Foro Global sobre Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutrición (Foro FSN)

Dear contributors, 

We take this opportunity to sincerely thank all those who have contributed to the consultation on the scope of the upcoming CFS HLPE-FSN report “Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation”. 

We received 74 very insightful contributions from 33 countries, diverse public and private organizations working in different fields of expertise, academia, civil society and other institutions. These inputs will allow the HLPE-FSN to address the critical issues facing both policymakers and practitioners to ensure that urban and peri-urban food systems contribute to food security and nutrition. 

Given the social and economic significance of food systems in urban and peri-urban areas, addressing the challenges and enhancing the positive impacts of urbanization and rural transformation is fundamental to achieve the realization of the right to food.

We truly appreciate the time and effort you devoted to provide your comments to this e-consultation. Your participation and your contributions are fundamental to ensuring legitimacy, scientific quality, and the incorporation of diverse forms of knowledge and expertise in the HLPE-FSN report “Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation”. Following this e-consultation, the drafting team led by Prof. Jane Battersby-Lennard will develop a revised draft of the report (V1) which will be submitted for peer review. Following peer review, the HLPE-FSN will launch the report on 2nd July 2024. The report will be presented at the 52nd plenary session of the CFS in October 2024, which will mark the start of the policy convergence process on this theme.

Paola Termine, HLPE-FSN Programme Officer, co-facilitator of this e-consultation

Dear Evariste, Dear Paola, Dear HLPE Team,

Thank you very much for your flexibility in accepting Brazil's inputs to the zero draft of the HLPE Report on Urban and Peri urban Food Systems. It is deeply appreciated.

As you can see in the attached document, we have received inputs from different areas of our Government working with policy and programs related to urban and peri-urban food systems and also to food security and nutrition in these areas.

We sincerely hope that the comments and suggestions and experiences shared could be well taken into consideration by the drafting team. Please do not hesitate to contact me in case any questions arise.

Thank you once again.

Best regards,

Lara Lobo Monteiro

Alternate Permanent Representative of Brazil to FAO, WFP and IFAD

After a review of the Draft Zero of the document on “Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation” the Permanent representative of the kingdom of Morocco would like to propose the following comments to be considered by the HLPE.

Structural recommendations:

• Consider combining or reorganizing chapters: Chapters 2 and 3 both deal with aspects of the urban context and their impact on food security. Combining them into a single chapter, "Urbanization and its impact on food security and nutrition" could improve flow and reduce redundancy.
• Balance depth and conciseness: While the document requires in-depth exploration of each topic, consider summarizing certain sections, particularly those with extensive subheadings, to improve readability and maintain focus.

Specific Recommendations by Chapter:

Proposal of Additional references

1. HAKIMI, F. (2022) ‘Assessing multifunctionality and sustainability of peri-urban farming: A case study in the Casablanca Metropolitan Area (Morocco)’, International Journal of Horticulture, Agriculture and Food science, 6(2), pp. 01–06. doi:10.22161/ijhaf.6.2.1.
2. Le Système Urbain : Les Acquis, Les Contraintes et les défis à relever pour un urbanisme renouvelé Fédération des agences urbaines du maroc. Available at: https://www.federation-majal.ma/fr/Evenements/le-syst%C3%A8me-urbain-le… (Accessed: 01 February 2024).
3. “Urbanisme.” CNEA, www.cnea.ma/fr/domaine-de-reforme/urbanisme. Accessed 1 Feb. 2024.
4. “Urbanisme : Les Actions Du Maroc Pour Réussir La Transition Verte Des Villes Présentées à Nairobi.” Maroc.Ma, 9 June 2023, www.maroc.ma/fr/actualites/urbanisme-les-actions-du-maroc-pour-reussir-….
5. “Urbanisme: Vers La Mise En Place Des Bases d’une Planification Urbaine Prospective, Stratégique et Durable ” Maroc.Ma, 12 Dec. 2023, www.maroc.ma/fr/actualites/urbanisme-vers-la-mise-en-place-des-bases-du….

Dear Paola, 

please find the comments made by the FAO Urban Taskteam:

1.The V0 draft introduces a conceptual framework informed by key principles established in previous HLPE-FSN reports (HLPE, 2017; HLPE, 2020).

a) Do you find the proposed framework effective to highlight and discuss the key issues concerning urban and peri-urban food systems?

While the current framework itself is fine, there are comment we would like to make:

• There is room for improvement by expanding the framework by emphasizing the interconnectedness of rural, peri-urban, and urban elements in the framework, and showing that these elements are situated within a broader food system which simultaneously interacts with other ‘systems’ - social, economic, and environmental, in line with the UNFSS and FAO definitions. A clearer picture of the relationships between rural and urban/periurban food systems (urban-rural linkages) will allow for more informed recommendations. Note this refers to rural areas beyond the immediate territory of the city and indeed national boundaries – anywhere from where food is sourced and which may be impacted by urbanization. Our comments are not restricted to rural-urban linkages in the classical sense that it is all about the rural areas just outside of the city. The broader connections need to be understood and articulated. For example, the framework can recognize that the upstream part of food system may, by significant degree, happen in rural areas, regions within and outside national boundaries, something which was mentioned in the last chapters but not in the framework. It can also emphasize how rural transformation shapes U-PU food systems and vice versa, for example in terms of food demand, migration/commute and in the terms of livelihoods. In that sense, the framework can focus on broader understanding of food security and nutrition to showcase opportunities for environmental and social gain in urban food system transformation, themselves essential to support food security over the longer-term as aspects of sustainability - and provide more evidence for that.

• Overall we would encourage the framework to a more solution-oriented, forward-looking approach for policymakers. The overall ‘challenge’ can be framed in terms of urban food systems as drivers of a wider food systems transformation, which itself can be a solution to interconnected crises like climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, conflict, and poverty. (Also, recommendations on tackling these issues  could be integrated into chapters 3, 5, 6, and 7 (e.g. illustrating how urban agriculture, forestry and greenspaces can have a role in mitigating urban heat islands and flooding, livelihood-related shocks and stress etc.) not only in urban but also in peri-urban and nearby rural areas.)

• Additionally, it is recommended to integrate greater consideration of variation in urban contexts based on city typologies (small, intermediary, or metropolitan). The document falls short in highlighting the opportunities that small and intermediary cities have to better integrate food systems into urban planning. Therefore, consider adding a dedicated aspect to elucidate the diverse urban contexts associated with metropolitan, small, and intermediary cities. Small cities and towns serve as crucial hubs in strengthening rural-urban connections and facilitating the efficiency of value chains. Megacities with high density pose complexities in the transformation, but intermediary cities where growth is happening present an opportunity to safeguard land suitable for agriculture and truly incorporate food systems into urban planning.

• Finally, incorporating more examples on integration of informality in different UPFS dimensions (e.g. street food vendors, markets, midstream) would offer valuable guidance to policy makers.

b) Is this a useful conceptual framework to provide practical guidance for policymakers?

This largely depends upon the policy makers and what they are looking to implement, but it was highlighted that if we imagine for example, policymakers being assigned to develop a food strategy at the local level, that they could struggle to understand the framework.

With regard to reaching policymakers for the document as a whole, in terms of format and language, consider making the writing style less academic, and including more practical examples and guiding diagrams and boxes that summarize the problematic. If this is not possible, consider developing a more dedicated and succinct version of the product, potentially based on Chapter 6 and the forthcoming Chapter 7, to address policymakers more effectively and acknowledge the complexity of the framework and its potential difficulty for local authority policymakers.

We recognize these comments may appear contradictory to the suggestions above of ensuring a broader approach is taken to understanding food security and nutrition, but believe this could be handled in how the framework is presented.

c) Can you offer suggestions for examples to illustrate and facilitate the operationalization of the conceptual framework to address issues relevant for FSN?

We agree that incorporating more practical examples is key, and also examples that illustrate diversity of U-PU systems. These examples can inspire policymakers by showcasing experiences from different cities. Especially in Chapter 5, you could reduce the current extensive discussion to include robust discussion on practical steps and strategies for implementation, to emphasize action and implementation. Likewise, you can consider illustrating Section 1.4 with more examples, similar to the approach in the next chapters, to make it more accessible and practical for policymakers.

• The document could include more evidence/examples on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urban food systems, and here is one FAO project to consider to incorporate:

Country: Bangladesh (project reference: OSRO/BGD/008/WFP ) Title: Food security for households most affected by the COVID-19 crisis in at-risk low-income urban areas. Objective: To address the food security needs of selected beneficiaries in at-risk low-income urban areas of Dhaka and smaller urban municipalities near Dhaka, with a focus on establishing linkages with local smallholder farmers in semi-rural and rural areas of Dhaka North City Corporation. Link to the story (under the sub-title ‘Getting city farmers to grow and eat more vegetables)

• You can further emphasize promoting job opportunities with decent working conditions for food-insecure households within U-PU food systems, and critical questions regarding formalizing informal workers and increasing living incomes and wages in the U-PU food sectors.

• Include detailed examples of how cities are crafting comprehensive food strategies and policies and, implementing them through inclusive governance and food policy councils. Consider linking specific case studies, such as the Mexico City canteen example (its award-winning case study) or the approach adopted by Bordeaux Metropole and its food policy (council) [Bordeaux says yes to its new food policy](https://eurocities.eu/stories/bordeaux-says-yes-to-its-new-food-policy/ ).

• Explore existing solutions in Latin America that support business formalization and greater access to social protection, such as Monotax (Uruguay) or Monotributo (Argentina).

2. The report adopts the broader definition of food security (proposed by the HLPE-FSN in 2020), which includes six dimensions of food security: availability, access, utilization, stability, agency and sustainability.

1. Does the V0 draft cover sufficiently the implications of this broader definition in urban and peri-urban food systems?

The 'utilization' and 'stabilization' dimensions are the least addressed, thus it is suggested to give more attention to these dimensions in the report. It would be helpful to explain/define what these dimensions concretely means in the context of UPFS, and clarify the connection between food safety, dietary diversity, and ‘utilization’ dimension. Additionally, further elaboration on the 'agency' dimension is crucial, particularly as it is interconnected with addressing inequalities, a significant driver of disparity. You can provide examples of strategies that enhance awareness and agency, enabling these communities to actively shape their own food security and well-being. Connect examples with case studies rather than academic papers for a more practical illustration, such as highlighting how self-help groups in rural India and structures like Stokvels in South Africa and Chamas in Kenya contribute to long-term food security outcomes for U-PU residents.

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

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

• Trends/variables/elements around shocks and resilience:

Consider incorporating more evidence and examples of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on urban food systems to strengthen the resilience aspect. Acknowledge the urgent need to reinforce resilience in the face of various shocks, including climate-related events, pandemics, and global economic crises. Emphasize the vulnerability of both urban and periurban food systems, disrupted supply chains, and the consequent impact on urban food security.

Links:

• FAO policy brief on urban food systems and COVID-19
• Key results from the FAO global survey “Urban Food Systems and COVID-19”

For Chapters 2 and 3, particularly Sections 2.4 and 3.2, consider a broader consideration of contexts, specifically incorporating discussions on fragile settings and protracted food crisis situations. Highlight opportunities that emerge when individuals with rural food and agriculture livelihoods are displaced or migrate to cities, presenting unique possibilities for food systems and related urban contexts.

In Chapters 5, 6, and 7, include risk-sensitive policies and practices, as urban and peri-urban areas face higher exposure and vulnerabilities. Develop risk-informed and shock-responsive social protection schemes, nature-based solutions, and risk-proofed infrastructures and services to enhance the resilience and sustainability of urban food systems.

• Trends on urban jobs:

Highlight the critical and insufficiently presented points for how U-PU food systems could reduce poverty and inequalities. Emphasize aspects like greater job creation, decent working conditions, improved access to social services, and community empowerment in urban settings.

• The key role of local and regional governments:

It is recommended to underscore the crucial role of local governments in advancing sustainable urban food systems, and strategies that enhance the recognition of local governments in global, regional, and national food systems agendas should be included.

• Trends regarding ecosystem services:

Ecosystem services from UPA have been well described, but there is one service that has not been mentioned, and that is the capacity of agricultural areas to allow water to infiltrate aquifers. In the case of the city of Abidjan for example, agricultural fields allow water infiltration, which prevents saline water in the aquifer (consequence of the sea level rise).

• Other remarks:

• In Section 3.2.1,  Figure 3.2 and the related comments should be eliminated as they refer to outdated, preliminary, not validated and not cross-country comparable data.
• In Section 3.2.2, it would be good to distinguish between food insecurity by gender of the individuals (like the one included in SOFI), and by gender of the head of the household like many case studies mentioned later in the text.

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

• It is recommended to emphasize the integration of food systems into existing planning and regulations and development of specific ordinances dedicated to urban and peri-urban food systems. Integrating food systems into local development plans secures national funding allocation, contributing to overall sustainability (refer to SOFI 2023 and FAO-UCL's "Integrating Food into Urban Planning, 2018"). A dedicated paragraph on the integration of food systems into urban and territorial planning is suggested.

• Emphasize the point and provide examples on establishing partnerships with non-state actors, particularly private-public partnerships, which is crucial for unleashing the potential power of cities.

• Consider providing additional information and examples to underscore the statement that not all components of the system are equally vulnerable to climate shocks, especially small-scale and informal actors.

• Elevate the importance of cross-country and peer-to-peer learning as a powerful tool to encourage learning among cities and country representatives to foster increased participation in mainstreaming food systems in policies, planning, and actions.

• Better highlight the growing connectivity and interlinkages across urban, peri-urban, and rural areas, referencing SOFI 2023. Address the issue of context specificity, ensuring a balanced perspective that includes diverse regions, particularly highlighting specificities like Small Island Developing States (SIDS).

• Ensure Chapter 3.5 encompasses a broader scope, considering multiple shocks and stresses with systemic and territorial implications. Rename section 3.5 to "Multiple Shocks and Stresses Threatening and Impacting Urban and Peri-Urban Areas" to accurately represent the comprehensive nature of challenges faced by urban, peri-urban, and rural areas.

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

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

• UN. UN Common Guidance on Helping Build Resilient Societies, 2020. https://unsdg.un.org/sites/default/files/2021-09/UN-Resilience-Guidance-Final-Sept.pdf
• FAO. The Future of Food and Agriculture – Drivers and Triggers for Transformation. The Future of Food and Agriculture 3. Rome, Italy: FAO, 2022 (section 1.6. on risks and uncertainties). https://doi.org/10.4060/cc0959en  
• FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, and WHO. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World. Building Climate Resilience for Food Security and Nutrition. Rome: FAO, 2018. http://www.fao.org/3/I9553EN/i9553en.pdf.FSIN
• Global Report on Food Crises 2023, 2023. https://www.fsinplatform.org/global-report-food-crises-2023
• Sharm Adaptation Agenda, Implementation Report 2023, on climate action and food systems and also urban systems : https://climatechampions.unfccc.int/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Sharm-El-Sheikh-Adaptation-Agenda-2023-Implementation-Report.pdf
• The ESA/ESP/ESS recent study on workers in agrifood systems could be used to illustrate the context of U-PU food systems, as the data are disaggregated per rural-urban-periurban settings.

5. Are there any redundant facts or statements that could be eliminated from the V0 draft?

It would be good to differentiate and establish clearer links, especially regarding food environment factors, as there appears to be potential overlap between certain points in sections 3.4 and 4.2.

We also have some additional comments about the structure of the document

• Consider incorporating ‘decentralization’ in the “urban contexts” circle illustrated in Fig 1.4.

• Consider renaming Chapter 4 to explicitly reflect the question it addresses: "What aspects of urban and peri-urban food systems need strengthening to achieve urban and peri-urban food security and nutrition?" This adjustment can create a clearer connection between the chapter's content and its overarching purpose.

• Consider switching the order of Chapters 3 and 4, placing the comprehensive exploration of urban and peri-urban food systems in Chapter 4 before discussing challenges and dynamics in Chapter 3.

• In Chapters 4, 5, and 6, which have already integrated methods for applying the conceptual framework, consider revising the titles to better reflect the primary questions the report aims to answer.

• In Chapter 4, consider restructuring point 4.6.3 as the entire point 4.6., focusing on key elements of food systems nodes, while merging points 4.6.2, 4.6.4, and 4.6.6 into section 3.5 on shocks and stresses threatening and affecting food security and nutrition. Handle diversity under 4.6.5 separately due to its importance for resilience, food security, and nutrition.

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

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

• Box 18 of SOFI 2023
• School Feeding programmes in Senegal (Bambilor and Khougheul)
• Agroecological fair in Portoviejo, Ecuador

• Towards the high-quality development of City Region Food Systems: Emerging approaches in China
• BOX 16 SOFI 2023: Local agrifood systems strategies linking large metropolitan areas with rural hinterland in Antananarivo, Nairobi and Quito
• https://eatrightindia.gov.in/eatsmartcity/home
• https://foodtrails.milanurbanfoodpolicypact.org/cities/
• A foodshed example https://www.foodmatters.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Food-Partnership-Development.pdf
• https://foodfoundation.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-04/FOOD%20CITIES%202022_Pune.pdf
• The city examples in this webinar series we developed are interesting https://foodfoundation.org.uk/fc22-emergency-food-planning
• The FAO Office of Emergency and Resilience primarily focuses on addressing food insecurity and malnutrition in fragile or protracted food crisis situations, encompassing countries affected by multiple crises such as conflicts, extreme weather events, and socio-economic disturbances. Operations extend to regions like Iraq, Syria, Bangladesh, and Nigeria, each with distinct objectives:

• **Iraq: OSRO/IRQ/902/EC**

Objective: Contribute significantly to the sustainable food and agricultural livelihood security of rural and peri-urban populations in Ninevah Governorate.

• **Syria: UNJP/SYR/025/UNJ**

Objective: Strengthen urban and rural resilience and conditions for recovery by enhancing the capacity of local authorities, civil society, and communities to develop evidence-based policies and resilience programs.

• **Nigeria (Three Projects):**

*Restoring livelihoods of vulnerable populations to catastrophic food and nutrition insecurity in BAY*

*Emergency food security and livelihood assistance to conflict-affected populations in Northeast Nigeria*

*Improved production, availability, and access to nutritious food for vulnerable IDPs, returnees, and host communities*

Common focus: Target populations with limited access to land, providing inputs for urban and peri-urban gardening to diversify diets and generate income.

• **Somalia: "UN Joined Work on Building Resilience in Somalia"**

Output 3: Households and producer groups supported to diversify and enhance livelihoods for improved income.

Activities involve working with communities in each district to identify options for diversification in rural, peri-urban, and urban areas, particularly focusing on women's roles and minimizing risks. Examples include honey/beekeeping, poultry-raising, dairy production, and vegetable and fruit gardening.

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

• Consider citing the illustrative example outlined on page 133 of SOFI 2023, which discusses "Sub-national agrifood systems governance agreements among metropolitan, intermediary, and small cities in Peru." Lima has established the Food System Council of Metropolitan Lima (CONSIAL). The council has enacted several local ordinances to promote healthier urban food environments, urban agriculture, the use of public spaces for agroecology farmers’ markets, and the recovery of unsold food in wholesale markets. https://foodfoundation.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-05/Surat_Citizen%20engagement%20presentation.pdf

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

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

• Consider looking into the example related to food waste and circularity in Nairobi City County by visiting the following link: https://www.fao.org/urban-food-agenda/news-events/news-detail/en/c/1473546/.
• Consider the example of New York City : Mayor Adams of NYC has committed to reduce city’s food-based emissions by 33% by 2020, linked to NYC’s integrated greenhouse has inventory, which incorporates emissions from the production and consumption of food, developed by the Mayor’s Office of Climate.

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

• Explore a case study on public food procurement in Ecuador (Manabi province and Portoviejo city) through the following links:
  
  Video 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQLLhzhgReY
  
  Video 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuyI9D1698o&t=141s
• Consider referencing SOFI 2023 chapter 5.3 for further insights.
• Please note that FAO is developing guidelines on multi-level food systems governance, compiling various good practices.
• BOX 16 SOFI 2023: Local agrifood systems strategies linking large metropolitan areas with rural hinterland in Antananarivo and Quito
• Colombia Alianza por el Buen Vivir https://www.concejodemedellin.gov.co/la-alianza-por-el-buen-vivir-es-fundamental-para-el-desarrollo-de-la-ciudad-region/   The current status of this initiative is unknown, but the objective was to bring together municipal, provincial and national governments together to improve food systems in the region. If this has stopped working in recent years, that could also be an example for lessons learnt.
• https://foodfoundation.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-05/Pune%20-%20The%20Food%20Economy%20presentation.pdf
• https://eatforum.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Case-study_Quezon-City-Food-and-Nutrition-Resilience-EAT-UNICEF-QUEZON.pdf
• https://www.futurepolicy.org/food-and-water/belo-horizontes-food-security-policy/

The Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples’ Mechanism (CSIPM) for relations with the United Nations Committee on World Food Security (CFS) is the largest international space of civil society organisations (CSOs) working to eradicate food insecurity and malnutrition. All participating organizations in the CSIPM belong to one of the following 11 constituencies: smallholder farmers, pastoralists, fisherfolk, Indigenous Peoples, agricultural and food workers, landless, women, youth, consumers, urban food insecure and NGOs. This collective written contribution has been prepared by participants from the CSIPM Urban and Peri-Urban Working Group which was constituted in January 2024 to follow this CFS workstream.

GENERAL COMMENTS ON THE V0 DRAFT OF THE HLPE-FSN REPORT

The Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples' Mechanism (CSIPM) welcomes the V0 Draft of the HLPE-FSN report on "Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanisation and rural transformation". The CFS had a policy workstream on Urbanization and Rural Transformation and Implications for Food Security and Nutrition but despite many efforts and resources dedicated to this workstream, and although there was a consultation process, it did not result in a final negotiated policy document. For this reason, the CSIPM welcomes an HLPE report on this topic and sees the opportunity to raise awareness of the priorities of the most affected constituencies in urban and peri-urban contexts through this work stream.

 This six-chapter report provides a definition of urban and peri-urban food systems in the first chapter, followed by a historical perspective on the process of urbanization, the current context of urban growth and the number of people living in urban areas in food insecurity. The third chapter examines the nutritional transition and food security, and how the human right to food can be guaranteed. The fourth chapter analyses urban and peri-urban food systems, addressing the different processes, actors, and how people access food, such as through reliance on supermarkets and the proliferation of convenience stores. The fifth chapter discusses urban food governance, laws, an urban food policy, the different regional actors, and how participation in urban policy takes place. Chapter six discusses policy partnerships, and the different actors involved in these responses, as well as international issues and the international market.

The CSIPM recognises that one of the important aspects of the HLPE-FSN report is that it builds its conceptualisation on the six dimensions of food security: availability, access, utilisation, stability, agency and sustainability.

Furthermore, we also find it positive how the report differentiates between the urban and peri-urban concept for the global north and the global south to recognise the different ways in which poverty, migration and internal inequalities have increased in each country. We also welcome the fact that the report talks about malnutrition, given the impact of the penetration of ultra-processed products in urban and peri-urban contexts.

However, we also see some weaknesses and spaces for improvement, such as the fact that the report does not look at the human right to food and the different dimensions of human rights in a holistic way. The report should elaborate more on the indivisibility and interconnection between the right to and the right to the city, or to housing, or the right to work and social protection, or the right to a healthy, clean, safe and sustainable environment. There is a very limited section on addressing gender or inequalities that could be expanded, and which could benefit from previous CFS policy outcomes as a reference, especially the “Voluntary Guidelines on Gender Equality and Women’s and Girls Empowerment in the Context of Food Security and Nutrition”. The report should also focus more on youth as agents of transformation in urban and peri-urban food systems. Young people are vital to achieving economies of wellbeing defined by food sovereignty, dignified livelihoods, and healthy environments in rural and urban areas. Food systems transformations are urgently needed to ensure that youth can live well in the countryside and cities, restore ecological harmony, and receive fair remuneration for their work in food systems. Young people are often forced to migrate to cities because life in rural areas is made impossible by structural constraints. Systemic shifts in food systems should centre the core principles of rights, equity, agency, and recognition of the role of youth as collective and individual protagonists of social change.

The report could also benefit from an additional section in chapter 4 looking at existing alternatives to supermarkets and convenience stores, such as territorial markets, community supported agriculture, food buying groups and cooperatives. There must also be an examination of the proliferation of charitable food aid provision in a variety of settings from food banks to schools and religious spaces.

While urban and peri-urban agriculture is addressed, the report does not consider agroecology as a transformative approach for urban and peri urban systems. Among the CFS documents we have a basis for moving forward on urban and peri-urban agriculture based on agroecology and the report should refer to the FAO 10 principles of Agroecology and the CFS Policy Recommendations. There is also an increasing body of research on Urban Agroecology and recognition of its practices and values, that address power and injustice, provide social and wellbeing benefits beyond the production of food and embraces a variety of holistic low impact, low input sustainable food production methods. Some references are provided below.

Moreover, there is no systemic and connected vision between political systems and public procurement services, for example with regard to procurement programmes, there is nothing about a public procurement network. With regard to governance, the report does not touch on urban planning and management instruments, it only calls on social participation councils, but not with the objective to put the food perspective as transversal in the design of urban planning instruments, such as the budget, the urban infrastructure and the different existing public services.

For the CSIPM, social participation is key to create urban and peri-urban food systems that can impact malnutrition and food insecurity. The most affected people and constituencies -such as gypsy, Roma and traveller communities, youth, refugees, migrants, pastoralists, peasants, homeless people, low income groups, including women, racialised people and ethnic groups, persons with disabilities, older people and children among others living in urban and peri- urban areas- should be included in policy making spaces through transparent, democratic and effective processes that respect the autonomy and self-organizations of social movements, feminist movements and civic movements. For example, there is an absence of the workers' perspective, and the perspective of the social and solidarity economy and social protection that consider the conditions for providing quality of life.

ASSUMPTIONS THAT SHOULD BE CHALLENGED (SHIFTING THE PARADIGM)

• The urbanization paradigm, and modernization itself, that requires living in cities away from rural areas. It is well documented that urbanisation often leads to the very problems it is aiming to solve: poor housing, overcrowding, unemployment, poverty and destitution, food insecurity, health disparities, traffic congestion, pollution, lack of proper infrastructure such as a good food environment, schools, transport, water, energy and sewage.
• Many developed countries still retain a very significant proportion of their total population in rural areas. For instance, countries like Austria, Poland, Slovakia, Ireland and Thailand, among many others, have rural populations of above 40% - close to 50% in some cases. These are indeed real-life examples of countries where the trend does not align with the paradigm, but these examples are often ignored. In China, the successful rural regeneration programme includes many young people and has a strong dimension of Community Supported Agriculture with a key focus on territorial markets.
• Strengthening territorial markets is key, as rather than focusing on international trade which can have negative consequences and impacts in food security in rural and urban areas and should be further explored.
• Cities are expanding through urban sprawl. Within and around cities, there were fertile areas for agriculture that now have been converted to built up areas in an alarming manner. It is essential to maintain peri-urban agriculture (using the VGGT where possible), in order to ensure access to fresh nutritious produce for local populations. Furthermore, the rural-urban linkages are critical.
• The report should take the fact that the urban context is not homogenous and has interconnected institutions or networks made up of different actors who should be taken into consideration. Food security and food sovereignty initiatives, as well as governance and food policy to promote access to food, should pay attention to the different needs, priorities and preferences of the various groups that make up the cities. The urban context includes refugees, immigrants, and different socio-economic classes.

WHAT IS MISSING OR COULD BE STRENGTHENED

• Private sector engagement has led to increased production and availability of ultra-processed foods becoming widely available in the urban areas and also widely distributed through food banks. The report should answer the question of how to promote localized food systems and territorial markets in urban contexts to ensure access to affordable, healthy and culturally acceptable diets to consumers. The connection between access to ultra-processed foods and health should be further explored given the rise in consumption of processed foods. On the issue of communal norms and cultural food practices, the report should examine how these influence consumption patterns in urban areas.
• In Pakistan 65% of population is composed of youth, how can we involve them in this process? Youth make up a large segment of the urban population and rural-urban exodus is on the rise. The potential of youth as actors in the food system in urban areas is crucial and could be further explored. Understanding the context is key, as this baseline study in Uganda shows.
• Two elements not well addressed in the report are: social function of public procurement services and food provision. This dimension is often absent from analyses but needs to be considered as essential to ensuring food security and food sovereignty. This has been a key focus in Europe in recent years. The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) together with partners such as Slow Food and Urgenci has worked extensively on this question. As the Manifesto for establishing minimum standards for public canteens across the EU. This was also a key part of the work of the European Food Policy Coalition. An excellent example of school organic public procurement using municipal land is the project Une cantine 100 % bio sans surcoût.
• During the pandemic, we saw how the public supply network and public markets were important to ensure access to adequate food. It is necessary to support the creation of pacts also between municipalities, as they can create pacts and agreements at the national and local level. For example, in Brazil the creation of the national strategy for food security and urban context which intends to create local policies between different actors.
• The draft is well developed and presents an elaborated description of food security issues in urban and peri-urban areas. However, the concepts of gender and inequality are largely missing from the analysis. Although the report mentions gender briefly as a cross-cutting issue, the report could benefit greatly by developing an inequality framework or proposal on how to address gender, racial, social and economic inequalities when talking about food security in urban and peri-urban areas. An intersectional feminist framework would promote   an understanding of the reasons behind disparities and inequalities in the access and distribution of food, as well as social impacts of these inequalities. See HLPE 18 on Reducing Inequalities for Food Security and Nutrition.
• Urban areas comprise a large population living in poverty and its impacts affect food security of families and communities, especially women and girls and underserved communities. Moreover, existing literature largely documents that women within families tend to experience more food insecurity, especially during shocks. Therefore, the report should take this into consideration.There is a component of analysis that relates to agency (empowerment), but it is not extensive.
• Furthermore, the mention of women and gender in the report appears in relation to the children and their role as mothers in addressing the challenges of the children's food insecurity. The report does not offer a critical reflection on the roles of other actors in the nutrition of children, the positive contribution and value of women in the preparation of food and the time dedicated to feed the family.
• The report should also include a greater focus on widespread practices that contributed significantly to ensuring food security and food sovereignty during the pandemic and the post-pandemic period. Some of these experiences are synthesized in the CSIPM report Voices from the ground: From COVID-19 to radical transformation of our food systems (2020). As well as Enacting Resilience: the Response of LSPA to the Covid-19 Crisis (2021), a significant report published by Urgenci that underlines the importance and relevance of peri-urban agriculture in feeding urban populations. What is clear in both these reports is the birth of spontaneous solidarity-based, bottom-up citizens’ initiatives that made key contributions to ensuring access and the Right to Food and Nutrition.
• There is no real exploration of land use, including access to land and tenureship for urban and peri urban food producers, regeneration and its impacts.
• There is no understanding of urban and peri urban food systems, and particularly food production in the planning and emergency resilience of cities. Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic there was a lack of preparedness or planning for shocks in the food system for many cities with a reliance on the market to ensure food availability.
• For the CSIPM there is still more work to do regarding governance. For example, how municipalities can preserve and build more physical and social infrastructure in areas of deprivation. As well as better engagement with marginalised groups who do not participate in the mainstream food system. There  could be more from a legal point of view on how municipalities can create agreements and laws to improve infrastructure and supply.  Some key examples of how this can be done are: https://securite-sociale-alimentation.org/  Other examples exist in Brazil and other countries.
• It would also be important for the report to include an analysis on loss and waste of food in markets and supermarkets, problems are linked to the just in time system, transport, storage, and the confusing labelling systems of best before, and use by dates that mean that edible food is disposed of before its expiry date. Large quantities of food are also disposed of at source to control prices, such as milk; or to meet supermarket cosmetic standards, or in the home. The report could also provide recommendations on mechanisms that provide better information through scientific recommendations, and that can be useful for many populations, in order to reduce food waste. Studies have demonstrated the fact that food loss and waste are significantly lower in direct consumer food systems such as Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), as the one on Food loss and waste in community-supported agriculture in the region of Leipzig, Germany.  There are various explanations for this, especially the extensive use of agroecology in CSA, the proximity of CSA to consumers (both physical and psychological), the fact that consumers always accept all fruit and vegetables, irrespective of size or shape, so no grading and rejection processes exist.
• Food sovereignty is a concept that does not appear in the report, but it is very important if we take into account the territorial or local perspectives and the agency aspect of food security. We must underline the importance of consumers, who must recognise themselves in the food they eat.
• The report could also include recommendations with regard to the role of public authorities, for example from the ministries of health and agriculture as well as recommendations on local agroecological/organic production for territorial public procurement
• Access to and the protection of land; and the succession of existing farms for new forms of collectives and cooperatives, such as community farms in urban and peri-urban areas should be prioritized .
• It would also be important to include in the report an analysis on oligopolies in terms of agriculture, as we see the same in terms of retail globally. Also public goods and wholesale markets.
• The report needs to be clear regarding where agricultural food production places in urban and peri-urban contexts, such as the promotion of community gardens, allotment backyard gardens using limited space, technologies such as vertical farming, hydroponics, rooftop farming, among others.
• Also, it should address how the deficit in local production and reliance on importation have an impact on urban and peri-urban food systems.
• Community Land Trusts and their equivalents need to be recognised by the report as a means of preserving urban and peri-urban agriculture. This form of preservation is very common in New York and increasingly in the United Kingdom, and is recognised in UN Habitat 2. It is a key form of solidarity economy regarding land usage, and is linked to Local Government legislation.
• We consider it important to emphasize the fact that certain food consumption and production networks that are below the radar have not been taken into account in the report. There should be an extensive look at existing alternatives to long food chains, including Community Supported Agriculture, producers’ and consumers collectives and cooperative shops, small-scale producers collectives of various kinds, and distributive platforms like the Open Food Network, on-line collective producers’ sales (including criteria such as agroecology/organic production). As well as informal trading networks such as the suitcase trade, often black market, between global south and global north in culturally acceptable food products
• Food Policy Councils are key to developing successfully sustainable urban and peri-urban agriculture and there needs to be an extensive section developed on this subject.
• It would be important to explore the food, climate and humanitarian nexus in the urban context. How cities are prepared to respond to shocks and humanitarian emergencies, and build long-term resilience in a climate crisis context. Examples are initiatives on early warning systems in Nairobi, Kenya and a similar project in Philippines-B-Ready project.   

We need to emphasize the alternatives that do exist are in many cases deeply anchored, and whose resilience during the pandemic was shown to be invaluable, such as in Brazil, where small scale food producers gave food to people free of charge. As documented in the CSIPM report (2022) Voices from the ground 2: transformative solutions to the global systemic food crises.

• The French and Belgian experimental food social security trials which are currently underway with the basis of food as a human right and as social protection. There is a reference to the French trials in the report to UCLG, which is possibly the first time that a Local Government network has been referenced in the CFS work.
• Rural regeneration policy in China, where CSA plays a considerable role should also be referenced. The interesting aspect in China is that there is far less of an issue of access to land, due to the fact that all rural families have a land allocation
• Food policy councils, and the very interesting work being done now in New York City, Toronto, London and other cities should be highlighted. See Milan Urban Food Policy Pact website for examples

OTHER REFERENCES WHICH COULD BE CONSIDERED

• Sachs, C., & Patel-Campillo, A. (2014). Feminist food justice: Crafting a new vision. Feminist Studies, 40 (2), 396-410.
• Allen, Patricia, et al. Women and food chains: The gendered politics of food. The International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food, 2007, vol. 15, no1, p.1-23
• Hunger virus paper by Oxfam https://policy-practice.oxfam.org/resources/the-hunger-virus-how-covid-19-is-fuelling-hunger-in-a-hungry-world-621023/

URBAN AGROECOLOGY REFERENCES

• Urban Agroecology: Principles and Potential https://edepot.wur.nl/448775
• Pengue WA (2022) Local Food Systems: Making Visible the Invisible Through Urban Agroecology. Front. Sustain. Cities 4:867691. doi:10.3389/frsc.2022.867691
• Urbanising in Place Project: Building the Food, Water, Energy Nexus From Below.  http://urbanisinginplace.org/.                      
• Sustainable Urbanisation Global Initiative (SUGI)/Food-Water-Energy Nexus  https://jpi-urbaneurope.eu/calls/sugi/
• Resourcing an Agroecological Urbanism: Political,Transformational and Territorial Dimensions. Edited By Chiara Tornaghi, Michiel Dehaene

Let me start by congratulating you and all the other members of the team on a very good piece of work. The report is super-well documented, incorporates many perspectives on urban food systems, and reviews many dimensions of it. It is a tour-de-force which is coming together well.  In what follows I would like to make a few suggestions that reflect my own engagement with the topic and I hope they are useful for the team.

1. Regarding question 1 on the conceptual framework, I am in two minds. The conceptual framework elaborates in more than sufficient detail the different dimensions of urban food systems and it will be very useful for any scholar that wants to understand an urban food system anywhere. In this respect I was very happy with the report.

What the report and the conceptual framework do not achieve is a sense of urgency, of why this issue needs attention. Would there be a way to start the report with a summary of some of the biggest problems that have been observed, and then illustrate those problems with some numbers? I would expect the following problems to come up high, at the least in the developing world: waste, lack of hygiene and outbreak of food born diseases; unbalanced diets, certainly in the lower income strata, and resulting malnutrition; excessively high food prices in urban spots, because of poor logistics and insufficient local competition. But maybe I am wrong, and the biggest problems are different ones, if so fine.

By all means, the team might wish to consider what it wants to achieve. To lay out the analytics of urban food systems or to draw attention to a hot, urgent upcoming issue, create buy-in, and outline a way forward........

2. I was not particularly convinced of the need for six dimensions of food security, the former three were actually good enough for me. With the six dimensions, the risk is that the analysis dies in sophistication (paralysis through analysis). The report should not be about the implications of a broader definition, but about the implications of ongoing urbanization on food security. The more the report focuses on the real life issues instead of the definitions, the better.

3. I find the subjects treated in the report very relevant. There is maybe one issue that may need more attention, and that is food preparation by poor urban households. In my view, the urban food system does not end when the food reaches the consumer, but only after the food is prepared and consumed. I would guess that poor food preparation contributes a lot to bad nutrition outcomes but also to other health problems, such as air pollution in and outside the house, and to fire risks. If food preparation is difficult, a lot of improvements earlier in the urban food system may go to waste.

4. Finally, it would be fantastic if the report spelled out a way-forward. Such a way-forward might be split up in a few action areas:

1. 1. the research agenda: what are the issues where understanding is lacking? How can those be addressed?
   2. data and information: how could the data availability on urban food systems be improved, so that better decisions can be made?
   3. investment frameworks: what are, in general, the most important type of investments that are required to improve urban food systems, are those in the realm of the public or the private sector? 
   4. governance and policy: what are the type of policies that have shown success in different cities? How were they brought about?
   5. the yardsticks of success: how can we see that the urban food system of one city is better than that of another city? And also, how can we measure the success of possible "urban food system improvement programs"?

Best regards,

Willem

Dalle stime ONU sappiamo che oggi, la questione cruciale del cibo si concentra particolarmente nelle aree urbane dove vive più della metà della popolazione mondiale e che questa quota supererà i due terzi della popolazione mondiale, determinando grandi sfide per le amministrazioni cittadine.

Di fronte a questo quadro in evoluzione, è cruciale che gli enti locali realizzino sistemi agroalimentari sostenibili ed inclusivi e che potenzino nuovi modelli di governance volti a favorire un consumo consapevole ed una produzione agroecologica, in modo da assicurare il diritto umano al cibo e per poter mettere a segno gli Obiettivi di Sviluppo Sostenibile contenuti nell’Agenda ONU 2030.

Roma è una delle 27 città italiane che ha firmato il “Patto di Milano” (MUFFP), l’eredità forse più importante di Expo 2015, che promuove un approccio di pianificazione alimentare per rispondere alle sfide sociali, ambientali ed economiche che l’agricoltura e l’alimentazione si trovano esoprattutto si troveranno ad affrontare.

Il cibo può rivelarsi un elemento strategico che plasma la forma e la sostanza di una città e che orienta in modo consapevole la comunità che la vive.

Produzione, trasformazione, distribuzione e consumo sono aspetti della catena del cibo da amalgamare con la salute delle persone e la tutela dell’ambiente. 

Il cibo come politica urbana implica una scelta essenziale: quella di “fare sistema” attorno al ciclo dell’agroalimentare. 

Di fronte alle sfide del nostro tempo, l’agricoltura urbana e periurbana può giocare un ruolo da protagonista e passare ad essere da settore marginale, architrave di sviluppo e di crescita.

Il Piano del Cibo deve diventare parte integrante della programmazione urbana ed agire con un approccio sistemico, multisettoriale e multiscalare, nel quale rientrino una serie di politiche pubbliche relative alla pianificazione del territorio, alla distribuzione degli alimenti, alla accessibilità al cibo, alla gestione dei rifiuti alimentari, e al riciclo.

Per fare questo Roma ha messo in campo un processo unico a livello mondiale attraverso la costituzione nata dal basso del Consiglio del Cibo costituitosi formalmente lo scorso 27 ottobre in occasione della III conferenza agricola cittadina del Comune di Roma.

Il tema generale del cibo incontra inevitabilmente a Roma, città agricola più grande d’Europa con i suoi 60.000 ettari, quello dell’agricoltura.

Per rilanciare questo settore nella nostra città, sempre in occasione della III conferenza agricola è stato pubblicato un bando per assegnare terre pubbliche inutilizzate a giovani agricoltori.

Dopo i primi lotti per oltre 70 ettari si procederà nel corso del 2024 e a seguire alla messa a bando di altre 15 aree sulle quali si sta effettuando un censimento

Un’altra grande esperienza in città è quella rappresentata dagli oltre 140 orti urbani che anche grazie al progetto RU:URBAN ha permesso a Roma di essere riconosciuta a livello europeo come“Good Practice City”

L'agricoltura urbana può ridurre l'impatto delle ondate di calore sulla salute, riducendo l'impronta di carbonio delle città.

In una ottica quindi di capacitazione di comunità e di sussidiarietà circolare, gli orti urbani comunitari nel governo della città possono essere veri hub per diverse politiche pubbliche verdi nonché percorsi d’inclusione sociale di persone con problemi di isolamento, dipendenza, esclusione.

https://www.milanurbanfoodpolicypact.org/

https://www.comune.roma.it/web/it/bando-concorso.page?contentId=BEC1102886

http://www.gardeniser.it/

https://www.comune.roma.it/web/it/notizia.page?contentId=NWS1103136

Question 1 - About the conceptual framework

• The definition of urban and peri urban food systems could be slightly improved to have a clearer opening of the report.

These are now described in relation to activities (p.7) but it can be expanded - also building on the reference from Tefft et al, 2021 – to include actors, institutions and environments. It is still a complex concept so I would be in favour of adding a scheme or a series of images next to this paragraph.

Moreover, a broader explanation of these systems could come earlier in the report, it would imply a change in the structure but may be beneficial in guiding the following arguments.

• To better develop the complexity of U-PU systems, I would consider revising the current framework in the light of other key topics connecting food and cities.

I think it can help in making clearer how do U-PU systems connect to everyday life aspects for general readers, and how their challenges can be tackled in strategic interventions bringing about benefits in more than one ‘dimension’, for decision makers.

This need to identify emerging key topics becomes evident when you come across certain sections that are not well developed (i.e. online food retail). Some elements can be introduced within a broader explanation (for example, urban food supply and distribution and the different types of food retail). Following this, the most relevant aspects / entry points for action can be expanded (i.e. territorial markets for food nutrition in contexts of high vulnerability to food insecurity; information and regulation of the midstream; etc.).

• Taking the case of markets to think through food and cities:

When describing markets in their roles for strengthening urban and peri urban food systems (as raised in p.46), the argument can be improved by highlighting the dimensions in which these impact – which go beyond the supply role that is well explained and which also impact on conditions of food security. 

These dimensions can be identified in relation to key urban challenges, such as:

• the strengthening of local economies
• the development of territorial linkages
• the planning of sustainable / green cities
• governance of public services (including food and nutrition),
• the right to the city – implying the use and appropriation of spaces and services that are for public purpose (for example, regulations favoring the use of public spaces for markets).

Question 3 - About trends and information on key elements

• An improved account on the status and vulnerability to food insecurity today is needed.

Especially in relation to the most recent and consecutive global events (such as COVID-19, political conflicts and wars, and climate change events).

There are publications about food insecurity worsening during the pandemic and about the fact we do not have a real scenario of recovery yet, given other conditions also increasing vulnerability.

It is important to make this situation clearer for decision makers to realize this scenario is particularly sensitive to any policies or interventions they undertake - regarding or disregarding effects on food systems.

On markets:

• Some distinctions regarding markets should be made.

It seems the section on territorial markets (pp.46-47) is bringing together:

farmers markets, also referred as territorial markets in some studies;

retail markets, also referred as public markets, centrally located in cities or city districts, traditionally public properties but not the main status today;

and other forms of collective vending that may be identified as markets.

Informality and management weaknesses are more closely linked to retail and street markets than to farmers' markets - which in certain locations may be operating as well-constituted spaces and under clearer policies than other public markets (for example, old farmers markets in the Andes, for wholesale and retail).

• The share of urban population obtaining food from market sources is mentioned (p.43) but it brings together different types of market sources which makes it unclear.

It is a complicated figure to build globally. It could be more accurate to describe the situation per region and/or per representative set of countries/cities for which the figure could be more accurately measured.

Question 4 - About references

• FAO Investment Centre Food systems assessments:

https://www.fao.org/support-to-investment/our-work/projects/fsa2021/en/

These reports can be useful for identifying regional trends, as well as to identify the attention given to the urban dimension in food systems sustainability (often not adequately assessed).

You may have reviewed this series of reports (from which some of the experts here and I participated) but I raise them because I did not see them in the citations.

It is a long set and it may be more time effective to contact the leaders of this initiative - James Tefft and Patrick Herlant (or Beatrice Ngirabacu, to facilitate the communication).

I recently collaborated in the synthesis of a regional report for Latin America, based on these FAO assessments conducted for LAC and enriched by information from a complementary set of country case studies. Patrick Herlant and Jorge Albarracin (Bolivia) were leading this effort. It may be a good source of information or complement to your reflections for this regional area.

• FAO – EBRD studies on urban food systems during COVID 19:

A team at the Investment Centre, led by Florent Tomatis, has undertaken a series of studies on urban food distribution in main European cities, funded by the EBRD. The publications were under review, but you could request more information (a tentative title to the complete publication was: COVID-19 Pandemic package: evolution of food distribution systems – The resilience pathway).

These case studies included values on the market share of different types of marketing channels, trends in food commercialization and consumption, among others.

• FAO Latin America reports on markets:

This regional office has developed some studies on the regional situation of markets, and included some approximations to the share of different marketing channels – where the traditional predominates.

There is also mention to trends. E-commerce for instance does not develop at the pace it does for northern countries.

FAO and FLAMA. 2022. Wholesale markets: The social and economic effects of wholesale markets on urban food systems – 03/01/2022. Bulletin No. 8. Santiago, FAO.

Intini, J., Torres, J., and Ramírez, A. 2020. Series The food system and the challenges of COVID-19: Traditional food supply channels in a pandemic: suggestions for their modernisation. No. 4. Santiago, FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1542en

• FAO Investment Centre on wholesale food markets:

Although the publication of the report we presented to you is still in process, we use references to public ‘virtual’ spaces where we have shared this work. A suggestion to include them in case what we shared was useful:

Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. 2022. Webinar: Mercados de alimentos: sistema alimentario urbano para ciudades resilientes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_lj_pJ_7Sk&list=LL&index=10&t=2637s

Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. 2023. Webinar: Cómo trasladar los mercados mayoristas afuera de las ciudades: lecciones aprendidas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLHTjOFE-zw

Huaita-Alfaro, A.M., Quintero, M.C., y Tomatis, F. 2023. Urban Food Security: How to connect our cities’ food systems?

https://blogs.iadb.org/ciudades-sostenibles/en/urban-food-security-how-to-connect-our-cities-food-systems/

Tomatis, F., Huaita-Alfaro, A.M. y Quintero, M.C. 2023. Urban Food Security: where should wholesale markets be located?

https://blogs.iadb.org/ciudades-sostenibles/en/urban-food-security-where-should-wholesale-markets-be-located/

• Studies on food markets – political economy and urban sociology approximations:

Sergio Schneider (University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil) and colleagues have developed some studies on food markets – mainly farmers markets, developing connections of these to larger food economic markets. You may find some inputs from their analysis of relevance here too:

Schneider, S. y Cassol, A. 2023. Fostering new rural-urban relationships through markets, and the key role of governance. Food and Agriculture in Urbanized Societies. Research in Rural Sociology and Development, Volume 26, 83–105

van der Ploeg, J.D., Ye, J. y Schneider, S. 2022. Reading markets politically: on the transformativity and relevance of peasant markets, The Journal of Peasant Studies, 1-26

van der Ploeg, J.D. y Schneider, S. 2022. Autonomy as a politico-economic concept: Peasant practices and nested markets. Journal of Agrarian Change, 1–18.

Dear moderator

We considered the time of our country to send the contributions, but it was closed when I tried.

I am sending our contribution below on behalf of the National Institute of Science and Technology Fight against Hunger, Brazil.

Best wishes

Dirce Marchioni

 

1.The V0 draft introduces a conceptual framework informed by key principles established in previous HLPE-FSN reports (HLPE, 2017; HLPE, 2020).

Do you find the proposed framework effective to highlight and discuss the key issues concerning urban and peri-urban food systems?

Yes

Is this a useful conceptual framework to provide practical guidance for policymakers?

Yes. However, when you give the figure (p10), there is a oversimplification in the aspects linked with each one of the dimensions. 

Can you offer suggestions for examples to illustrate and facilitate the operationalization of the conceptual framework to address issues relevant for FSN?

We suggest to stress that it is a system, and not a linear e compartmentalized situation.  

2. The report adopts the broader definition of food security (proposed by the HLPE-FSN in 2020), which includes six dimensions of food security: availability, access, utilization, stability, agency and sustainability.

Does the V0 draft cover sufficiently the implications of this broader definition in urban and peri-urban food systems?

The dimension of agency still is not very well explained. Since that, together with sustainability these are new additions to the framework, they should be more clear

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

Yes

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

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

No

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

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

5. Are there any redundant facts or statements that could be eliminated from the V0 draft?

No

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

No comments

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

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

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

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

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

Dear madam/Sir

I hope first of all I am congratulate to the (FSN) Coordinator body, I am engaging long time in agriculture's media sector, how I can contribution my role in agriculture sectors. I came from yet still Agriculture family background. Strengthening urban and peri-urban food systems to achieve food security and nutrition in the context of urbanization and rural transformation-V0 draft of the HLPE-FSN report #19

I recognize the about the agriculture value how is important for men. I wish in terms of play role in agriculture sector from my side.

Many many thanks FSN Coordinator body' All of world FSN Members.

Giving me opportunity space of consultation Our dignified institution from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

With best regards,

Dhanbahadur Magar

Online portal : www.krishijournal.com.np