facilities and Services

Characteristics and Form of Provision

Provider and Responsibilities

Basic trading infrastructure located in major business districts: market stalls, shops and warehouses.

Feasible to charge economic user fees because of private good characteristics. Therefore commercial provision (by private or public-private mix) is possible.

Planning and design: city and local authorities (CLAs). Investment: mix of CLAs and private capital (including prefinance by traders). Management: autonomous, arms-length agency with clear commercial mandate or private.

Basic trading infrastructure located in poor suburbs/slums: market stalls and shops.

Private investment in open markets may be inadequate by possible limited returns. Charging economic user-fees is feasible but exclusion of non payers may have wider health and environmental effects. Possibility of mixed provision. Private food shops and sales from homes need to be encouraged.

Planning and design: CLAs. Investment: mix of CLA, community and trader associations and community labour. Management: community or trader associations.

Cold storage facilities, slaughterhouses, on-site processing plants and transport.

Commercial provision. Those provided by governments tend to suffer from poor management and maintenance.

Planning guidelines and regulation: CLAs. Design, investment and management: private.

Parking space and child daycare facilities.

Charging economic user-fees is feasible but exclusion of non payers may have wider social and environmental effects.

Planning, design and investment in infrastructure: CLAs (private only in major business districts). Management: private.

Roads, public drains and sanitation facilities.

Difficult to exclude nonpayers and negative effects of non-provision on others. Public provision necessary.

Planning and design: CLAs and Department of Urban Planning. Investment: central government (Ministry of Finance).

Regulations and policing including food import controls, quality control, health and food safety standards.

Typical example of public good.

Drafting bylaws and legislative instruments on standards: CLAs, food standards agency. Gazette regulations: central government (legislature). Enforcement: police and judiciary.

A5.4 Methods for collecting data

A5.4.1 Bibliographical Research

Bibliographical research entails:

  • identification of the sources of data and information on the issues national, regional, sectoral and municipal development plans; official national or sectoral policy documents; official statistics; studies, publications and articles; development project reports; international, regional and national seminar proceedings; correspondence and minutes of meetings;
  • a critical collection of bibliographical data whose usefulness and validity must be evaluated in relation to the points included in the TOR;
  • presentation of the bibliographical data: useful information must be incorporated into the table proposed in the TOR. This would show:
  • available data;
  • the various points of view on some aspects of the issues and the measures to be envisaged;
  • the additional data required to proceed with the case study;
  • the research areas to be examined in further detail.

Given the interdisciplinary nature of the study, sources will have to be found in the fields that are potentially relevant to the study. Therefore, the bibliographic research will be pluridisciplinary.

A5.4.2 Interviews

Interviews will provide the views of the groups of players involved in FSDSs, ongoing and planned measures and research. To gain maximum benefit from an interview:

  • have adequate information about the person to be interviewed and about his/her institution;
  • define the aim of the interview;
  • prepare a list of key questions and topics for discussion;
  • clearly explain the reasons for the interview (e.g. the objective of the FSDS study, the interview and the importance of the information the interviewer wishes to obtain from the interviewee);
  • ensure that the information obtained is precisely understood;
  • obtain critical information on available technical documentation and request a copy;
  • prepare a brief report of the interview and indicate the action to be taken. Give the team coordinator a copy of the report.

A5.4.3 Direct Observations

Direct observation during field visits provides qualitative and quantitative data on legal and illegal taxes on markets and at roadblocks, selling prices of food, transport costs, physical and operational conditions in markets, goods traffic, food presentation and hygiene.

A field visit requires organizational effort, but modest financial resources. To make the most of this type of visit:

  • ensure that the site, the weather (seasons, months, weeks, days and time) and the conditions are right for the purpose of the visit (a sunny day will not be appropriate to assess a market’s propensity to flood!);
  • clearly define the information required;
  • prepare a list of questions in the event
  • of interviews;
  • prepare a list of the tasks to be accomplished.

A5.4.4 The Mini-Survey

Mini-surveys may be necessary to collect important quantitative or qualitative data that are not already available or out of date.

As surveys require considerable organization, human and financial effort, it is important to:

  • ensure that the data sought are not already available;
  • carefully define the objectives, the sample and all other details of the survey;
  • limit as much as possible the information to be collected. Avoid the temptation to conduct excessively detailed surveys;
  • ensure that the place, weather (season, month, week, day and, even, time) and conditions are right for the survey;
  • carefully prepare the questionnaires and test them before launching the survey;
  • ensure that the work plan allows sufficient time to carry out the survey and analyse the data;
  • ensure that human and financial resources are ready to carry out the survey, process and analyse the data.

A5.5 Presentation of problems, constraints and critical points, expected results and remedial measures

A5.5.1 Presentation of Problems, Constraints and Critical Points


Brief description of the problem. Has it been perceived by the various interest groups?
Does it interest the urban, periurban or rural areas?


Brief description of the specific context.


Indicate the direct and indirect causes (factors responsible) of the observed phenomenon.
State the points of the view of the different interest groups.



State the immediate direct and indirect consequences (responsibilities). State the points of view of the interest groups. Do they pertain to the urban, periurban or rural areas?

Medium and long term

State the main medium and long term consequences of taking no remedial action (status quo scenario). State the points of view of the interest groups. Do they affect the urban, periurban or rural areas?


Indicate the various solutions (results) expected. Have they been put forward by the interest groups? Do they concern the urban, periurban or rural areas?

A5.5.2 Presentation of Remedial Measures


Briefly describe the proposed measure.


Briefly describe the expected result.


Briefly describe the problem to be solved.


Identify the relevant strategy.


State whether the measure concerns urban, periurban or rural space, or a combination ofall three.


State the time (in months) it will take to obtain interim or final results.


State who the direct and indirect beneficiaries will be.

Instit. respons.

Give the names of the lead institution and the partner institutions.


Are there alternative ways to resolve the problem: e.g. public or private and centralized ordecentralized?

A5.5.3 Remedial Measures: Selection Criteria


  • What are the direct and indirect benefits of the proposed measure?
  • Will the proposed measure solve several problems simultaneously?
  • Is long term viability assured?


What will be the major negative consequences of the measure in the short, medium and long term? Will they be acceptable? By whom?


Is the measure realistic from the following viewpoints:

  • political: how politically acceptable will the measure be in the short, medium and long term?
  • strategic: is the proposed measure in line with central and/or local government strategy and with the strategy defined to attain the desired scenario?
  • institutional: is the implementing institution capable of implementing and managing the measure?
  • financial: will the proposed measure be covered by available funds bearing in mind the need to implement other measures in the same sector? If not, what steps are required to ensure that the proposed measure can be finally sustained?


  • Do the expected economic benefits justify the use of the funds?
  • How more efficient than alternative measures is the proposed measure?

Other considerations

  • To what extent is the proposed measure a pillar of the strategy?
  • Do the project results depend on other projects being implemented in other sectors (a typical example is the building of an access road which is independent of FSDS planning). Is this external element a determining factor?
  • Are the specifications adequate? Will feasibility studies be necessary in order to include the measure in the programme?
  • If this is a regulatory measure, has it been evaluated by the beneficiaries?
  • Must general policy considerations or matters concerning the security of person/goods be considered?

A5.5.4 Presentation of Expected Results


Brief description of anticipated result.


Explain why the anticipated result can be obtained in a relatively easier or more complex way than other possible results.

Direct benefits

Will the direct benefits be sustainable over time? Will subsequent remedial action be necessary?

Indirect benefits

State whether the anticipated solution will solve, even partially, another problem.


State the main consequences likely to ensue from the anticipated result in the medium term and long term.


State whether the anticipated solution will require complementary measures.

A5.6 Problem analysis: an approach

A5.6.1 Developing a research path

A table must be prepared setting out the city’s problems. The table must then be converted into an operational research path with the aid of maps of the city and its surrounding area. The plan below shows how develop a research path.

Urban food demand

  • Food consumed;
  • average consumption per inhabitant.

  • Changes in and factors determining consumption and purchasing models;
  • main consumption and preparation practices
  • main purchasing practices;
  • projection of urban food demand.

Characteristics of urban areas

  • Urban expansion patterns;
  • urban population dynamics;
  • social segregation phenomena;
  • population distribution by economic levels (location of poverty levels).

  • Retrospective analysis (covering 15-20 years);
  • projection of urban expansion to 10 years;
  • projection of the urban population;
  • commercial structures and urban growth;
  • conflicts over land use;
  • urban land management policies;
  • institutions and policies relating to urban food security.

Location of food arrival points in urban and periurban areas

  • Main markets;
  • roads into the city;
  • rural/urban transport facilities;
  • food types, flows and quantities.

  • Areas of food origin or production;
  • important pipelines
  • players (e.g. wholesalers, middlemen and transporters);
  • public and private commercial services (e.g. information and credit);
  • service management practices.

Location of urban distribution

  • Intra-urban markets and marketing structures;
  • location and quantification of food flows to urban areas;
  • intra-urban transport.

  • Traders, transporters, etc.
  • market management practices;
  • product processing;
  • forms of urban distribution;
  • rules governing trade and related services;
  • marketing channels, marketing costs and margins;
  • employment generation
  • informal activities.

Ongoing or planned policies, programmes

  • General economic policies covering FSDSs; FSDSs;
  • urban food security programme;
  • administrative decentralization;
  • on-going and planned programmes of FSDS improvement measures.

  • Direct and indirect effects of general and sectoral policies; institutional responsibilities at territorial and sectoral levels;
  • conflicts and synergies between administrative levels, and between sectoral and territorial administrations.

A5.6.2 Determining the Relative Importance of the Problems: an Example

The case study of city X revealed the following problems:

All these problems have a negative effect on the efficiency of distribution and cause the purchase prices of all foods to rise. But are they all equally important? What order of priority can be assigned to them?


Function concerned

Level concerned

Functional relationships




4, 2




3, 4, 1






services management


1, 2

This simple analytical table shows that:

This analytical table suggests that:

A5.7 Check list for identifying and formulating a market infrastructure development project

Initial background information

Factors to be considered in identifying the investment project

The policy context

Main operational factors

Formulating the market project

General factors in Market Master Plan preparation

Evaluating the project

A5.8 Making decisions about market infrastructure interventions

A5.8.1 Criteria for Screening and Prioritizing Market Improvements

Among wholesale and retail markets, there may be a number of potential candidates for improvements. At the identification stage it will be necessary to prioritize these so that a realistic improvement programme can be drawn-up. The factors used in the selection criteria and the prioritization process can be given equal weighting, can be ranked (so that a particular factor which is of importance to the development programme can be emphasised) or can be used in a sequential manner to provide a decision tree.

Most Important Selection Criteria

1. The markets are presently in an unimproved state;

2. they have a special function, such as an assembly market, an urban producer market, or are serving a large rural or urban catchment area;

3. they trade in fresh produce;

4. the sites are on land already owned by local government, a market body authority, or the local community;

5. they can be subject to a formal agreement where the development actions would be implemented through market committees established with the agreement and participation of the traders;

6. there is a willingness on the part of the market traders to improve the efficiency of the present market operations and to accept higher fee or rental charges as a condition of improvements being made;

7. assurances have been obtained that adequate revenues from the improved markets could be generated to cover all operational and maintenance costs and provide funds for further market improvements; and

8. the private sector is willing to take responsibility for improving individual sheds and stalls, and the project limits its activities to investment in the upgrading of "common" basic infrastructure, such as:

Ranking of Market Proposals

Generally, market improvements are only likely to be viable if the levels of investment are relatively modest. The incremental benefits of undertaking the market improvements should provide sufficient revenues to cover all operating costs, including putting aside a fund for future market expansion. Revenues are often likely to be sufficient to cover repayment of capital and interest even assuming a long repayment period and a grace period before repayment. The returns are very sensitive to the daily charges. Thus, after meeting the selection criteria outlined above, the shortlist of proposals should be evaluated and ranked according to:

1. whether they make a significant contribution (in terms of volume turnover) to the trading of fresh produce;

2. their importance in the overall market system, with priority given to unimproved major markets;

3. whether it is possible to use an improved existing market site. A new market site should only need to be considered if it is necessary to replace an existing congested site or if there is an urgent need for expansion because of population growth; and

4. the local development planning framework:

A5.8.2 Basic Questions for Developing a Justification for Market Infrastructure

  • Has consideration been given to whether the development is really necessary?
  • is it clear why there is a need for a new market?
  • have alternatives been considered, such as improving existing markets by rehabilitating or expanding?
  • has thought been given to the consequences of a new market on the environment?
  • have the implications for traffic and parking space been considered?
  • is there a consensus on the financial and economic rationale for the project? Is it agreed that it should be run on a profitmaking or, at least, on a cost-recovery basis, i.e. be "economically sustainable"?
  • what are the traders’, transporters’ and consumers’ reactions to the proposals?
  • is there a possibility or agreement for increasing market user charges?

For larger markets, such as urban wholesale and retail markets, further factors may need to be considered:

  • has thought been given to all the accompanying measures which may be required to protect the economic interest of those traders to be relocated to a new market site?
  • why should traders want to move to a new market?
  • will services (e.g. banks) also be willing to move to the new market?
  • has an estimate been made of how much more traders will have to pay to distribute food from the new market back into town?
  • has the involvement of traders and transporters in the operation of the market and its management been agreed?

Finally, are the next steps on how to proceed with the market development clear?

Source: Tracey-White, 2000.

A5.9 The external review

A5.9.1 The Participatory Approach

The urban communities (e.g. neighbourhoods and sectors) will normally have been consulted during the diagnostic process to get their points of view on local problems and possible solutions. However, between this and the programming stage, some solutions will have gone through a sifting process. In the meantime, local proposals might have undergone radical changes. It will therefore be essential to start discussions during the development programme preparation stage in order to obtain a consensus. Indeed, FSDSs are a very sensitive issue as they have a direct bearing on households’ economic life and urban communities’ social life. In some cases, the team will have to include an urban sociologist and/or persons capable of acting as intermediaries between the team and the urban communities. Discussions will often have to include CLAs decision-makers.

A5.9.2 Suggestions for Maximum Benefit from a Final Review

At the organizing stage:

  • test the all papers in advance so as to ensure that their content is clear and pertinent;
  • carefully select the participants in the discussion. Ensure that all interest groups (traders, transporters, consumers, farmers, extension workers and civil servants in the ministries and local authorities) are represented;
  • ensure that the presence of decision-makers or senior civil servants does not inhibit participation in the discussions;
  • restrict the number of participants so as to get the most out of the discussions.

During the meeting:

  • distribute any additional technical papers only at the end of the meeting so as not to distract participants attention.
  • explain clearly the aims of the discussion session;
  • give the review the feeling of a "working", not an "official", session and limit ceremony as much as possible so as to make the most of the time available for technical discussions.

Minutes of the meeting:

  • appoint a rapporteur to draw up a brief summary of the discussions, criticisms and additional proposals. The items on which agreement is or is not reached should be identified;
  • distribute the minutes of the discussions to the participants;
  • review the case study (especially its conclusions and recommendations) as well as all proposals for action in light of the participants’ discussions, criticisms and recommendations. Prepare a final version for official distribution.

A5.9.3 Workshop Participants

Local Government:

  • Mayor, Deputy Mayor and City Executives;
  • Senior officials of municipalities and other concerned authorities (urban planning, infrastructure development, health, transport, etc.);
  • municipal police and transport police.

Central Government:

  • the Ministry of Agriculture (sections in charge of food production development in rural, periurban and urban areas; food product marketing, food quality control; agricultural extension service; etc.);
  • the Ministry of Trade (section in charge of internal commerce);
  • Ministry of Internal Affairs (sections dealing with municipalities and police);
  • Ministry of Urbanization (sections dealing with urban infrastructure and of issues related to urban food marketing);
  • Ministry of Health (sections concerned with food quality, safety and environmental issues);
  • authorities responsible for transport infrastructure and facilities;
  • universities and research institutions;
  • other concerned institutions;
  • agricultural development banks.

Private sector:

Associations of food producers, transporters and processors, food traders, shopkeepers, street vendors, consumers, Chambers of Commerce and Agriculture, NGOs, etc.

Donors and development agencies:

UNDP, UNCHS/HABITAT, UNICEF, WHO, The World Bank, Regional Development Banks, the European Commission, France, The Netherlands, GTZ, etc.

Regional and national development programmes and networks:

  • Healthy Cities Programmes (WHO);
  • Urban Development Programmes (World Bank, UNDP, UNCHS/Habitat);
  • Urban Management Programmes (World Bank, UNDP, UNCHS/Habitat);
  • Food security programmes;
  • Rural Development Programmes;
  • Urban Poverty Alleviation Programmes;
  • Special Programme for Food Security.

A5.9.4 Managing Workshop Discussions

It is particularly important for discussions to be properly managed when:

  • many social groups are involved;
  • the stakes are high;
  • only a small number of participants actually take part in the discussions;
  • the points of view on the problems dealt with sometimes differ and are rarely based on objective or scientific reasoning.

As a result, the discussions can easily:

  • stray on to matters which are not pertinent and not on the agenda;
  • fail to reach a practical conclusion;
  • revolve around a small group of participants and, therefore, not be representative of the meeting.

Therefore, appropriate management will:

  • focus the discussions on pertinent matters;
  • identify, where appropriate, key items for discussion in separate small working groups to be led by specially selected discussion leaders.
  • encourage all participants to take part in discussions;
  • ensure clear, well argued and practical conclusions and recommendations.

A number of guides and papers are available on holding workshops and seminars and on discussion management techniques. See the special section in the bibliography.

A5.9.5 Resources, Facilities, Equipment and Material Required During Workshops

Human resources:

  • interpreting facilities (if required);
  • two rapporteurs;
  • secretaries/typists with excellent knowledge of Microsoft Office package.


  • adequate meeting room;
  • sound amplification system (depending on size of meeting room, its acoustics and number of participants);
  • air conditioning (if required);

Equipment and instruments:

  • two PCs(*) and a laser printer with new ink cartridge;
  • photocopying facilities with adequate supply of paper;
  • slide projector, overhead projector and large screen;
  • one PC connected to a data projector (for presentations);
  • flipcharts with adequate supply of paper sheets and felt pens (three colours).

For individual participants:

  • paper and pencils;
  • technical documentation;
  • coffeebreaks (depending duration of workshop);
  • lunches (depending on local customs and duration of workshop).

For work groups:

  • flip chart paper and stands with adequate supply of paper;
  • felt pens (three colours) for large writing on flipchart sheets.

(*) Each PC should have:

  • Windows 95 or above;
  • minimum of 64 Mb RAM;
  • Microsoft Office package;
  • Internet access;
  • Adobe Acrobat Reader (freely downloaded from:

A5.10 Workshop agenda and report format (phase 1 and 2)

A5.10.1 Pre-Case Study

"Food Supply and Distribution to (name of city)"


Overview of present and future situations
(urban food security, FSDS structure and functioning, etc.)

FSDS constraints and solutions
Plenary discussions

Issues for in-depth analysis
Plenary discussions

Workshop conclusions and recommendations

Workshop final statement

A5.10.2 Case Study, Policy and Programmes

"FSD Policies, Strategies and Programmes for (name of city)"


Overview of present and future situations
(urban food security, FSDS structure and functioning), etc.

FSDS constraints and solutions
Plenary discussions

Summary of results of specific in-depth analysis
Plenary discussions

Urban FSD policy and strategies
Plenary discussions

FSD development programmes and subprogrammes
Plenary discussions

Workshop conclusions and recommendations

Workshop final statement

A5.10.3 Workshop Report Format (Phase 1)

  • Executive summary;
  • Introduction;
  • Workshop final statement;
  • Brief overview of present and future situation;
  • Summary of diagnosis and selected solutions (revised following workshop discussions);
  • Issues for in-depth analysis (revised following workshop discussions).


  • Agenda of the workshop;
  • Summary of speeches;
  • Maps, drawings and statistical data;
  • Subjects for interinstitutional collaboration;
  • Forms of collaboration with local institutions;
  • Resources which will be made available to the team by different local institutions;
  • List of participants.

A5.10.4 Workshop Report Format (Phase 2)

  • Executive summary;
  • Introduction;
  • Workshop final statement;
  • Brief overview of present and future situation;
  • FSDS constraints and solutions;
  • Summary of results of in-depth analysis (revised following workshop discussions);
  • Urban food supply and distribution policy and strategies (revised following workshop discussions);
  • FSD development programmes and subprogrammes (revised following workshop discussions).


  • Agenda of the workshop;
  • Summary of speeches;
  • Maps, drawings and statistical data;
  • List of participants.

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page