Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Consultas

Fortalecimiento de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos para alcanzar la seguridad alimentaria y afianzar la nutrición en el contexto de la urbanización y la transformación rural

El Grupo de alto nivel de expertos en seguridad alimentaria y nutrición  (GANESAN) está elaborando el informe “Fortalecimiento de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos para alcanzar la seguridad alimentaria y afianzar la nutrición en el contexto de la urbanización y la transformación rural”, a petición del Comité de Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial (CSA). El informe del GANESAN se presentará en el 52.º período de sesiones del CSA en octubre de 2024.

Con esta consulta electrónica, el GANESAN desea conocer su opinión sobre el alcance propuesto para este informe y las preguntas orientativas que figuran a continuación.

ALCANCE Y JUSTIFICACIÓN

Casi el 60 % de la población mundial vive actualmente en núcleos urbanos (ONU DAES, 2018; Acharya et al., 2020). En general, se consideran motores de crecimiento y empleo, donde se produce más del 80 % del producto interno bruto (PIB) mundial. Pero también se enfrentan a enormes desafíos para garantizar el acceso de todos sus residentes a servicios esenciales, como sanidad, educación, transporte y alimentación. La población urbana está aumentando rápidamente, con un incremento particularmente acusado en África y Asia. Por ejemplo, las 15 ciudades del mundo cuya población crece de forma más rápida se encuentran en África. Además de la urbanización, se ha producido una “disociación geográfica” (Langemeyer et al., 2021) entre las ciudades y el suministro de alimentos, debido a la reorientación del uso de la tierra urbana y periurbana en búsqueda de “mayores beneficios”. En este sentido, las ciudades y municipios están perdiendo con rapidez tierras agrícolas periurbanas, que históricamente les han proporcionado alimentos frescos y saludables. Las zonas urbanas también están sufriendo un mayor número de fenómenos meteorológicos extremos que afectan a los medios de vida e ingresos de su población, mientras aumentan las desigualdades entre sus habitantes (Pelling et al., 2021). Estas tendencias implican que las zonas urbanas y periurbanas también concentran riesgos para la inseguridad alimentaria y la malnutrición, tal y como se puso de manifiesto durante la pandemia de la enfermedad por coronavirus (COVID-19) (véase, por ejemplo, Rede PENSSAN, 2021), agravada por desastres naturales y conflictos. Al mismo tiempo, las zonas urbanas y periurbanas tienen múltiples recursos y sirven como centros para la educación, la tecnología y la innovación, los servicios sanitarios y sociales y la producción, elaboración y distribución de alimentos. Todas estas funciones se podrían potenciar.

A menudo, las relaciones económicas y comerciales informales en los sistemas alimentarios en zonas urbanas empobrecidas pueden ser fundamentales para la seguridad alimentaria, pero son ignoradas por políticas y regulaciones. Los sistemas alimentarios informales están formados por una red compleja de proveedores, transportistas, vendedores ambulantes, minoristas y vendedores de alimentos en la vía pública y en los mercados, además de los agricultores, y contribuyen a que los alimentos sean más accesibles y asequibles para los consumidores urbanos. Sin embargo, estos actores del sector informal dependen principalmente de sus propios recursos y capital, y cuentan con muy poco respaldo político para reforzar sus empresas y garantizar la calidad, como apoyo para el acceso a información sobre los mercados, transporte y logística, cadenas de frío o instalaciones de reutilización de residuos (Tefft et al., 2017). De hecho, en ausencia de una planificación específica de los sistemas alimentarios, la venta y el consumo de alimentos altamente procesados está creciendo en la mayoría de los centros urbanos, mientras que el comercio local ­—que ofrece alimentos saludables y frescos a precios asequibles, y a menudo en cantidades más pequeñas— queda relegado, contribuyendo a los denominados “desiertos alimentarios”. Estas tendencias suelen afectar a la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición de forma negativa (Peyton, Moseley y Battersby, 2015; Battersby, 2017; Acharya et al., 2020).

Esta falta de coherencia en materia de políticas pone de relieve una falta general de coordinación entre las políticas y los actores relacionados con la seguridad alimentaria, la agricultura o el medio ambiente y la planificación urbana. Y se ve agravada por la escasez general de datos, análisis y evidencias empíricas a nivel urbano para fundamentar la toma de decisiones sobre políticas alimentarias urbanas y periurbanas. Es por ello que los responsables de formular las políticas tienen dificultades para planificar, priorizar, diseñar y realizar un seguimiento de las intervenciones en los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos, así como para garantizar la coherencia entre políticas y sectores. Además, los gobiernos y otros órganos —como los sistemas de alerta temprana para casos de hambruna (FEWS, por sus siglas en inglés)— no han logrado que el seguimiento de la inseguridad alimentaria en zonas urbanas esté al mismo nivel que el de zonas rurales, limitándose a indicadores muy básicos como precios de los alimentos (Moseley, 2001; Krishnamurthy, Choularton y Kareiva, 2020).

Las ciudades pueden desempeñar un papel vital en la formulación de políticas de los sistemas alimentarios para reforzar su resiliencia de varias maneras. Pueden producir alimentos cultivados localmente o de forma regenerativa cuando proceda, facilitar la producción urbana y periurbana sostenible de alimentos nutritivos, evitar el desperdicio de alimentos aumentando la inversión en bioeconomía circular (definida en términos generales como una economía basada en el uso sostenible, la reutilización y la regeneración de los recursos naturales) y construir mercados inclusivos invirtiendo en infraestructuras para que pequeños comerciantes y minoristas puedan comercializar productos alimenticios más saludables. También pueden promover la resiliencia mitigando los efectos negativos del cambio climático y adaptándose a ellos (GANESAN, 2020; Heck y Alonso, 2021).

La agricultura urbana y periurbana es una opción importante, con efectos potencialmente positivos en la diversidad dietética, la calidad de los espacios urbanos, las acciones comunitarias, y el empoderamiento. Pero, en la mayoría de las ciudades —especialmente en el Sur del mundo— el apoyo estatal a la agricultura urbana y periurbana es limitado. Por el contrario, la regulación actual de las ciudades y el creciente valor de mercado de la tierra periurbana limitan las oportunidades para la producción local. Un estudio reciente de la FAO concluyó que los gobiernos municipales desempeñan un papel sumamente importante en la identificación y conexión de los actores de los sistemas alimentarios a fin de fomentar iniciativas innovadoras comunitarias que contribuyan a mejorar la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición (FAO, 2020). Por ejemplo, ante las dramáticas consecuencias de la pandemia, los huertos domésticos proporcionaron complementos alimenticios nutritivos y saludables y servicios ecosistémicos (Lal, 2020). Los mercados locales se multiplicaron, al igual que las iniciativas de productores familiares para entregar cestas de alimentos frescos a domicilio y las iniciativas de donación de alimentos a comunidades de bajos ingresos. Muchos habitantes de las zonas urbanas —en especial nuevos migrantes, personas sin papeles y trabajadores informales— se vieron obligados a acudir a bancos de alimentos y organizaciones benéficas, con gran detrimento de su dignidad y arbitrio (Rao et al., 2020). Estas experiencias ponen de relieve la importancia y el potencial de la dimensión territorial de los sistemas alimentarios para la realización del derecho humano a la alimentación (Recine et al., 2021).

Dada la importancia social y económica de las zonas urbanas, es imprescindible abordar los desafíos que plantea la urbanización en relación con la transformación rural, a fin de “reconstruir mejor” tras la pandemia de COVID-19 y las perturbaciones de las cadenas de suministro causadas por la guerra en Ucrania, los conflictos internos y los desastres naturales. Es de vital importancia que las políticas aborden la pobreza y la desigualdad, fomenten la resiliencia y la inclusión social y promuevan medios de vida sostenibles. Las necesidades específicas de los diversos contextos rurales y urbanos, la diferencia entre los distintos tipos de zonas urbanas (p. ej. megaciudades y municipios en zonas mayoritariamente rurales) y los vínculos entre ellas en zonas rurales y urbanas deberían tenerse en cuenta a la hora de formular políticas alimentarias. Por ejemplo, la Nueva Agenda Urbana insta a integrar la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional en la planificación urbana y territorial (ONU-Hábitat, 2016). El informe también podría examinar cuestiones específicas relacionadas con la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición a las que se enfrentan las ciudades en situaciones de conflicto, desastres naturales y otras crisis, en especial cuando dependen de alimentos importados y son vulnerables la volatilidad de los precios.

Es necesario un análisis más profundo de los sistemas alimentarios en el contexto de la urbanización y la transformación rural para garantizar la realización del derecho a la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional en sus seis dimensiones (GANESAN, 2020). En particular, el informe podría investigar el potencial de los mercados territoriales e informales, la economía circular y las cadenas de suministro más cortas para reforzar los vínculos entre la producción y el consumo de alimentos urbanos y periurbanos. El papel de los entornos alimentarios en zonas urbanas es especialmente importante, dada la coexistencia de la distribución organizada (supermercados) y los mercados territoriales e informales, y los efectos negativos de la proliferación de supermercados, que relegan a los establecimientos minoristas de venta de alimentos pequeños y/o informales (Peyton et al. 2015). Es por ello que, algunas partes de las ciudades a menudo las más pobres se han convertido en “desiertos alimentarios” sin apenas productos frescos y saludables. Esto afecta a las dietas urbanas, que ya se caracterizan por dar mayor prioridad a alimentos procesados y precocinados. Además, los centros urbanos y sobre todo las zonas de asentamientos informales se suelen caracterizar por la falta de infraestructuras básicas como el acceso a agua potable y aguas residuales. Por tanto, es necesario prestar atención específica a las necesidades de agua y saneamiento en relación con la utilización de alimentos en zonas urbanas y periurbanas.

Al mismo tiempo, en las zonas urbanas y periurbanas albergan hay innovaciones interesantes para la producción, transformación y distribución de alimentos como huertos verticales, grupos de compra ética e innovaciones de comercialización, que podrían reproducirse en otros contextos. Para reforzar el papel de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos, es fundamental reflexionar sobre la estructura de la gobernanza de la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición. Y en especial sobre cómo los ayuntamientos, los expertos en planificación urbana y otros asociados pueden colaborar con actores tradicionalmente involucrados en los sistemas alimentarios y las políticas de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición para potenciar las sinergias. Algunas de las medidas en materia de políticas que se han recomendado en los últimos años para reforzar el papel de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos están relacionadas con la promoción del acceso equitativo a la tierra y los recursos agrícolas productivos para los pequeños productores; la inversión en infraestructuras rurales y urbana; el desarrollo de mercados territoriales y cadenas de suministro cortas; la priorización de la población en situación de pobreza en ciudades y zonas rurales para pueda acceder a alimentos nutritivos y condiciones de vida más saludables; y la anticipación al futuro interconectado de la urbanización y la transformación rural (GANESAN, 2020; Heck y Alonso, 2021).

Sobre la base de los resultados del Grupo de trabajo de composición abierta del CSA sobre urbanización, transformación rural e implicaciones para la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición (CFS 2017/44/6 y CFS 2016/43/11), la bibliografía reciente y los debates sobre políticas, el informe examinará estas cuestiones y formulará recomendaciones sobre políticas para el CSA.

PREGUNTAS PARA ORIENTAR LA CONSULTA ELECTRÓNICA SOBRE EL ALCANCE DEL INFORME DEL GANESAN

El GANESAN desea conocer su opinión sobre el alcance propuesto del informe “Fortalecimiento de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos para alcanzar la seguridad alimentaria y afianzar la nutrición en el contexto de la urbanización y la transformación rural”. En particular, les invita a:

A

Compartir sus comentarios sobre los objetivos y el contenido propuesto de este informe. ¿Considera que el alcance propuesto es suficientemente amplio para analizar y debatir las cuestiones fundamentales relacionadas con el papel de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos en el logro de la seguridad alimentaria y la mejora de la nutrición? ¿Hay alguna laguna u omisión importante?

B

Compartir buenas prácticas y experiencias exitosas sobre el fortalecimiento de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos en el contexto de la urbanización y la transformación rural, incluidos casos de emergencias o conflictos.

C

Compartir bibliografía, estudios de casos y datos recientes que puedan ayudar a responder a las siguientes preguntas:

1.            ¿Cuáles son los principales obstáculos que dificultan la contribución de los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos a la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición?

2.            ¿Cómo se pueden transformar los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos de forma que sean más equitativos y accesibles, tanto para sus actores como en términos de los resultados en materia de seguridad alimentaria y nutrición?

3.            ¿Cómo se puede reforzar la resiliencia de las cadenas urbanas de suministro de alimentos —formales e informales, locales y mundiales— a fin de garantizar la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición en entornos urbanos?

4.            ¿Qué se debe cambiar en la planificación urbana para proporcionar mejor apoyo a todas las dimensiones de la seguridad alimentaria, incluido el apoyo a los derechos humanos, el arbitrio y la sostenibilidad? ¿Cuáles son algunas de las medidas que pueden fortalecer el arbitrio de los actores locales en los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos? 

5.            ¿Cómo pueden los gobiernos nacionales y municipales fomentar ciudades y pueblos con bajas emisiones de carbono, inclusivos, relativamente autosuficientes y resilientes, a fin de impulsar la mejora de la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición a raíz del cambio climático y otras crisis?

6.            ¿Cuáles son las políticas más apropiadas (y las lagunas en las políticas ya existentes) en zonas urbanas y rurales para abordar cuestiones relativas a la tenencia de la tierra, la expansión urbana en tierras agrícolas y la creciente competencia por los recursos naturales?

7.            ¿Cómo pueden los sistemas alimentarios urbanos y periurbanos garantizar que se satisfacen las necesidades alimentarias y nutricionales de grupos específicos de personas, como migrantes, desplazados internos, niños, adolescentes, etc.?

8.            ¿Cuáles son los posibles beneficios y desafíos de los mercados territoriales para el fortalecimiento de la seguridad alimentaria y la nutrición de las poblaciones urbanas?

9.            ¿De qué forma puede generar beneficios climáticos secundarios para todos y reforzar la resiliencia al cambio climático la incorporación de prácticas de agricultura resiliente al clima y economía circular?

10.         ¿Cómo se puede involucrar y empoderar a la ciudadanía a fin de impulsar procesos inclusivos, transparentes y participativos para las transformaciones urbanas, velando por las sinergias y complementariedad con los ayuntamientos?

11.         ¿Qué experiencias de comunidades urbanas para aumentar el acceso a alimentos frescos y dietas saludables pueden inspirar políticas públicas más amplias?

EL GANESAN utilizará los resultados de esta consulta para elaborar el borrador cero del informe y realizar una nueva consulta electrónica. Posteriormente será revisado por pares y se presentará al equipo de redacción y al Comité Directivo del GANESAN para su finalización y aprobación.

Les agradecemos de antemano sus comentarios y contribuciones sobre el alcance de este informe del GANESAN. Los comentarios son bienvenidos en los idiomas inglés, francés y español.

¡El HLPE-FSN espera una consulta rica!

Évariste Nicolétis, Coordinador del GANESAN-FSN

Paola Termine, oficial de programas del GANESAN-FSN

 


BIBLIOGRAFÍA

Acharya, G. Cassou, E. Jaffee, S., Ludher, E.K. 2020. RICH Food, Smart City: How Building Reliable, Inclusive, Competitive, and Healthy Food Systems is Smart Policy for Urban Asia. Washington, DC, World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/35137   

Battersby, J. 2017. Food system transformation in the absence of food system planning: the case of supermarket and shopping mall retail expansion in Cape Town, South Africa. Built Environment, 43(3): 417-430.

FAO. 2020. Ciudades y gobiernos locales a la vanguardia en la construcción de sistemas alimentarios inclusivos y resilientes: Principales resultados de la encuesta de la FAO "Sistemas alimentarios urbanos y COVID-19". Roma.

Heck, S. & Alonso, S. 2021. Resilient Cities Through Sustainable Urban and Peri-Urban Agrifood Systems. Montpellier, France, CGIAR. Resilient-Cities.pdf (storage.googleapis.com)

GANESAN. 2020. Seguridad alimentaria y nutrición: elaborar una descripción global de cara a 2030. Un

informe del Grupo de alto nivel de expertos en seguridad alimentaria y nutrición del Comité de

Seguridad Alimentaria Mundial, Roma. https://www.fao.org/3/ca9731es/ca9731es.pdf

Krishnamurthy, P. K., Choularton, R. J., & Kareiva, P. 2020. Dealing with uncertainty in famine predictions: How complex events affect food security early warning skill in the Greater Horn of Africa. Global Food Security, 26: 100374.

Lal, R. 2020. Home gardening and urban agriculture for advancing food and nutritional security in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Food Security, 12: 871-876. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12571-020-01058-3

Langemeyer, J., Madrid-López, C., Mendoza Beltrán, A. & Villalba Mendez, G. 2021. Urban agriculture — A necessary pathway towards urban resilience and global sustainability? Landscape and Urban Planning, 210: 104055. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204621000189

Moseley, W. G. 2001. Monitoring urban food security in Sub-Saharan Africa. African Geographical Review, 21(1): 81-90.

Pelling, M., Chow, W. T. L., Chu, E., Dawson, R., Dodman, D., Fraser, A., Hayward, B. et al. 2021. A climate resilience research renewal agenda: learning lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic for urban climate resilience. Climate and Development, 0(0): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2021.1956411

Peyton, S., Moseley, W. & Battersby, J. 2015. Implications of supermarket expansion on urban food security in Cape Town, South Africa. African Geographical Review, 34(1): 36-54.

Rao, N., Narain, N., Chakraborty, S., Bhanjdeo, A. & Pattnaik, A. 2020. Destinations Matter: Social Policy and Migrant Workers in the Times of Covid. The European Journal of Development Research, 32(5): 1639–1661. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7590571/

Recine, E., Preiss, P.V., Valencia, M. et al. 2021. The Indispensable Territorial Dimension of Food Supply: A View from Brazil During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Development, 64: 282–287. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41301-021-00308-x    

Rede Brasileira de Pesquisa em Soberania e Segurança Alimentar (Rede PENSSAN). 2021. VIGISAN National Survey of Food Insecurity in the Context of the Covid-19 Pandemic in Brazil https://olheparaafome.com.br/VIGISAN_AF_National_Survey_of_Food_Insecurity.pdf

Tefft, J., Jonasova, M., Adjao, R. & Morgan, A. 2017. Food systems for an urbanizing world. Washington DC, World Bank and Rome, FAO.

UNDESA (UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs). 2018. 2018 Revision of World Urbanization Prospects. New York. Cited June 2022. https://desapublications.un.org/file/615/download

ONU-Hábitat (Programa de las Naciones Unidas para los Asentamientos Humanos). 2016. The New Urban Agenda. Nairobi. https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2021/10/nueva-agenda-urbana-ilustrada.pdf

 

Esta actividad ya ha concluido. Por favor, póngase en contacto con [email protected] para mayor información.

*Pinche sobre el nombre para leer todos los comentarios publicados por ese miembro y contactarle directamente
  • Leer 96 contribuciones
  • Ampliar todo

Dr. Andrew Schmitz

University of Florida
United States of America

Three key issues that need more attention:

  1. food storage
  2. food waste and
  3. transportation

which are linked in any meaningful value chain analyses In many regions ,and for many commodities , storage facilities if they do exist are inadequate . Food waste is a major concern and more analyses of this topic is badly needed For example most analysts miss the fact that eating and cooking meals at home generate more food waste than eating away from home The cost of transportation has risen sharply and transportation linkages connecting production sources and consumer demands ,as shown in supply chain analyses , are often non existent.

For references:

Andrew Schmitz, Charles B. Moss, Troy G. Schmitz, G. Cornelis van Kooten and H. Carole Schmitz (2022) Agricultural Policy, Agribusiness, and Rent-Seeking Behaviour.

Dr. Andrew Schmitz

Ben Hill Griffin, Jr., Eminent Scholar and Professor

Food and Resource Economics, University of Florida

Dr. Pradip Dey

ICAR-AICRP (STCR), Indian Institute of Soil Science, Bhopal
India

Dear FSN Members and others,

Good evening from India!

Kindly find below the comments w.r.t. point no. 10 about citizen engagement vis-a-vis capacity building:

Capacity building - at both individual and institutional level, greater involvement of private sector through Public Private Partnership and better awareness is important. Top-down anti-corruption practices and national level approaches to improving accountability mechanisms have often failed in fragile and conflict-affected situations. In contrast, identifying and supporting local accountability mechanisms, strengthening partnerships, and supporting collaborative governance and capacity building has been shown to be more effective in these contexts. The accountability triangle involving Citizen, Policymakers and Public Private Partnership provides a way to understand successes and failures along the service delivery chain by analyzing the relationships between policymakers/politicians, service providers and citizens. 

With warm regards 

Dear Évariste Nicolétis and Paola Termine,

This is an important step that can address various socio-ecological and economic challenges related to urbanisation and sustainability. I appreciate you for taking this timely and important topic for consultation.

My comments will focus more on gaps in the scope related to urban agriculture that address questions A and B.

A. Do you find the proposed scope comprehensive to analyze and discuss the key issues concerning the role of urban and peri-urban food systems in achieving food security and nutrition? Are there any major gaps or omissions?

  1. Recognising multifunctionality of urban agriculture: In the context of urbanisation, urban agriculture can serve multiple functions in addition to contributing to food security and nutrition. Recognising the multifunctionality of urban agriculture is crucial to explore its overall sustainability potential including contributing to food security and nutrition. The scope of this HLPE report has focused on mere food security and nutrition aspects of urban agriculture and has not addressed its multifunctionality. This might invite unwarranted sustainability challenges as it may be interpreted as mere expansion of present modes of food production into the urban areas. If urban agriculture can contribute to sustainability along with ensuring food security, it must be integrated into the urban fabric and it needs to consider all social, ecological, cultural, and economic outcomes urban agriculture can offer. It would be great if the report incorporates these aspects into its scope.
  2. Recognising diversity of urban agriculture practices: There are multitudes of urban agriculture practices. However, the scope of the report seems to focus more on land-based urban agricultural practices which is mostly mere expansion of conventional agriculture to urban areas. Although it is important to bring all possible unused urban land under food production, it may also lead to challenges that the dominant agri-food system already eliciting in the rural hinterlands. Also, such urban agriculture practices will not be well-integrated into the urban fabric. Therefore, to ensure long-lasting and sustainable urban agricultural practices, the emphasis of the report should be to promote various types of small-scale urban agricultural practices that are well-integrated into the urban fabric and use all otherwise unused spaces for food production. The types of urban agriculture practices that needs more policy attention and promotion may vary depending upon the geographical context and local specificities. However, there should be special emphasis not to ignore small-scale and non-commercial urban agricultural practices in the policy support.
  3. Emphasis on ecological, circular, and resource-efficient production methods: The scope of the HLPE report do not speak about sustainable production methods of urban agriculture that needs to be adopted in order to ensure ecological sustainability in addition to food security and nutrition. Ecological, circular, and resource-efficient production methods need to receive adequate attention in the HLPE report. As there is constant competition for resources in the urban areas, special emphasis should be given to develop and promote practices that are resource efficient. Ecological production practices need to be emphasised because otherwise urban agriculture may act against the concept of ecological sustainability and health if more agrochemicals are introduced into the urban areas. Also, to well-integrate into the urban fabric and to ensure circular food production, there should be more focus on integrating urban waste management with urban agriculture.
  4. Overcoming Global North-South divide in urban agriculture research: There is a large divide between Global North and Global South in carrying out the research on urban agriculture. Institutions from Global North has dominated in urban agriculture research and this has resulted in providing a world view that is largely reflective of urban agriculture practices from the Global North (Pinheiro and Govind 2020) (document attached). Therefore, urban agriculture practices and its intricacies from the Global South has been largely absent in the peer-reviewed research literature. It would be pertinent for the HLPE report to consider this knowledge gap and take measures to overcome it.
  5. Gaps need to be addressed by policy actors:
    1. Much of the interventions on urban agriculture, especially government initiatives, largely focuses on large cities. New interventions for urban agriculture promotion in large cities may act as mitigation measures to address climate change whereas in small towns and cities, urban agriculture can offer adaptation measures. Moreover, in small-towns and cities have more flexibility to incorporate urban agriculture in their interventions to build edible urban areas. HLPE report needs to emphasis this aspect to avoid bias in the interventions.
    2. The scope of the HLPE report do not talk much about inclusiveness in the interventions for urban agriculture. It needs conscious efforts to make sure that the benefits of urban agriculture are extended to all sections of society in an affordable and culturally appropriate way.
    3. Also, there should be integration of activities of various government departments to make sure that adequate steps are taken to integrate waste management with urban food production.
    4. Integrating urban agriculture into the urban short food supply chains are another area that need innovative policy attention. It may not be always possible to integrate urban agriculture produces into the existing marketing channels. Innovative measures need to be taken to create new urban short food supply chains where even small-quantities of home-grown or garden-surplus produces can be sold.
    5. There is a dearth of quantitative data on urban agriculture practices, its focus and production, and other sustainability outcomes. It will be pertinent to keep a database to keep track of urban agriculture policy interventions so that adequate measures can be taken for further improvement.

B. Share good practices and successful experiences on strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems in the context of urbanization and rural transformation, including in the case of emergencies or conflicts.

a. In one of the Indian states, Kerala, there were government interventions for promotion of urban home gardening in private residential spaces across the state irrespective of the size or population of the urban areas. Kerala has a rural-urban continuum and high urban population (almost half of the total population). From 2012-2013 to 2021-22, the government has taken measures to incorporate subsidised distribution of containers planted with vegetable seedlings at a cost as low as less than 7 USD, after 75 % subsidy. This enabled people from almost all sections of society to start home-garden vegetable cultivation in all possible spaces in their residential areas, be it ground, rooftop, parapet, balcony or top of boundary walls. Also, there were measures to distribute drip or wick irrigation units suitable for small house lots to ensure water-efficient vegetable gardening. In addition, there were also interventions to distribute waste management units under subsidy schemes so that home garden vegetable cultivation can be integrated with household waste management. These activities, carried out as part of ‘Promotion of urban clusters and waste management’ under Vegetable Development Program focused on reviving the traditional practices of home gardening with small-scale technological support to make it suitable for space-crunch urban areas. In other states where respective state governments promote urban home gardening/kitchen gardening in India, the scope has been limited only to large cities with a higher population.

b. In one district centre in Kerala, there is an initiative led by a social media collective (Facebook-based agriculture group operated in the local language Malayalam) to link home-grown food production with urban short food supply chains. They use the Facebook group to disseminate information on the types and quantities of the produces that will be available in the urban weekly market. This group takes stringent measures to ensure that all the produce sold there is grown completely organically and ensures “know your farmer” or “vegetables with an address” to the customers. More details can be found in Pinheiro (200). The document is attached here.

Enclosures for further reading:

Pinheiro, A. (2022). Urban home gardening movement in Kerala—Role of social media collectives. LEISA-India. https://leisaindia.org/urban-home-gardening-movement-in-kerala-role-of-…

Pinheiro, A., & Govind, M. (2020). Emerging Global Trends in Urban Agriculture Research: A Scientometric Analysis of Peer-reviewed Journals. Journal of Scientometric Research, 9(2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.9.2.20

Dear FSN Moderator and the HLPE team, thank-you for the opportunity to provide inputs during this scoping phase. My notes can be found below. Looking forward to the report.

Best Dr. A Trevenen-Jones

The outline scope of the report indicates a much-needed attention to the widening inequalities in urban food systems driven by the unique food environment, insufficient understanding and intervention around the informal food sector, aspects of gender and dietary challenges alongside multiplier Anthropocene impacts. It also highlights the urban-peri-urban and rural food system connectivity, but perhaps more could be developed with respect to referencing a sustainable food systems framework. While best practices regarding what city governments and partners are doing to transform their food systems are being shared by cities across the world, through for example, platforms like the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact (awards) and Food Action Cities accessible databases, less appears to be shared about learnings and monitoring and evaluation – about what worked and what didn’t, what and how just food transformation was monitored and how communities moved forward. This is of value given the context specific character of food systems and governance and that everyone is learning and course correcting along the way.

Coverage of the UNFSS Coalitions, as interlinked in an ‘’ecosystem’’ of support to regional, national, sub-national including local governments with special mention of the Coalition on Inclusive and Sustainable Urban Food Systems and updates (if possible) as per the UNFSS Stocktaking in mid-2023 would be meaningful and can provide a dynamic resource within the report.  Cross referencing with key reports like SOFI (2022) and the more recent Asia-Pacific SOFI as well as the Global Nutrition report provides further depth and a national and global perspective.

Cities/urban communities’ key role in invigorating urban-rural and regional connectivity and accelerated FS transformation is recognised in the scoping. It is worth mentioning that this is not only through the usual staple and fresh food demand but also by providing strong consumption-production signals for a diversity of sustainable and resilient food relationships through circular (‘’zero-waste’’) food systems, regenerative rural landscapes and social and technological innovations. In this respect, these dimensions should be further explored,

  • indigenous knowledge,
  • cultural practices,
  • food as social relationships,
  • intermediary cities as hubs connecting smaller towns, rural communities and larger cities,
  • small farmers and variety of multiple food systems linked SMEs,
  • storage and cool room value additions,
  • food handling and safety knowledge and practices,
  • diversified food system livelihoods especially in the informal sector,
  • better leveraging of how food is distributed through informal and formal channels including reaching those living in poverty and vulnerable to all forms of malnutrition, and the value of vendor/farmer and consumer fresh food markets as places where food knowledge and practices are shared and reinforced,
  • formal governance e.g. city governments/municipalities vs informal governance e.g. urban ‘’traditional’’ fresh food market committees as well as multi-level governance and multi-stakeholder mechanisms as mandated and as per practices, further noting the extent of effective local agency to reshape food environments/systems,
  • alignment around ‘’One city, one food system’’ type principles whether through formal or informal/voluntary partnerships,
  • positive implications of supermarket growth and aspirational low-middle income communities e.g. food safety, diversity and price of food, shifting consumer preferences,
  • social and ecological resilience,
  • access to sub-national food systems data – quantitative and qualitative, as well as
  • gender mainstreaming and youth engagement - as designed and practiced.

Moreover, as cities expand and more people reside in cities issues of ‘’food deserts’’ and urban creep into the peri-urban surrounds arise as such what constitutes urban vs peri-urban food system, agency and inclusion, nexus relationships e.g. food, municipal water, renewable energy, as well as impact on affordability and physical access to safe, nutritious and diverse foods should be clarified – with referencing of Dietary Quality.

A final note on context, while this matters, practices and learnings from other cities/cases offer invaluable tools, learnings and approaches which can be copied and or adapted. In this respect while there are disparities between developed and developing countries and cities exemplars offered by the cities of Baltimore, Bristol, Nairobi, Dhaka, Quelimane, New York and many others should be considered – and selected based on inspiration and criteria like city ‘’size and administrative mandate’’ and address of equity, urban planning innovation or best practice, ‘’one city’’ partnerships, farmers markets etc.

Suggested resources:

Dear CFS/HLPE-FSN Team,

 Please find my Inputs,

  • Urban growth borders have become a key instrument for containment, restricting urban growth and separating urban and rural areas.
  • Unplanned "urban sprawls" are environmentally unsustainable and consume valuable land resources, often fertile agricultural land.
  • In the last 4 decades in some cities we have witnessed the impact of urbanization on the natural resources, decline of vegetation more than 60% and water bodies more than 70%, with an increase of temperature by ~2 to 2.5 ºC.
  • The food pattern of the population has significantly changed, from the last few decades due to various reasons like migration for job, education, business and on transfer etc. The food consumption is not nutritious because of adapting to new trends and change of life style and adopting throw away culture. There is a shift in cultural and traditional practise of food habits.

On behalf of We Effect, a Swedish cooperative development cooperation organisation, I share cases and comments collected from our work with partner organisations.

We have numerous cases of home gardens. First out is a case from Zimbabwe where one of our partner organisations has seen that with the adoption of organic farming input, farming costs have been reduced by more than 90% (Cost of producing a 200L cow fertiliser cost US$5 while cost of Ammonium Nitrate inorganic fertiliser is US$54-$75). Members of our supported partner organisation are now producing food at a minimal cost. In Gambiza, Chiundura, Getrude who relies on gardening projects testifies that besides having the organic fertilisers (fish hydrolysate and lab serum) helping in the growth of her vegetables, she has realised that they control aphids and help keep the crops healthy. She has moved from using artificial fertilisers ever since she got the information from the organisation Women and Land in Zimbambwe (WLZ) about organic liquid fertilisers. Training initiatives have also attracted many people to join WLZ groups and with it, there has been an increase in WLZ membership with the final result of 95% of members applying climate resilient farming practices.

More cases and comments are attached:

Attached: Case of domestic organoponic gardens in housing cooperatives in Central America.

Attached: Case of azolla crop cultivation on Palestine

Attached: Cases of urban and peri-urban low water usage agriculture in Palestine

Attached: Comments from our Zambia land office on the two questions of: 

  • What are the most appropriate policies (and gaps in existing policies) along the rural-urban continuum to address issues of land tenure, urban expansion into farmland and the growing competition for natural resources?
  • In what ways can the incorporation of climate resilient agricultural and circular economy practices in urban and peri-urban agriculture provide climate co-benefits for all and enhance climate resilience?

If more best practice cases of home gardens are of interest, or more in-depth information about the ones listed above, we are happy to contribute with such.

TMG’s work as part of the Urban Food Futures programme addressed the two questions:

1)How can urban and peri-urban food systems be transformed and made more equitable and accessible both for food system actors and in terms of food security and nutrition outcomes?

2) How can citizens be engaged and empowered to drive inclusive, transparent, participatory processes for urban transformations, ensuring synergies and complementarity with city councils?

Setting out at the height of the Covid-19 crisis, our work was driven by one overarching question: how have low-income communities in the three cities responded to the impact of the pandemic on food security? And, subsequently, what can we learn from immediate community responses to design pathways for transformation of urban food systems? To achieve food system transformation, therefore, we need to re-politicize issues around food and hunger. While celebrating individual successes, the impact we want to see goes beyond the single project. One of our main objectives for the second phase of the programme is to establish “Urban Nutrition Hubs” as spaces for learning, dialogue, and piloting of innovation. Using a living lab approach, the Hubs will serve as spaces for co-creating knowledge with local communities and other actors, and driving the implementation of our programmatic pathways as we continue to pilot and link multiple local innovations with municipal action. To achieve food and nutrition security in urban areas, food and nutrition policies must be fundamentally rethought from the point of view of the needs of those who are experiencing food and nutrition insecurity. Food security policies tend to neglect cities as a distinct entity requiring distinct policies, and they tend to focus on increasing food production. This negates the recommendations arising from a range of findings that show that food insecurity is often tied to income, gender, and social status. Strategies to address food and nutrition insecurity in informal settlements and low-income areas require solutions beyond traditional strategies that are often focussed on production-oriented solutions. If those had worked in the past, lives in informal settlements would look different today. Transformative changes to improve urban food security and nutrition must employ different strategies informed by local realities and must centre the consumer perspective. This requires a commitment to understanding the complex realities of urban low-income areas and informal settlements and acknowledge the drivers of food insecurity, particularly in the light of crises. Urban Nutrition Hubs are living labs in real-life settings where solutions to food system challenges emerge. Urban Nutrition Hubs are characterised by their multifunctionality. Food is symbolic of identity and collective culture and is often manifested in unpaid care work provided by women on farms, in kitchens, as vendors, or in other communal roles. Urban Nutrition Hubs will serve as places to advocate for women’s rights and support the empowerment of women through networking and advocacy programmes. 

TMG's Pathways for Transformation:

https://downloads.ctfassets.net/rrirl83ijfda/6mSvmaV4SgT1Kedf6dS0jM/a24…

Dr. Marc Wegerif

University of Pretoria. Dept. Anthropology, Archaeology and Development Studies
Sudáfrica
Dear Moderator and HLPE



Please find a submission in response to your "HLPE-FSN e-consultation on Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation". 

Thanks for this consultation and the important initiative. I hope some of the ideas are useful for this important piece of work that the HLPE is undertaking.

The scope and rationale is generally good. The current scope is completely gender blind. Please do not proceed with this without giving good attention to the particular roles and vulnerabilities of women within food systems. If you would like to follow up on any particular suggestions, feel free to contact me. 

My comments are structured in response to the consultation guiding questions. Apologies that some of it is rushed. Giving ideas seemed more important than polished answers.



Stay well




Dr. Marc Wegerif

Development Studies Programme Coordinator, Department of Anthropology, Archaeology and Development Studies, Faculty of Humanities, University of Pretoria, South Africa

Inputs 

A

Share your comments on the objectives and proposed content of this report as outlined above.

Do you find the proposed scope comprehensive to analyze and discuss the key issues concerning the role of urban and peri-urban food systems in achieving food security and nutrition? Are there any major gaps or omissions?

Good piece of work. The scope is clear and comprehensive. Good to see the attention given to the importance of ‘informal’ food systems and the “complex network of suppliers, transporters, hawkers, retailers and street and market food vendors, in addition to farmers” that are involved. Also the reference to territorial markets and the role of municipalities are particularly positive.

While talking food systems, one does not get a very clear sense of a food system approach. I would expect more attention to the way in which food systems are shaped by, and in turn shape, the wider social, economic and ecological conditions.

The line starting at bottom of page two does direct us to some of these issues, but that line does not explicitly mention food system and we don’t get explicit acknowledgment of the role of food systems in relation to these social and ecological issues.

Missing is:

- Reference to gender and the particular roles and vulnerabilities of women.

- Clarity on what is meant by “urban and peri-urban food systems”. I understand an urban food system to be the food system that provides food to the residents of an urban area, or urban areas. That then incorporates the food system from inputs, primary production, processing, transporting, distribution, retailing through to consumption. One could imagine some people reading the scope and rationale document and seeing the urban and peri-urban food system as being what happens in urban and peri-urban areas. The holistic approach I am suggesting is the most appropriate way to also address the link with rural areas.

- Attention to the livelihood, business, and livelihood creating role and opportunities in urban and peri-urban food systems. Food systems do, and need to, create livelihoods and broad based business opportunities.

- Attention to the social dynamics of food systems. They can build or undermine social cohesion.

- Enough attention to assessing the ecological (environmental) impacts of food systems and the need for ecologically regenerative food systems.

- Attention to what one could think of as “middle-ground, neither local nor global, food systems” (Wegerif & Wiskerke, 2017). The mention of “short supply chains” doesn’t cover this and is problematic in other ways, as I shall explain below. The reality is that much food needed in cities, especially heavy staples, has to come from some distance. But this does not have to be through global supply chains. There are two key issues that need more attention: 1) the mid-distance, of rural hinterlands of a country and intra-regional trade that might cover some distance, but are very different from depending on global food systems and global supply chains for food; and 2) the nature of the actors and social and economic relations involved in these food flows even when they cover some distance.

- Power and inequality in the framing of the issue and focus of the study. I put these two important issues together as they are so interlinked. Food systems are shaped by power and they can drive greater inequality and with it greater accumulation of not just wealth, but also power, or they can be more equitable and move societies to be more equitable. This exercise needs to be very cognisant of power and inequality, it needs to explore in looking at existing food systems and proposing any interventions who the winners and losers are, who owns what and who gets what. It needs to look at what power is shaping food systems and the policies related to them and interventions that are made and not made.

- Food utilisation issues that relate to food choices and health issues. These do directly impact food and nutrition security outcomes. Perhaps, to bring this out alongside other factors, the triple burden of poor nutrition concept would be useful.

Some debates:

- The notion of supply chains does not fit with the reality of many urban food systems that are better understood as the complex networks as mentioned in the document. The difference is important because the study needs to understand the nature of relations involved and in many cities in the South and these are not ‘supply chain’ relations, so they should not be assumed to be or be judged in relation to ‘supply chain’ thinking. The other way in which ‘short supply chains’ don’t fit, is the undefined notion of ‘short’, as covered in the note on ‘middle-ground’ above. It would be problematic to start out research with normative assumptions that short is always necessarily better, especially taking into account the rural producers as well as urban eaters.

- The notion of informal is problematic due to the lack of clarity about what it means (Dell'Anno, 2022), its description of something by what it is not, which has a built in assumption about what it should be and therefore about its inferiority in relation to that ideal. And this is not just a theoretical argument; we see the prejudice against the informal play out in state actions (Battersby, 2020; Kiaka et al., 2021; Skinner, 2018; Wegerif, 2020). It is also problematic to think, as many do, of food systems that are dominant in their contexts, supply most of the food for urban eaters, and involve an array of forms of taxations, regulation and registration (such as of market traders and small shop owners), as ‘informal’. I appreciate your centring of ‘informal’ in the scoping document as it is a known term and your use of it shows recognition of much of the food system of cities in the global south, but I would at the same time appeal to the team to look beyond the notion of informal, to explore the actual nature of these urban food systems, to understand their organising logic, and to not start out prejudiced with assumptions of ‘formal’ as a standard to reach and measure the rest against. This piece of work could make a useful contribution by questioning and exploring other options to the concept of informal for describing the most important food systems for those in poverty in our cities.

B

Share good practices and successful experiences on strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems in the context of urbanization and rural transformation, including in the case of emergencies or conflicts.

The good practices that I want to urge greater attention to are the what the subaltern in cities of the global south are doing themselves. That is what those in poverty create for themselves to meet their needs for food and livelihoods. Much of this falls into what gets termed ‘informal’. But informal in fact covers many things, not all related to those in poverty. The issue is to value and learn from what the poor and oppressed do themselves.

The work of Jane Battersby and others linked to the Hungry Cities Partnership has revealed some of these important good practices, at least the importance for food supply of the ‘informal’ parts of the food system (Battersby et al., 2016; Battersby & Watson, 2018; Haysom, 2015; Rudolph et al., 2021; Skinner, 2016; Skinner & Haysom, 2016).

Work on urban subaltern studies from south Asia, such as by Bayat and Roy, have lessons for us on urban food systems, even if their own work is not food focussed (Bayat, 2000; Roy, 2005, 2011).

 

My own work on the feeding of Dar es Salaam shows good practices in how a symbiotic food system, with multitudes of actors and no corporate vertical integration, feeds a large and fast growing city (Wegerif, 2020; Wegerif, 2014; Wegerif & Hebinck, 2016; Wegerif & Martucci, 2019).

Planning, urban plans, infrastructure, and food system governance that creates space for food trade, for food markets, and for the many (including the unruly) initiatives of the sub-altern is good practice (Battersby & Watson, 2019; Skinner & Watson, 2020; Wegerif & Kissoly, 2022; Zhong et al., 2019) and these should be useful (Béné & Devereux, 2023; Haysom, 2022).

I have current and ongoing work looking at street traders selling fresh produce and their contribution to food access and food systems as a whole in South Africa. This contribution is happening despite the high level of corporate concentration in food systems in South Africa. This, I would argue, is a good practice. As work is ongoing, much has not been published yet, but a few things related to this have come out and more is on the way (Tempia et al., 2023; Wegerif, 2022a).

C

Share recent literature, case studies and data that could help answer the following questions:

1.            What are the main bottlenecks hampering the contribution of urban and peri-urban food systems to food security and nutrition?

Corporate concentration in food systems including increasing financialisation (Greenberg, 2015, 2017; Heijden & Vink, 2013; Wegerif & Anseeuw, 2020). Also policy makers’ and planners’ neglect or active undermining of parts of the food system. We need far more attention to the impacts and implications of financialisaton in the global food system.

2.            How can urban and peri-urban food systems be transformed and made more equitable and accessible both for food system actors and in terms of food security and nutrition outcomes?

Learn from and build on how the subaltern organise food systems. Multitudes of actors of similar scale in symbiotic relations. Grow the food system through replication, not scaling up. Spaces for markets in cities within walking distance of all residents. Local small shops. Bicycle based distribution. Certain levels of protection from the vagaries of international trade and non-food influences such as exchange rate fluctuations. Primarily agroecological production. Autonomy of farmers and other actors in food systems. I have put references for my work on this, such as (Wegerif, 2020), here are a few more other writings of value among many other works (De Schutter, 2010; Gliessman, 2018; Mier y Terán Giménez Cacho et al., 2018; Rosset et al., 2011; Van der Ploeg, 2008, 2014)

3.            How can urban food supply chains, formal and informal, local and global, be made more resilient to ensure food security and nutrition within urban settings?

First move away from ‘food supply chains’ thinking that is rooted in corporate practices that prioritise accumulation for the few and do not work for the majority. We don’t need to make ‘supply chains’ more resilient, we need socially and ecologically regenerative food systems. I believe my answer to question 2 above covers some of this. The full elaboration will need a lot more space than this brief input.

What I will add here is the need to recognise the ways in which market relations are socially (as well as economically) embedded and to then seek ways to enhance the best in us; the collaborations between actors that keep food systems more collaborative, inclusive, and equitable (Ndhlovu, 2022; Ostrom, 1990, 2010; Zak, 2011).

4.            What changes are needed in urban planning to better support all dimensions of food security – including support for human rights, agency and sustainability? Which are some of the measures that can strengthen the agency of local actors in urban and peri-urban food systems? 

Space for the initiatives of the subaltern based on recognising their agency. Plan for space for food markets and trading within walking distance of all in the cities. Move away from outdated three party (state, private sector, community) ideas of stakeholder involvement. Ensure infrastructure and technology that enables multitudes of actors of a small-scale. Avoid concentration of ownership, production, and processing. Grow through replication, not scaling up.  Some references (Skinner & Watson, 2020; Wegerif, 2022b; Wegerif & Kissoly, 2022; Zhong et al., 2019).

5.            How can national and municipal governments strengthen the potential for low-carbon, inclusive, relatively self-sufficient and resilient cities and towns to drive improved food security and nutrition in the wake of climate change and other crises?

I believe my answers on some of the above cover this to some extent. These are big questions that I can’t fully address in this short input.

6.            What are the most appropriate policies (and gaps in existing policies) along the rural-urban continuum to address issues of land tenure, urban expansion into farmland and the growing competition for natural resources?

I have touched on some of what is needed above. Let me emphasis here some of the main problems (Gaps). One is the focus on corporate supply and value chains and efforts to incorporate other actors into these rather than support real and living alternatives. Another is under valuing and undermining what the subaltern do themselves. And another is overlooking power in food systems. And, last I will state here is a continued failure by decision makers to truly take a holistic food system approach. By that I mean the failure to fully factor in and value in our analysis and interventions the full social, economic, and ecological contribution of food systems as elaborated in a range of documents (FAO, 2018; HLPE, 2020).

7.            How can urban and peri-urban food systems ensure that food and nutrition needs of specific groups of people, such as migrants, the internally-displaced, children, adolescent, etc., are met?

My suggestions above will assist with this, in particular the focus on food systems of and for the sub-altern. This includes recognising and working with their agency.

8.            What are the potential benefits and challenges of territorial markets for strengthening food security and nutrition for urban populations?

More diversified multi-actor food systems with greater autonomy from corporate control (CSM, 2016).

9.            In what ways can the incorporation of climate resilient agricultural and circular economy practices in urban and peri-urban agriculture provide climate co-benefits for all and enhance climate resilience?

This needs smaller-scale operations networked in symbiotic food systems within which animal manure and what would otherwise be food waste are reused as compost, etc. Water use planning and management are critical in many areas.

10.         How can citizens be engaged and empowered to drive inclusive, transparent, participatory processes for urban transformations, ensuring synergies and complementarity with city councils?

Recognise and be responsive to the actions and initiatives (agency) of the subaltern. That doesn’t mean traditional stakeholder meetings, it means positive responses to people’s actions and initiatives. New alliances are needed among the ‘informal’ traders, small-scale processors and small-scale farmers for them to be organised and heard differently.

11.         Which experiences of urban communities to increase access to fresh food and healthy diets can inspire broader public policies?

The way street traders of different kinds create livelihoods for themselves and make food more accessible to those in poverty.

Some References:

Battersby, J. (2020). South Africa’s lockdown regulations and the reinforcement of anti-informality bias. Agriculture and Human Values, 37, 543-544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-020-10078-w

Battersby, J., Marshak, M., & Mngqibisa, N. (2016). Mapping the invisible: the Informal food economy of Cape Town, South Africa (Urban food security series, Issue. https://hungrycities.net/publication/hcp-discussion-papers-no-5-mapping-informal-food-economy-cape-town-south-africa/

Battersby, J., & Watson, V. (2018). Urban Food Systems Governance and Poverty in African Cities. Routledge.

Battersby, J., & Watson, V. (2019). The planned ‘city-region’in the New Urban Agenda: an appropriate framing for urban food security? Town Planning Review, 90(5), 497-519.

Bayat, A. (2000). From ‘Dangerous Classes' to Quiet Rebels' Politics of the Urban Subaltern in the Global South. International sociology, 15(3), 533-557. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/026858000015003005

Béné, C., & Devereux, S. (2023). Resilience and Food Security in a Food Systems Context. Springer Nature.

CSM. (2016). Connecting Smallholders to Markets: An Analytical Guide (International Civil Society Mechanism, Hands On the Land Alliance for Food Sovereignty, Issue. https://www.csm4cfs.org/connecting-smallholders-markets-analytical-guide/

Report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter (Agroecology), Promotion and protection of human rights: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms  (Human Rights Council, United Nations, A/HRC/16/49 2010).

Dell'Anno, R. (2022). Theories and definitions of the informal economy: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 36(5), 1610-1643.

FAO. (2018). Sustainable food systems: Concept and framework. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.

Gliessman, S. (2018). Feeding Prometheus: agroecology and unchaining our desire for food system transformation. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems.

Greenberg, S. (2015). Corporate Concentration And Food Security In South Africa: Is The Commercial Agro-Food System Delivering?

Greenberg, S. (2017). Corporate power in the agro-food system and the consumer food environment in South Africa. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 44(2), 467-496. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1259223

Haysom, G. (2015). Food and the city: Urban scale food system governance. Urban Forum,

Haysom, G. (2022). Understanding secondary city typologies: A food governance lens. In Transforming Urban Food Systems in Secondary Cities in Africa (pp. 25-44). Springer International Publishing Cham.

Heijden, T. v. d., & Vink, N. (2013). Good for whom? Supermarkets and small farmers in South Africa–a critical review of current approaches to increasing access to modern markets. Agrekon, 52(1), 68-86.

HLPE. (2020). Food security and nutrition: Building a global narrative towards 2030. CFS - Committee on World Food Security. http://www.fao.org/3/ca9731en/ca9731en.pdf

Kiaka, R., Chikulo, S., Slootheer, S., & Hebinck, P. (2021). “The street is ours”. A comparative analysis of street trading, Covid-19 and new street geographies in Harare, Zimbabwe and Kisumu, Kenya. Food Security, 1-19. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-021-01162-y

Mier y Terán Giménez Cacho, M., Giraldo, O. F., Aldasoro, M., Morales, H., Ferguson, B. G., Rosset, P., Khadse, A., & Campos, C. (2018). Bringing agroecology to scale: key drivers and emblematic cases. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 42(6), 637-665. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2018.1443313

Ndhlovu, T. P. (2022). Food (in) security, the moral economy, and Ubuntu in South Africa: a Southern perspective. Review of international political economy, 1-25.

Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.

Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems. American Economic Review, 100, 408-444. https://doi.org/10.1080/19186444.2010.11658229

Rosset, P. M., Machín Sosa, B., Roque Jaime, A. M., & Ávila Lozano, D. R. (2011). The Campesino-to-Campesino agroecology movement of ANAP in Cuba: social process methodology in the construction of sustainable peasant agriculture and food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 38(1), 161-191.

Roy, A. (2005). Urban informality: Toward an epistemology of planning. Journal of the american planning association, 71(2), 147-158. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360508976689

Roy, A. (2011). Slumdog cities: Rethinking subaltern urbanism. International journal of urban and regional research, 35(2), 223-238.

Rudolph, M., Kroll, F., Muchesa, E., Paiker, M., & Fatti, P. (2021). Food Security in Urban Cities: A Case Study Conducted in Johannesburg, South Africa. Journal of Food Security, 9(2), 46-55. https://doi.org/10.12691/jfs-9-2-2

Skinner, C. (2016). Informal food retail in Africa: A review of evidence (Consuming urban poverty project, Issue.

Skinner, C. (2018). Contributing yet excluded? Informal food retail in African cities. In J. Battersby & V. Watson (Eds.), Urban Food Systems Governance and Poverty in African Cities (pp. 141). Routledge.

Skinner, C., & Haysom, G. (2016). The informal sector's role in food security: A missing link in policy debates? https://repository.uwc.ac.za/handle/10566/4527

Skinner, C., & Watson, V. (2020). The informal economy in urban Africa: Challenging planning theory and praxis. In M. Chen & F. Carré (Eds.), The Informal economy revisited: Examining the past, envisioning the future (pp. 123-131). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9780429200724-21/informal-economy-urban-africa-caroline-skinner-vanessa-watson

Tempia, N. P., Nakana, E., Malungane, M., & Wegerif, M. (2023). Fresh Produce Market Challenges and Opportunities: A Case for the Johannesburg Municipal Fresh Produce Market. Global Agricultural and Food Marketing in a Global Context: Advancing Policy, Management, and Innovation, 120-141.

Van der Ploeg, J. D. (2008). The New Peasantries: Struggles for Autonomy and Sustainability in an Era of Empire and Globalization. Earthscan.

Van der Ploeg, J. D. (2014). Peasant-driven agricultural growth and food sovereignty. Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 999-1030.

Wegerif, M. (2020). The Symbiotic Food System. In J. Duncan, J. S. Wiskerke, & M. S. Carolan (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Sustainable and Regenerative Food Systems (pp. 188-203). Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Handbook-of-Sustainable-and-Regenerative-Food-Systems-1st-Edition/Duncan-Carolan-Wiskerke/p/book/9781138608047

Wegerif, M. (2022a). The impact of Covid-19 on black farmers in South Africa. Agrekon, 61(1), 52-66. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/03031853.2021.1971097

Wegerif, M. (2022b). South Africa After COVID-19: Identifying the Overlooked Economic Actors Needed for a Just and Equitable Food System. In S. Schneider, Preiss, P.V. and Marsden, T. (Ed.), Food and Agriculture in Urbanized Societies (Vol. 26, pp. 107-128). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1057-192220220000026011/full/html

Wegerif, M., & Anseeuw, W. (2020). Unearthing less visible trends in land inequality. https://d3o3cb4w253x5q.cloudfront.net/media/documents/land_inequality_conceptual_paper_2020_11_unearthing_less_visible_trends_en_spr_lavhFDK.pdf

Wegerif, M. C., & Kissoly, L. (2022). Perspective from an African City: Food Market Governance in Dar es Salaam. In A. Moragues-Faus, J. K. Clark, J. Battersby, & A. Davies (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Urban Food Governance (pp. 278-292). Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Handbook-of-Urban-Food-Governance/Moragues-Faus-Clark-Battersby-Davies/p/book/9780367518004

Wegerif, M. C., & Wiskerke, J. S. (2017). Exploring the Staple Foodscape of Dar es Salaam. Sustainability, 9(6), 1081. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/su9061081

Wegerif, M. C. A. (2014). Exploring Sustainable Urban Food Provisioning: The Case of Eggs in Dar es Salaam. Sustainability, 6(6), 3747-3779. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6063747

Wegerif, M. C. A. (2020). “Informal” food traders and food security: experiences from the Covid-19 response in South Africa. Food Security, 12(4), 797-800. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-020-01078-z

Wegerif, M. C. A., & Hebinck, P. (2016). The Symbiotic Food System: An ‘Alternative’Agri-Food System Already Working at Scale. Agriculture, 6(3), 40. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture6030040

Wegerif, M. C. A., & Martucci, R. (2019). Milk and the city: Raw milk challenging the value claims of value chains. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 43(10), 1077-1105. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2018.1530716

Zak, P. J. (2011). Moral markets. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 77(2), 212-233.

Zhong, T., Si, Z., Crush, J., Scott, S., & Huang, X. (2019). Achieving urban food security through a hybrid public-private food provisioning system: the case of Nanjing, China. Food Security, 11(5), 1071-1086.

Dear FSN moderator,

It is my pleasure – as programme manager -  to share a contribution from the WUR team involved in FAO’s Dhaka Food Systems Project currently ongoing in Bangladesh, We have pulled some of our ideas an resources together in response to the queries raised around strengthening urban an peri-urban food systems for FNS.

Please find herewith our contribution from Wageningen University and research. In case of any question please fee free to reach out.

COMMENTS

A. Share your comments on the objectives and proposed content of this report as outlined above.

Do you find the proposed scope comprehensive to analyze and discuss the key issues concerning the role of urban and peri-urban food systems in achieving food security and nutrition? Are there any major gaps or omissions?

Response:

With reference to four years of comprehensive work covering four cities in the in the Dhaka Metropolitan area in the Support for modelling, planning and improving Dhaka’s food system (DFS) Project, led by FAO Bangladesh, and jointly implemented with Wageningen University and research (WUR), the defined scope touches upon on a set of highly relevant themes in the realm of strengthening food systems in urbanizing societies. However, the mode of scope articulation is at the same time quite generic and broad and seems to lack a bit a food systemic problem framing making more explicit what are the critical drivers and what are activities and outcomes of interest, in particularly reasoning from the ambition to consider the two interrelated phenomena of urbanisation and rural transformation in parallel. Highly interesting, but highly complex at the same time.

From our work in the DFS project, which has put into practice a responsive approach working with he national and city governments, a few emerging areas of interest relate to:

  • rethinking food system governance across scales. Who sets the boundaries to urban/peri-urban food systems, formally but also informally. Who is responsible for urban food policy? Who holds the process of food system governance?
  • A focus on sustainable healthy diets rather than on food and nutrition security, in line with earlier work of the HLPE on nutrition, also reflecting the growing body of research on planetary boundaries and the pressure of current food systems.
  • Addressing today urgencies next to applying long term planning: the development of planning approaches, processes, and tools to support anticipatory governance capacities building on foresight and scenario development techniques, necessary to understand dynamics across scales and timelines and thus building towards strategies to build an understanding on balancing  trade-offs, including who wins and who light loose, identifying synergies and to support decision making.

B. Share good practices and successful experiences on strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems in the context of urbanization and rural transformation, including in the case of emergencies or conflicts.

Feel free to check out our website

https://www.wur.nl/en/research-results/research-institutes/centre-for-development-innovation/show-cdi/improving-dhakas-food-system.htm

Share recent literature, case studies and data that could help answer the following questions:

  1. What are the main bottlenecks hampering the contribution of urban and peri-urban food systems to food security and nutrition?

What we can share here are the lessons learned in the DFS project from initiating and facilitating city working groups and their road towards developing their city specific food charters.

https://edepot.wur.nl/575023:. Lotte Roosendaal, MSc1, Marion Herens, PhD1, Riti Herman-Mostert, MSc1, Jainal Abedin, MBA2. 2022. The contribution of City Working Groups to Dhaka’s Food System Governance: first experiences and insights - Case-based experiences from the Dhaka Metropolitan Area. Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen University & Research. Wageningen

https://research.wur.nl/en/publications/consumers-health-and-food-safety-perceptions-in-the-dhaka-metropo: Harriëtte M. Snoek, Haki Pamuk, Ireen Raaijmakers, Valerie C.J. Janssen, Kulsum Begum Chowdhury, Syeda Mahsina Akter, Siet J. Sijtsema (2021): Consumers’ health and food safety perceptions in the Dhaka metropolitan area, Wageningen Economic Research,  Wageningen University & Research. Wageningen

2.            How can urban and peri-urban food systems be transformed and made more equitable and accessible both for food system actors and in terms of food security and nutrition outcomes?

  1. How can urban food supply chains, formal and informal, local and global, be made more resilient to ensure food security and nutrition within urban settings?

     
  2. What changes are needed in urban planning to better support all dimensions of food security – including support for human rights, agency and sustainability? Which are some of the measures that can strengthen the agency of local actors in urban and peri-urban food systems?

https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3423; Charlotte Van Haren, Inder Kumar, Anouk Cormont, Catharien Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Bertram De Rooij, Syed Islam, Peter Verweij: The Role of Spatialisation and Spatial Planning in Improving Food Systems: Insights from the Fast-Growing City of Dhaka, Bangladesh, Sustainability 2023, 15(4), 3423; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043423

Also feel free to cCheck out our planning tools developed under the DFS project:

Interactive GiS Dhaka Food System: https://dhakafoodsystems.wenr.wur.nl/

Food system foresight Dashboard: https://shiny.wur.nl/foresight-dhaka-food-system/

Currently we are working on the process of transfer of tools to Bangladesh stakeholder

5.            How can national and municipal governments strengthen the potential for low-carbon, inclusive, relatively self-sufficient and resilient cities and towns to drive improved food security and nutrition in the wake of climate change and other crises?

6.            What are the most appropriate policies (and gaps in existing policies) along the rural-urban continuum to address issues of land tenure, urban expansion into farmland and the growing competition for natural resources?

Maybe this is of help:

https://research.wur.nl/en/publications/land-use-classification-bangladesh-combining-and-downscaling-exis

7.            How can urban and peri-urban food systems ensure that food and nutrition needs of specific groups of people, such as migrants, the internally-displaced, children, adolescent, etc., are met?

We have developed a Nutrition Strategy to strengthen nutrition sensitive action across all activities

https://edepot.wur.nl/566606: S. Bakker, L. Roosendaal, M. Herens, A. Mishra, M. Chowdhury (2021); Nutrition strategy for the Dhaka Food Systems Project, Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen University & Research. Wageningen

And a Gender strategy:  Riti Hermán Mostert, Janet Naco, Samprita Chakma, Md. Parvez, Melanie Kok, Harriette Snoek , Anouk Cormont, John Taylor (FAO Bangladesh), Jan Brouwers (2020): Dhaka Food System: gender analysis and strategy, Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen University & Research. Wageningen

8.            What are the potential benefits and challenges of territorial markets for strengthening food security and nutrition for urban populations?

9.            In what ways can the incorporation of climate resilient agricultural and circular economy practices in urban and peri-urban agriculture provide climate co-benefits for all and enhance climate resilience?

Still work in progress, but we have launched pilots on biogas digesters and black soldier fly rearing (reports forthcoming)

10.         How can citizens be engaged and empowered to drive inclusive, transparent, participatory processes for urban transformations, ensuring synergies and complementarity with city councils?

11.         Which experiences of urban communities to increase access to fresh food and healthy diets can inspire broader public policies?

We have, based on a range of consultations with a broad group of representatives in a dedicated foresight and scenario development process, drafted a Dhaka Food Agenda 2041with the ministry of local governance and the city corporations. This product is still up for feedback and validation with the GoB and will be launched in June 2023, therefore not to be made public at this stage. We could, however, make a request to send you a copy.

A report on the foresight process can be found: Riti Herman Mostert, Marion Herens, Lotte Roosendaal, Jim Woodhill, Jainal Abedin, Pedro Garzon Delvaux, Jessica Gomes, Nazrul Islam, Anowarul Islam, Sahidul Islam, Sharifa Parvin, Syed Islam, Mohammad Asif Mahfuz, Sajia Ahmed, Nuary Totan, Sk Mohibullah. With organising support from Silvi Razzaque and Abdullah Maimun (2022): Dhaka Food Agenda 2041 Foresight and Scenario development: workshop report. Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation, Wageningen University & Research. Wageningen

Kind regards/Kind regards,

Marion Herens, PhD

Sr. Advisor Food and Nutrition Security / programme manager