The role of both rural and urban spaces for rebuilding food systems is ever more relevant today. Cities are growing and globalisation is impacting everyone, producers and consumers alike. Hunger, malnutrition, unhealthy diets and obesity affect billions of people, soil degradation affects billions of hectares, and we face an alarming climate crisis. In this context, our food systems – how our food is produced, where, and how it ends up on our plates – must be rethought. From a production perspective, we need to value agroecological approaches and family farming as a way of life. From a consumption perspective, we need enough safe, nutritious and culturally appropriate food for everyone and to break out of non-resilient patterns of urban development.

Many debates on rural and urban development have remained rather dislocated. The city was mainly conceived as a far-away place where consumers had to be reached with ‘market access’ programmes but very little real connections were established between producers and consumers. Rather, the role of rural areas was reduced to a supportive one: feeding cities with cheap food. Policies pushed for intensive industrial agriculture, disconnecting people from their food and leaving room for middlemen, large distributors and retailers to take control over ever larger parts of the food chain. Decision makers in cities were hardly concerned about the ecological impacts of urban development for their peri-urban and rural surroundings, and saw no role for themselves in developing policies to influence food consumption and production patterns of their inhabitants. But all of this is rapidly changing, and there is growing awareness that improved rural–urban linkages are an essential element in the necessary transition towards more sustainable and resilient food systems. This is seen in joint initiatives by farmers and urban-based consumer groups for concrete changes that span across the urban–rural divide, with examples in this issue.

The important role of rural–urban linkages is also increasingly recognised through policy as a key factor for the development of sustainable, healthy and resilient food systems. That more than half of humanity now lives in cities, and that this share is likely to increase further in the coming decades, especially in Africa and Asia, has shifted policy priorities and introduced new actors. Concerns over climate change, resilience to environmental and economic shocks, food security and health have put food firmly on urban agendas. Cities have become important policy actors on food issues, and many have developed their own urban food policies in an area that was traditionally dominated by rural and agricultural policies. Likewise, civil society organisations in cities increasingly take up activities around urban agriculture and food, either for reasons of gastronomy or for environmental, social and health concerns, thereby building bridges between the rural and urban.

But where does the rural stop and where does the urban start? This is difficult to answer as the boundaries between city and countryside, or urban, peri-urban and rural, are ever more blurred. Rural and urban spaces cannot and should not be categorically separated. They are intimately linked and recognising and further strengthening these linkages is an important starting point for building viable pathways to sustainable and resilient food systems.

Dual identities

With rapid and increasing urbanisation, what does it mean to be urban? The move from rural to urban is often a result of necessity. National and international policies that favour industrial types of agriculture make it more difficult to continue family farming, pushing people to the cities, who can then send money to support those who stay on the farm. Pablo Tittonell points out that such ‘safety nets’ enable many farmers to continue producing when sole reliance on farming is no longer an option, but that this also works both ways, with urbanites in turn depending on traditional and diverse foods from their rural families.

These mutual relationships, made possible by urban people holding firmly to their rural identities, transcend individual families and rural–urban divides, and can manifest themselves as class-based alliances. Bolivian domestic workers fighting for food sovereignty is one such example where city dwellers, often recent migrants from the countryside, work together with peasants to create alternative food systems.

Strong rural identities in an urban context are also seen among growing numbers and increasingly varied urban agriculture initiatives. Such ‘rural’ activities in cities serve social needs, provide food security, and income-earning opportunities in marginalised communities. City farmers in black townships in South Africa introduce elements of rural lifestyles such as a sense of place and community ties in the urban context. Urban agriculture is also political, and citizens are fighting for control over their food systems and for recognition as urban farmers. In many cases, these objectives overlap, as in Rosario.

Counterforces

Even with hostile market and policy environments and increasing urbanisation, family farmers provide 70% of the world’s food. ‘Feeding the world’ is no small task, but citizens are not passively being fed, they are actively shaping how their food is produced and by whom (see box), ever more preferring food from family farmers. For this reason, farmers and consumers build new connections and start to collaborate.

Innovative direct marketing arrangements are an important link between farmers and consumers that contribute to overcoming the rural–urban divide. Shortening value chains, and developing direct relationships between farmers and consumers is gaining ground, and the strongest and most successful are those where the new social relationships are much more than a mere economic exchange. They include trust, friendship and new communities, as seen in initiatives that circumvent the strongly globalised food system in the Netherlands. Community Supported Agriculture, an alternative food system popular in Japan and the USA, spreading rapidly to Europe and also emerging in the global south, is a good example. In China, this concept is popular, providing consumers with reliable and safe food while also supporting young farmers to produce ecological food and pursue a lifestyle of their choice.

Besides direct marketing arrangements that build social networks, other initiatives that strengthen relationships and cooperation between farmers and citizens also emerge, founded on mutual benefits and often with shared or converging goals. For instance, across Japan, a system of shared ‘ownership’ supports farmers and urbanites to work together to preserve their highly valued but threatened rice terraces. Farmers share their traditional knowledge to preserve cultural landscapes and revive their rural communities, while people from the city want to learn about farming and educate their children.

Although the net flow of people is from rural to urban areas, there is an emerging counter-flow. Young people in particular are moving from cities to start farming. These so called ‘new farmers’ or ‘neo-rurals’ are motivated by social and environmental concerns and often choose agroecological practices. This is happening in many different parts of the world, and concepts such as Community Supported Agriculture, as in China and (peri-)urban farming, as in Brazil, are part of this dynamic.

Governance structures for agroecology

Agroecology is a consistent thread in building stronger rural–urban linkages. It is striking that urban agriculture initiatives like those in Argentina and South Africa explicitly choose agroecology as a point of departure, both in terms of production methods and for social and market relations that these initiatives embody. Also, several urban-based initiatives aim at closing nutrient and water flows at the local level, thereby improving the ecological ‘metabolism’ of the city. This shows that agroecology is as much the domain of the urban as it is of the rural. We see a convergence between rural- and urban-initiated movements, showing that consumers and producers alike have a stake in agroecological food production. Besides safe and healthy food, sustainable farming offers other benefits such as protection of cultural and environmental landscapes, carbon storage, biodiversity and clean water which city dwellers demand. Ecosystem services provided by farmers to cities deserve particular recognition.

A common denominator of the successful examples highlighted in this issue, is that they all have succeeded in putting into place appropriate social networks and institutional arrangements needed to add value to and strengthen the potential of rural–urban linkages. These range from marketing structures like Community Supported Agriculture or ‘food hubs’, social mechanisms that mobilise voluntary labour and initiatives that provide required knowledge, support and exchange. These structures allow citizens and farmers to govern their food according to their own values and principles. Without such governance structures that interconnect and strike the right balance between key rural and urban actors, improved rural–urban linkages would not be possible.

New and international policy making arenas  are embracing the importance of rural–urban linkages, as seen in this issue. These pages provide examples from across the world, where citizens, farmers, consumers, workers, women and youth, are building new, and strengthening existing rural–urban linkages with positive and concrete benefits. While these practices are promising, many challenges remain and still need to be addressed. On the one hand, it is key that international and national policies create space for emerging alternatives, Biraj Patnaik demonstrates for the World Trade Organisation that this is not always the case. On the other hand, we must make sure that rural–urban linkages continue to be grounded in practice, to avoid that it turns into another new buzz-word. For this, the active engagement of citizens, both consumers and producers, is the best way to create new pathways towards sustainable food systems we so urgently need.

Madeleine Florin (ILEIA) and Henk Renting (RUAF)

The post Editorial – Building sustainable food systems beyond the rural–urban divide appeared first on Ileia.

How much support can developing countries provide to their farmers for domestic food security without being accused of distorting international trade? This question is at the heart of a heated conflict in the World Trade Organization (WTO).

India proposes to spend less than US$25 per person per year under its National Food Security Act, aiming to stock food from local farmers for the food security needs of its population during hard times. Following the National Food Security Act of 2013, the central government would provide rice, wheat, maize and traditional grains like sorghum, pearl millet and finger millet, through the public distribution system. But the USA and other countries say that this is ‘a subsidy in disguise’ that should not be allowed, claiming it goes against WTO rules agreed in the 1994 Uruguay Round.

The US itself spends US$1608 per person per year under its Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program, which remains unchallenged in the WTO. Now that India has the means and the urgency to address its people’s food security needs, they would not be not allowed to do so? This hypocrisy highlights the WTO bias in favour of developed countries.

The developing world presented a comprehensive proposal for a progressive overhaul of the Agreement on Agriculture. But the USA, the EU and others arm-twisted developing countries into accepting a temporary ‘peace clause’ allowing them to continue with food security programmes ‘until a permanent solution is found’.

This injustice has to be reversed. Developing countries must unite and call for fundamental changes in international trade rules for food and agriculture. Civil society groups meeting in Tunis in March 2015 agreed on the following proposals.

• First, all countries should be allowed to implement comprehensive support programmes to develop sustainable, local food production systems for domestic food security.
• Second, no country should be allowed to export subsidised food that may have negative impacts on domestic food production of any other country.
• Third, countries should be allowed to use volume and price-related tools such as tariffs and (or ‘special safeguard mechanisms’) to counter import surges and falling commodity prices, and to protect the interests of their domestic producers.
• Fourth, developing countries should be allowed greater flexibility to impose tariffs on products designated ‘special products’ that impact their food security, rural development and livelihood security needs.

Anything short of these steps would enhance the inequities enshrined in the WTO, which work against small scale family farmers worldwide, and have deepened the agrarian crisis in the developing world in the last three decades. If this struggle is won, domestic food security and food sovereignty considerations would finally get precedence over the dictates of international trade.

Biraj Patnaik

Biraj Patnaik is the Principal Adviser to the Commissioners of the Supreme Court in India in the Right to Food case. Views expressed here are personal.
Email: biraj.patnaik@gmail.com

The post Opinion: The WTO must allow support to national food systems appeared first on Ileia.

Feeding the world’s growing cities has become ever harder over the past 50 years. Migrants from the countryside used to have supplies sent from their families, or could buy from local farmers at street corner markets. But much of this has disappeared, replaced by industrialised agriculture, identical products, multinational corporations, and supermarkets. Add to this the burning need to tackle climate change and energy transition, we must do everything to preserve agricultural land, particularly that close to major cities. And with this, to develop alternative food systems that support sustainable production of safe, healthy food that is available to all. This is the context in which Community Supported Agriculture has emerged: an alternative, locally-based economic model of agriculture and food distribution, in which consumers pledge to support one or more local farms, and share the risks and benefits of food production.

Chinese consumers, particularly the new middle class, are hungry not only for new foods, but also for new food systems. In the wake of various large-scale food scandals, food safety is a major concern for both the government and consumers. Compounded by pollution, pesticides and chemical fertilizers, trust in industrial farming has been undermined. Many people are buying food labelled organic, and for about the last seven years, more people have joined CSA groups. While relatively new phenomenon in China, there are already around 800 CSAs, with a membership of about 100,000 consumers. And these figures are growing fast! The citizens and farmers involved in these initiatives have created a national network to be able to share knowledge and other resources, and are also part of Urgenci, the global CSA network.

China’s first

What is Community Supported Agriculture?

The CSA model was born in Japan, where in the 1970s, as a result of mercury contamination (the famous Minimata disaster), a group of Japanese housewives started sourcing their food directly from organic farmers. This was known as Teikei, and the network is still flourishing in Japan today. The movement went global, with Urgenci, a network of national networks, now bringing well over a million producers and consumers together. There are also many thousands of groups that are not part of networks, especially in the USA.

How does it work?

Consumers commit to buying from a producer, or group of producers. A key point is that the consumers commit to buying on a regular basis and, at least for a whole growing season. This means that they share both the risks and benefits from the growing season. Payment is usually made in advance, but can vary, to allow those in difficult situations to still get fresh healthy fruit and vegetables.

Distribution models vary between countries, and even from one group to another. In some cases, boxes are prepared on the farm, and there are a number of drop off points in the city. In others, consumers are far more involved, assisting with planting, tending, harvesting, packing or distribution. There is a lot of good humour and exchange, and this is where community spirit is built. Many groups also have special festivals and newsletters to keep their consumers informed.

In 2008, Shi Yan, a soft-spoken but determined graduate from Renmin University, Beijing, helped to set up one of China’s first CSA farms called ‘Little Donkey’ It was a joint initiative between her university, the district government, and the Renmin Rural Reconstruction Centre.

Shi Yan became the chief operator. She had been inspired by her experience in 2008, working with Earthrise Farm, a small CSA in Minnesota, USA. “It changed my life,” says Shi Yan. She arrived there thinking that she would study its business model, “but when living there, I realised that it’s not just a model, it’s a lifestyle, and although I was concerned about rural issues, I never thought about living in a village.” But seven years ago she moved to the northwest corner of Beijing’s Haidian district to manage the farm, going against the trend where young people are abandoning rural villages for jobs in the city.

Little Donkey bucked another trend in Chinese agriculture. Chinese farmers are now among the world’s biggest users of chemical inputs, but cultivation at Little Donkey is chemical free. Although not certified organic because of the high certification costs, they do not use any chemical fertilizers or pesticides. They build soil health with knowledge and techniques from traditional practices, permaculture, and ‘natural farming’ principles of the South Korean farmer Han Kyu.

Little Donkey has ‘working share’ and ‘regular share’ members. Those with a working share rent 30 square metres and are provided with all material inputs such as seeds and organic fertilizers, tools and technical assistance to grow their own vegetables. Those with a regular share sign up for a weekly supply of seasonal production, which they can either pick up from the farm, shops and restaurants in the city, or have delivered to their door. Most payments are made online. Little Donkey currently has around 700 members, most of them residents of Beijing city. The farm is also used for training and research and is a hub for community activities with the possibility to organise visits and demonstrations of ecological farming.

More than production and consumption

Shi Yan recently moved on from Little Donkey and now works another farm, Shared Harvest, with her husband and his parents, where they rent land from the village authority. They employ 25 mostly young people who studied agriculture at university and are motivated to live a more communal, fulfilling life, and to practice what they learnt while studying.

The Shared Harvest CSA includes 500 families, four groups of parents from local schools, and organic clubs and restaurants in Beijing. Another community building aspect is the ‘Earth School’, where school children come to learn about ecological farming and the environment, how food is grown and what it looks like. Intent on nurturing the community, Shi Yan also set up a clothes exchange on her farm, and in November this year, the national network of about 500 groups will hold their annual conference in the area, including visits to her farm. This conference will also be back-to-back with the Urgenci International network conference, with more than 50 international participants. Shi Yan keeps a popular blog about all these initiatives.

‘New farmers’

Since 2008, more CSAs have popped up in China, so what makes them so popular? Besides consumers finding that CSA offers the alternative food system they are seeking, another big reason why it is taking off is because it provides an opportunity for educated youth, so called ‘new peasants’ or ‘new farmers’, to return to their roots. Young, qualified graduates who moved to the city to study, are becoming disillusioned by the bright lights and city life. And they are increasingly choosing to return to their villages. Caring for elderly family members is another reason for many young Chinese to choose to return to their villages, as grandparents are often left alone when children and grandchildren all work in the cities. These ‘new farmers’ lead many of China’s CSAs and this is also the case in the rest of the world. In many cases, they even leave behind stable employment and a good salary in the cities.

Liu Yueming is one such new farmer. She moved to Beijing and qualified as a biologist, but after working there for some time, she decided to move back to her family farm in 2010. She explained that the move has allowed her to be closer to her grandparents, and also to be able to spend more time with her own son. Liu employs 15 people on her eight hectare farm, most from the local village. Half the land is rented from the village authority on a 30 year lease, the rest is rented from different families in the village. She began working with 20 families, with just one rundown polytunnel, but with government support she now has seven more. Today, 400 nearby families choose between four different weekly vegetable boxes for periods of six or 12 months. Much of the communication between members and the farm is via Weibo, the Chinese version of Facebook.

Protected peri-urban land

Like Liu Yueming, new farmers can usually rent additional land, either from other families or from the local authorities. In fact, with a shortage of people to work the land in the villages, CSA has been welcomed with open arms. Protected peri-urban land dedicated to agriculture is common across China, and supports the spread of CSA. It provides access to fresh organic food and a viable model for new farmers to return to the land.

Farmers’ markets

Most of Liu’s produce is dedicated to feeding the local community, but she sells surplus produce at the Beijing Farmers’ market, one of a dozen across China operating together with CSAs. The market manager makes arrangements with farmers who sell their own produce. The clients of these markets are mainly the new Chinese middle class and foreigners, looking for high quality, fresh, organically grown food but who don’t want to commit to joining a CSA. Certification is not yet common, but the Chinese network is in the process of setting up a participatory guarantee system.

The legal situation of the farmers’ markets is uncertain. Theoretically, markets require a permit, but at the same time, famers are allowed to sell their produce freely. Another issue, at least in Beijing, is that refrigerated trucks must be used to transport all food into the city, and farmers near Beijing now work together to transport their produce to the market in this way.

What does the future hold?

It is impossible to know how the CSA movement will evolve in China, but the government is looking closely at the model as a supplier of safe and healthy food to the cities. But they could also favour other forms of production, namely partnerships with private companies. However, the number of such groups grows every year, proving that this food system, involving farmers, consumers and local authorities, is popular. Individuals such as Shi Yan have done much, with institutional support such as from Renmin University and the cooperation of local authorities.

Judith Hitchman

Judith Hitchman is an advocacy officer for Urgenci, and currently consumer constituency member of the Civil Society Mechanism of the Committee on World Food Security and Nutrition.
Email: hitchman@club-internet.fr

• Rural–urban linkages in China

• China has the largest agricultural system in the world in terms of farm output and it includes a little more than 200 million smallholdings, representing at least 800 million people. On just 10% of all cultivated land in the world, these smallholders produce 20% of the world’s total food supply. The average farm has only five mu of agricultural land, about one third of a hectare. However, China is self-sufficient in as far as the nutritional needs of its huge population are concerned. Over the last four decades total food production and productivity grew more than in any other country.Granaries, barter and multiple cropping are some of the underlying mechanisms, as well as a massive and richly chequered provisioning of food from farmers to cities through a widespread network of interconnected food markets. The Xin Fa Di market in Beijing is one example. Here thousands of suppliers and buyers come together to provide Beijing residents with 30,000 tonnes of fruit and vegetables every day.

  Hukou

  The national Hukou household registration system provides Chinese not only with a right to education and medical care which is tied to their place of origin, but in the case of rural people also gives them the right to access land. This given also shapes rural-urban migration flows.In China, migration is not a one way move from the countryside to the cities, but is circular. Many young people leave the villages in order to work in urban industries. After marriage and the first child, women return to the village while men only come back in periods of land preparation and harvest. After many years, the men return to the rural areas permanently to invest their savings in the farm. Many social struggles in the countryside rest on the right to land embedded in Hukou and it has enabled a number of peasants to start their own community supported agriculture initiatives.

  New marketsIn China, rural-urban linkages are also leading to the emergence of new markets. Ye, Rao and Wu (2010) refer to:

  > the market for organic produce, that currently embraces more than 500 different products that are mostly exported; the export value is about US $ 400 million;

  > the Green Food market that channels certified food within China with total market sales currently equaling € 19 billion a year;

  > the market for eco-agriculture that strongly builds on ancient agricultural traditions;

  > the markets associated with ‘One Village, One Product’, centred mostly on typical regional or local products, e.g. high quality tofu or hand picked organic apples;

  > the markets for agro-tourism, serving hundreds of millions of tourists and generating an income of some € 5 billion each year.

  Jan Douwe van der Ploeg
  
  Jan Douwe van der Ploeg is a professor at Wageningen University, the Netherlands and China Agricultural University in Beijing. jandouwe.vanderploeg@wur.nl

The post Community supported agriculture thriving in China appeared first on Ileia.

The past ten years have seen rapid change in Egypt as the modern culture of innovation, startups, and green economy has continued to gain ground. Many youth from Cairo have had the opportunity to travel abroad and have on their return, taken an interest in environmental issues, renewable energy and urban farming. NGOs such as Nahdet el Mahrousa, sought alternatives beyond depending on foreign aid development efforts, and supports young innovators achieve their entrepreneurial goals. One notable social enterprise they helped to set up is Nawaya, a group from Cairo working to strengthen rural–urban linkages.

The Nawaya team knew that building stronger links between rural and urban populations in Egypt is a fundamental part of building sustainable farming and food systems. Since the time of the Ottoman rulers, the rift between drivers of agricultural development and the needs of the peasantry has been growing. Today, agricultural holdings have been fragmented, been turned into housing or industrial areas, or sold to big investors. In rural areas, farming is no longer an attractive profession, challenged by inadequate financial and technical support and inaccessible marketing channels. And in urban areas, consumers find it ever more difficult to access high quality, locally produced products. This was the social challenge that Nawaya set out to tackle.

Nawaya

Nawaya is an Arabic play on words meaning ‘fruit stones’ and ‘intentions’, both alluding to improving sustainable agriculture, its central goal. Today, the team has seven members, most of whom are also busy with other work. Sara el Sayed the project manager and curriculum developer, manages an educational travel company, and Ahmed Galal the field coordinator, maintains a popular Facebook page dedicated to changing the way people relate to food.

The group is working on several parallel initiatives including technical aspects of farming with few external inputs, permaculture design, preserving agrobiodiversity, agrotourism, value-adding and product marketing. Importantly, Nawaya is creating a space where the goals and aspirations of both farmers and city dwellers meet.

Green innovation hubs

It was not before the January 25th revolution, 2011, when a real window of opportunity opened for the aspiring youth to take bold steps. And, it was no coincidence that several supportive networks emerged during this period, in which Nawaya was well embedded.

Nawaya not only received technical assistance, legal support, essential training and mentorship from Nahdet el Mahrousa. But the Permaculture Research Institute provided them with experts, trainers and educational material. And the Fagnoon art school, a well established arts centre on the outskirts of Guiza, part of greater Cairo, provided the location for most of their activities, including an experimental plot. Moreover, ICE-Cairo entered the scene, a massively popular meeting point for Cairo’s community interested in solving environmental and social challenges. Nawaya was set up in part by one of ICE-Cairo’s cofounders and until now, ICE-Cairo remains the hub for green innovation.

Farmer field schools

Nawaya developed a curriculum for a farmer field school with funding from Drosos foundation. The curriculum was developed in a participatory way with farmers to ensure that the most relevant topics would be covered. In particular, the field school focused on practices for building soil fertility, pest management and seed production.

Fifteen farmers and their families are currently involved. Those who joined were those willing to experiment on a small part of their own farms (on areas of about 700 m2). Most of the farmers grow wheat, graze cattle, and cultivate various fruits and vegetables, including okra, dates and mangoes.

A key part of the farmer field school approach is learning by doing. Nawaya took over a plot of land in Guiza, within the premises of Fagnoon art school, where they could experiment with permaculture principles alongside the farmers. The soil was highly saline and the available irrigation water was of poor quality, like that of many nearby farmers. The learning process worked both ways, with farmers showing why their traditional techniques worked, and in turn, the Nawaya team showing them how to improve productivity by building up soil fertility with techniques such as composting.

According to one of the farmers, Nawaya’s plot has improved dramatically. No laboratory tests were performed but a change in the soil quality was evident. This motivated the farmers already recruited by Nawaya to continue working with that project, and more farmers from outside the project to know about it. The knowledge generated on Nawaya’s plot and also on farmers’ fields has been documented as success stories for future users, forming part of Nawaya’s educational material in print and film.

Besides experimenting, Nawaya also organises workshops where both producers and consumers participate. For example, a farmer with experience in beekeeping gave a workshop to a group from Cairo. This was empowering for the farmer and is a step towards breaking down social barriers that exist between producers and city dwellers in Egypt. Activities like this help to build trust between growers and the Nawaya team, one of the biggest challenges Nawaya has faced.

From farm to fork

The real chef d’entreprise in any small scale farm is often a woman. This is true worldwide and Egypt is no exception. For this reason, Nawaya also tried to involve as many women as possible. They set up a community kitchen at Fagnoon art school where women could get creative with recipes that add value to what they grow and other local products. Besides providing the kitchen space and assisting with recording recipe development, Nawaya took on the task of packaging and marketing the end products in Cairo.

In early 2014, two Nawaya members, Sara Pozzi and Brendon Johnson, launched the Baladini food brand. They are now selling pasta from the community kitchen at weekly farmers’ markets and shops in Cairo. This initiative has provided an opportunity for women to work outside their homes and to share and learn new skills. Until now, finding a viable business model for this activity has been particularly difficult, and Nawaya is currently exploring how to share the risks and the profits so that the women can reliably generate extra household income.

Consumer consciousness

Nawaya has a growing network including a diverse range of city dwellers that support their activities in different ways. Some of them are well to do consumers interested in the highest quality food products, health conscious consumers supportive of small scale farmers, people interested in the culinary traditions of Egypt, permaculture enthusiasts, chefs, researchers and schools that wish to engage their students in educational gardens.

In total, about 2000 consumers are involved, and the Nawaya Facebook page has received 10,000 likes so far. People buying Nawaya’s produce have particularly enjoyed the traditional white cheese made from grassfed buffalo milk, honey and innovative food items such as caffeine-free coffee made from dates. “Yesterday, in Kattameya market I bought flour from Nawaya. It smells different and reminds me of my childhood,” said Essra, who immediately made bread and looks forward to trying it with the cheese. Now, they aim to reach out for an even bigger market and target middle class consumers. A broader range of products, larger quantities and more exposure might be a way to get more people on board.

Creative network

Much of Nawaya’s success can be attributed to the commitment of their team and their solid local network that has been actively involved from the start. Access to funding at the beginning allowed them to learn by doing, and having space at the Fagnoon art school was particularly helpful to establish themselves as a community. And, working closely with the ICE-Cairo community provided a wealth of creative ideas that helped to find solutions to practical issues. However, it is still challenging to navigate complicated legislations that are not conducive to developing small scale production operations, and accessing specialised knowledge and expertise when needed.

The learning process worked both ways

Nawaya has created a ‘bridge’, where farming families dedicated to reducing external inputs and diversifying their activities meet Cairo’s city dwellers. But this success has not come easily. Perhaps the most important lesson learnt is the importance of risk taking, trial and error, and how to deal with failure constructively. There is still a lot of work ahead as Nawaya plans to further explore the concept of multifunctional farming. They have identified a need for more strategic business planning, more efficient marketing channels, and more involvement from city dwellers. And working on social cohesion and conflict management has become increasingly necessary as they work more with rural communities.

Tarek Soliman

Tarek Soliman has a Masters in agroecology and is a freelance consultant on sustainable food production working with civil society organisations on the right to food. He is currently a fellow of the food innovation program of the Future Food Institute in Bologna, Italy.
Email: tareksoliman143@gmail.com

The post Egyptian youth challenge the city–country divide appeared first on Ileia.

Only recently I realised that when I was a child, my grandfather was practicing a form of urban agriculture in our backyard in the outskirts of Buenos Aires. But he didn’t see it as such. In his eyes, he was simply producing vegetables for the family, just as his father had done in the Piedmont of the Italian Alps before migrating to Argentina. Most people around us were doing the same thing too.

After all, our neighbourhood had been a green belt of commercial vegetable production only a few decades ago. During this transition, we lived in an open landscape with some relics of wilderness on the low productivity soils, marshes or river margins, and new signs of urbanisation – infrastructure, public transport, schools, parks and shops. I have to think about this mosaic every time I hear about projects for ‘new green cities’ in Europe, such as the projected green city of Almere, The Netherlands.

It also reminds me of other places. When I first visited Vihiga district in western Kenya, back in 2002, the population density was already incredibly high, with up to 1000 people living in every square kilometre. With the average family of about five cultivating less than half a hectare, about 60% of households earned part or most of their income from work outside the farm. Life would not have been possible without a fluid and strong rural–urban connectivity. Family members living in the cities would send money to their rural ’homes’. And especially in times of economic crises, rural families sent food to assist those in urban areas. Revisiting the area in 2012 we found a growing importance of rural–urban connectivity in the area, becoming even stronger with the spread of mobile phones. One example is the fantastic M-Farm initiative, connecting smallholders to urban markets using mobile phone technologies.

Smallholder farming in these peri-urban regions is being privately subsidised through cash remittances and off-farm activities. Which is logical. You can’t make a living from half a hectare of maize even if you get the best yields ever! The phenomenon of rural urban connectivity and interdependence is not only restricted to densely populated regions. For example, similar patterns exist in sparsely populated regions of rural Zimbabwe as described by Andersson.

Perhaps it is time to rethink the role of these farms that straddle the rural–urban continuum. Peri-urban farming is fading as a livelihood option, but not as a source of traditional and diverse food which is not always found on the market. The produce can buffer shocks in times of scarcity, contribute substantially to both rural and urban diets, provide ecosystem services and maintain agrobiodiversity.

This was true back in the 1970s in my grandfather’s garden and it is true for Vihiga today, and could become true in the future green cities of Europe. Perhaps it can be an alternative to the current research and development approach to food security, which continues to push the narrow idea that increasing yields of staple food crops is the primary solution.

Pablo Tittonell

Pablo Tittonell is Professor of the Farming Systems Ecology group at Wageningen University and Research Centre, the Netherlands. He is a board member of the African Conservation Tillage network and the European focal point of the Latin American Scientific Society on Agroecology (SOCLA). He is our regular columnist for 2015.
Email: pablo.tittonell@wur.nl

The post Opinion: Finding food security in the rural-urban continuum appeared first on Ileia.

India: Learning lunch with nature

How do you get your wonderful lunch? Is it because you can afford it or because somebody has worked to produce it? Where do you think your food comes from, and where will it come from in the future? These are some of the questions attracting hundreds of residents from Mumbai and Pune to Saguna Baug. Saguna Baug is Chandrashekhar Bhadsavle’s 50 hectare multifunctional farm combining agrotourism with cereal crops, multipurpose trees, livestock and aquatic fauna. Restoring the dignity of farming as a vocation was the main objective behind transforming the farm into an agrotourism hub. Over the past 20 years, the farm has developed into a place where leisure and learning merge and provide opportunities for farmers and urban residents to interact. This rural–urban interface brings visitors close to nature where they can learn and practice food production. The visitors can enjoy bird watching, water sports, purchase the farm’s produce or get involved with farming activities by working. They gain a better appreciation of some of the challenges and pressures farmers face. And, “appreciation not only ignites confidence but restores dignity too,” says Bhadsalve, who is acutely aware that restoring farmers’ confidence in farming is crucial to reversing rural outmigration. This initiative has other benefits too. Agrotourism accounts for 40% of the income from Saguna Baug, the farm now employs 60 local youth and, as consumers learn how their food is produced they are reshaping their eating habits.

Fore more information, contact Sudhirendar Sharma (sudhirendarsharma@gmail.com). Sudhirendar works at The Ecological Foundation in New Delhi, India and researches and writes on agriculture and related development issues.

Basque Country: Peasants connect with cities

In Basque Country (Spain) the severe economic crisis of the past few years coupled with unprecedented levels of youth unemployment, is opening space for agriculture as a new opportunity, especially among young people. They are seeking to build a decent future on the land, a future linked to the production of quality food, and another way of life. Interestingly, many of these are urban youth who were born and raised in the cities and towns of Basque Country (a trend in many other countries too, see this contribution). In parallel, Basque Country is a breeding ground for a large number of dynamics that link urban citizens to producers in the countryside. These include a growing number of consumer networks around small scale farmers, trading initiatives based on high quality peasant production, and various initiatives to revive local markets through direct sales. These innovations are central in the socio-political agenda and strategies of farmer organisations, especially for the Basque farmers’ union (EHNE Biscay), a member of La Via Campesina.

For more information contact bizkaia@ehnebizkaia.eus.

United Kingdom: Growing communities

Growing Communities is a successful social enterprise that builds community-led alternatives to the current damaging food system (www.growingcommunities.org). They began 18 years ago and the team now numbers 25 part-time staff. They provide a direct connection between farmers and consumers in a number of ways and it is this diversity that makes their enterprise unique. Through a box scheme, more than 3000 people receive fresh, local organic vegetables each week. Growing Communities also set up the Stoke Newington farmers’ market where about 25 local farmers sell direct to the public every Saturday. And, on top of these marketing initiatives, Growing Communities has a ’Patchwork Farm’ scattered across Hackney in East London. From 12 small market gardens and plots of about 100 m2 each, they produce two tonnes of salad leaves each year. And this is complemented by a wider variety of fruit and vegetables produced at Dagenham Farm, which is about three quarters of a hectare. Urban growing apprentices are trained each year on these farms and the group also supports other communities wishing to build their own alternative food systems. Through a ‘start-up programme’ that offers workshops, financial tools, practical support and interest-free loans, more than ten groups across the UK have since set up their own box schemes.

For more information contact Richenda Wilson (growcomm@growingcommunities.org)

Ecuador: 250,000 families to lead the food transformation

Frustrated by their government’s inability or disinterest in seriously addressing the unwanted human health, social and environmental consequences tied to industrial food, Ecuador’s National Agroecology Collective (or Colectivo) launched an ambitious initiative to recruit 250,000 families to commit at least half of their existing food budget to ‘responsible consumption’: pesticide- and GMO-free, locally sourced, culturally empowered, sustainable food. Together, this would represent some US$300 million per year – a sizeable investment in the sought after transition to healthier food. In the words of a concerned mother: “If the government is unwilling to represent our interests, then we must take things into our own hands.” To recruit the 250,000 families (roughly 5% of the country’s population), the Colectivo, a loose network of some 300 organisations, is both reinforcing its tried-and-tested methodology of sensorial food workshops as well as piloting a game in which participating families complete a series of challenges to self-evaluate the quality and effects of their food practices. The families also share their experiences through one-minute videos: www.quericoes.org. They represent an example for their neighbours and through this new campaign they become part of the country’s agroecology movement – a rising democratic force for a tastier future.

For more information contact Ana Deaconu (adeaconu@ekorural.org) and see UA Magazine 29 for a full article on this initiative.

The post Locally rooted: Ideas and initiatives from the field appeared first on Ileia.

B. Murphey (Ed.), 2014. Practical Action Publishing, Warwickshire, UK, 92pages.

This report concludes that “local food webs are a cornerstone for the model of food provision that should be prioritised in order to secure our future food.” The authors’ set out to convince those who influence agricultural, food and nutrition polices of this statement. Case studies exploring African and the European contexts support the claim that local food webs are efficient when compared with long chains that deliver the commodities produced by industrial agriculture to distant consumers.

Each case study raises different arguments for more protection, investment and support for local food webs. For instance, in Cameroon, local food production and exchange is shown to be a lifeline during failings of the formal sector. In Kenya local food webs are shown to provide food for the majority even when small scale producers are pushed to the margins. And from England, the mapping of local food webs is shown to be a powerful tool in the campaign against agribusiness. Similarities in terms of threats to the local food webs in each case study are highlighted and the mutual impacts between agricultural sectors in Europe and Africa analysed. Overall, the book provides a compelling case for sustainable food systems that help realise food sovereignty. Read more.

Urbanisation, rural–urban migration and poverty

C. Tacoli, G. McGranahan and D. Satterthwaite, 2015. International Institute for Environment and Development, London, UK, 33 pages.

In an increasingly urbanised world, substantial transformations in population distribution seem inevitable. In countries where most of the population is rural, agricultural production systems are evermore based on large-scale, mechanised farming. And often inadequate access to resources puts a strain on the capacity of smallholders to adapt to droughts and climate variability. Rural–urban migration is the result of these transformations, and a critical component of urbanisation.

This working paper aims to better understand migration and urban poverty and to challenge the assumption that urban poverty is a result of migration. The authors emphasise the role of cities and municipal governments in addressing the needs of their residents and stress that the lack of information on residents living in low-income and informal settlements is a reason why governments fail to reduce urban poverty. Read more.

Food for City Building: A Field Guide for Planners Actionists and Entrepreneurs

W. Roberts, 2014. Hypenotic Inc. Toronto, Canada, 336 pages.

This book is a reflection of Wayne Roberts’ ten year experience as manager of the Toronto Food Policy Council, a pioneering group and the first food policy council to be officially embedded within a major city government. This book is clearly about putting people and place first in food policy advocacy and makes an impressive attempt at, “connecting many of the dots linking food… to a hometown place… to neighbourhood agencies… to community-based businesses… to farmers… to workers… to the environment… to local governments… to residents, citizens, and activists… to democracy and empowerment… to physical and mental health…. to spirituality.”

The book’s versatility is reflected in the different groups of readers it targets – including entrepreneurs, innovators and activists amongst city officials exploring food dimensions of civic development and the youth who are energising the food movement and will be the next generation of food professionals and leaders. Read more.

The modern peasant: adventures in city food

J. Tulloh, 2013. Chatto and Windus, London, UK, 336 pages.

Alarmed by the fact that city dwellers are ever more cut off from the countryside and that the hidden costs of the ‘supermarket culture’ are enormous, this book sought to find out if some kind of peasant-like self-sufficiency could be achieved for city dwellers. The author was quickly inspired by her discovery that London is teeming with so called modern peasants. Vivid stories of visits to producers are complemented by tips for baking, pickling, fermenting and foraging.

These stories and a deep knowledge of cookery are combined to celebrate the city as a centre of food production. And the experiences from London show that taking the best from past and present traditions is exhilarating. Read more.

Food in an urbanised world. The role of city region food systems in resilience and sustainable development

S. Jennings, J. Cottee, T. Curtis and S. Miller, 2015. 3Keel, Oxford, UK, 92 pages

This report, commissioned by the Prince of Wales’s International Sustainability Unit, seeks to provide an overview and synthesis of the current state of knowledge on city region food systems. The concept of ‘city region food systems’ has come up strongly in international policy debates in recent years as amongst others highlighted by a Global Call for Action on City Region Food Systems that was adopted by an international coalition of NGOs and government organisations at the 7th World Urban Forum in Medellín in 2014 (www.cityregionfoodsystems.org). The report aims to clarify the city region food systems concept and analyse the proposed benefits of pursuing a city-regional approach to food policy and planning. It provides recommended actions that would help stakeholders ensure improvements to food systems outcomes at a city-region level and as a means of implementing more integrated approaches to improving rural–urban linkages. Read more.

Cities and Agriculture. Developing Resilient Urban Food Systems

H. de Zeeuw and P. Drechsel (Eds.), 2015. Earthscan Food and Agriculture Series, Routledge, 416 pages. Publication date 29 September 2015

In response to the challenges set to food systems by ongoing urbanisation processes, this edited volume presents experience and evidence-based ‘state of the art’ chapters on the key dimensions of urban food challenges and types of intraand peri-urban agriculture. The book provides urban planners, local policy makers and urban development practitioners with an overview of crucial aspects of urban food systems based on an up to date review of research results and practical experiences in both developed and developing countries. By doing so, the international team of authors, of which many are closely connected to the RUAF network, provides a balanced textbook for students of sustainable agriculture, food and urban studies, as well as a solid basis for well-informed policy making, planning and implementation regarding the development of sustainable, resilient and just urban food systems.

The book covers a wide range of relevant topics, amongst others, urban food systems and policies, multi stakeholder planning, agriculture in urban design and spatial planning, short chain food marketing, productive and safe use of organic wastes and wastewater, urban agriculture and climate change, gender, financing urban agriculture and the role of urban agriculture in disasters and emergencies. Read more.

The post Mind! New books on rural–urban linkages appeared first on Ileia.

Although Brazil is well known for its massive investment in industrial agriculture, it is also one of the world references when it comes to public policies supporting agroecology and organic production. This reputation is largely based on a set of policies and institutional programmes that have been implemented since 2000. These include the National Policy for Agroecology and Organic Production launched in 2012, followed by a National Plan in 2013. Consolidating agroecology and supporting organic production are two distinct goals, but participatory guarantee systems (PGS) are an example of an overlapping strategy.

Organic certification and labelling

Participatory guarantee systems
“Participatory guarantee systems are locally focused quality assurance systems. They certify producers based on active participation of stakeholders and are built on a foundation of trust, social networks and knowledge exchange,” states IFOAM, the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements. They also provide a reliable guarantee for consumers seeking certified products.

A key difference from third-party certification is that the guarantee is the result of direct participation by producers, consumers and others, who define the standards and verification procedures themselves. The benefits are clear. PGS operate at a local level and are accessible to small scale farmers as costs and bureaucracy are minimised. They support farmers’ flexibility and diversity. They encourage active participation and increase awareness amongst consumers, and they promote expansion of local food production systems.

Participatory guarantee systems are now used by more than half of Brazil’s certified organic producers and their products are increasingly reaching people in the cities. The others are certified via third-party systems. PGS became legally recognised in 2009, supporting two different approaches. The first, based on ‘participatory assessment bodies’, allows farmers to use the same national organic label as that used for third-party certification. The second, based on ‘social control organisations’, only provides certification and not the right to use the organic label. This latter system suits farmers who sell directly to both rural and urban consumers, for example at farmers’ markets or directly from their farms; situations that do not require an organic label.

Today, there are more than 200 such systems across Brazil, meaning much more ecological production reaches consumers, especially in urban areas. And, through PGS, farmers claim their identity as agroecological producers for which they receive greater recognition and support.

Autonomy

PGS also increase the autonomy of agroecological producers. “The middleman buying our products would mix everything, with or without pesticides, and decide how much he would pay,” lamented Terêncio, a farmer from the community of Arroio do Padre on the north coast of Rio Grande do Sul in southern Brazil. He is amongst a group of farmers producing in an agroecological way and struggling for more autonomy. Besides relying on middlemen to reach markets because of long distances, they were increasingly confronted by demands of middlemen to specialise and produce greater quantities of single products. This was not always in line with their aspirations.

In 2006, this group of family farmers formed the Cooperative of Itati, Terra de Areia and Três Forquilhas (COOMAFITT). The cooperative was part of their strategy to improve access to local markets, and to institutional markets through government procurement programmes, namely the food acquisition programme and the national school feeding programme. Setting up a PGS was seen as a complementary activity to the cooperative, as farmers would receive a premium of up to 30% on organically certified products sold into these urban, institutional markets. So, in 2011, they started the process of organic certification via a PGS.

A three-year process began with support from technicians from NGOs, and government rural extension and environmental services, mainly to navigate the bureaucracy. Farmers have experienced many benefits from being part of the group. Monique, a former technician highlights that for many, certification has increased the recognition of the value of their products: “the group’s name made access to fair markets and public programmes much easier. I have witnessed farmers gaining more power and identity through the PGS.” Now, the group holds monthly meetings with about 40 participants each time, mainly farmers and technicians. The Ministry of Agriculture has just approved their status as a participatory assessment body. These developments have also made the farmers much less dependent on middlemen.

Recognition as agroecological producers

Autonomy with respect to production systems and maintaining identity as agroecological farmers are as important as reaching markets. This is the case for a group of 12 farmers in the municipality of Divino in the Zona da Mata of Minas Gerais in southeastern Brazil that started to set up a PGS in late 2014.

Some of the farmers in Divino have been producing ecological coffee in agroforestry systems for more than 15 years without organic certification. They believe that the new organic label will help them to reach consumers in the cities who don’t know them yet. But, these farmers say that it is not just about organic production techniques and reaching more consumers. They also strive for increased recognition as agroecologists. Their main goal is to promote the spread of food production systems that are in balance with local ecosystems, are based on and respect for local culture, and are supported by fair urban markets. They believe that PGS will help to expand this movement.

How are they going about this? The farmers asked for technical and organisational support from the Centre of Alternative Technologies of Zona da Mata (CTA-ZM), an NGO with whom they have been working together for many years. They have had four meetings so far, each on a different farm. Together the group is exploring how to combine their aspirations and needs with the official requirements for organic certification. During each meeting, they visit the farm and the participants reflect on their observations by raising ideas related to adopting new practices and adapting existing ones. They are using the ‘Organic Management Notebook’ provided by the Ministry of Agriculture to assist with this process. This notebook provides accessible information on organic management techniques, and on how to manage and provide the information required by the Ministry of Agriculture.

Rural spaces in the cities

The participatory nature of PGS means that it supports different types of small scale producers involved with ecological production across Brazil. A group of 28 rural and urban producers has set up a PGS on the doorstep of Porto Alegre, the largest city in Rio Grande do Sul. Besides selling their produce beyond street markets, their major aim was to hold onto and preserve the ‘rural spaces’ in their urban context. Flying in the face of large investors and the mindsets of municipalities, they fought for recognition as agroecological and organic farmers. Building their identity as a group of agroecological and organically-certified urban farmers and consumers is their biggest achievement.

In 2011, farmers, consumers and technicians from the rural extension services came together to set up a PGS, and at the end of 2014 the Ministry of Agriculture authorised their certification.

With their new label, the aim is to construct new markets that are compatible with their agroecological farming in the city’s competitive environment. They sell their produce to restaurants and shops, and they are working to become part of the school feeding programme. They have become well known for producing and selling a number of unconventional edible plants including araça (Psidium longipetiolatum), butiá (Butia capitata) and tomate-de-capote (Physalis angulate). These are sold raw and processed, as jams and breads.

An additional benefit from the PGS process was better cooperation amongst the group. Most of them are ‘new urban farmers’, and sharing knowledge and skills, but also combining their resources, have been key to their success. Some producers provide land and inputs while others provide labour and knowledge. This has enabled them to share the benefits of ecological urban production with many more residents of Porto Alegre.

Institutional support

The official recognition and institutional support for participatory organic certification has served as a meeting point between local experiences of small scale farmers, and the rules of organic production. A number of successful participatory guarantee systems across Brazil highlight the importance of positive interactions between farmers, government and civil society organisations. In all three examples here, technical support and financial incentives such as access to food acquisition programmes, have contributed to their success.

Participatory certification and its recognition by governments contribute to the development of ecologically- based production and the expansion of local, sustainable food systems. The versatility of the participatory guarantee system lies in the fact that it preserves farmers’ autonomy and creativity in both rural and urban spaces, and is flexible enough to support their different circumstances, goals and aspirations.

Maria Alice F.C. Mendonça, Nina Abigail Caligiorne Cruz, Irene Maria Cardoso and Flávia Charão Marques

Maria Alice Mendonça is an agronomist and PhD student at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul.
Email: maria.alice.fcm@gmail.com

Nina Abigail Caligiorne Cruz is an agronomist and technician at the Centre of Alternative Technologies of Zona da Mata (CTA-ZM).
Email: nina@ctazm.org.br

Irene Cardoso is a professor of soil science at the Federal University of Viçosa
Email: irene@ufv.br

Flávia Charão Marques is a professor of rural development at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul.
Email: flavia.marques@ufrgs.br

The post Participatory certification in Brazil supports local food systems appeared first on Ileia.

An increasing number of Dutch citizens are worried about industrial food. They are apprehensive about the effects of additives that keep the food ‘fresh’ and presentable for a long time and reject the large amounts of packaging, food miles and waste connected with the food in supermarkets. They are looking for fresh and healthy food and want to contribute to the local economy and the sustainability of local farms.

‘Short chains’ in which urban consumers engage directly with producers, are opening new perspectives. Consumers get affordable, fresh and seasonal produce, usually produced in an (agro)ecological way. And producers receive fair prices. Direct sales eliminate various steps in the Dutch food chain. The following illustration shows how power in this chain is concentrated in the hands of just a few retailers:

A way out

Direct sales represent an alternative for farmers struggling to survive in the dominant system. Prices of feed, seeds and chemical fertilizers are increasing and at the same time large retailers are pushing down the prices farmers receive. This locks producers into a ‘race to the bottom’ whereby they end up receiving a small fraction of the prices consumers pay. This also locks them into a ‘treadmill’ of upscaling and intensification which requires ever more borrowed money from the bank. Unable to cope, one third of Dutch farmers stopped farming between 2000 and 2013.

Many producers look for ways out of this trap. But due to the continuous trend of upscaling within the Dutch agricultural sector, a large customer base is required to sell all products directly, and finding and keeping customers requires a lot of time and effort. As a result, the many emerging initiatives that facilitate direct sales from farmers to urban residents are a major transition in food and farming practices. They represent a new model in the Dutch context, which by world standards, is particularly globalised. Experiences from two initiatives are presented here.

Food collectives

Food collectives, or consumer groups that buy food directly from farmers, are emerging across the country. A young woman called Judith Vos set up a successful food collective (www.voedselkollektief.nl) in Amersfoort. It is internet-based: each week the participating farmers enter the vegetables, fruit and dairy products they can deliver and the customers place their orders accordingly. Volunteers amongst the consumers pick up produce from the farms, deliver it to a garage in the city, the sorting and collection point for consumers. All of the farmers are within 25 km of the city, thereby reducing food miles. The collective started out with 25 people in 2011, and now has 300 members, all of whom are supposed to contribute in some way or another.

Setting up the collective was not without difficulties. All of the work is done on a voluntary basis by members and with the growth of the initiative people reconsidered whether they were able to do the necessary work. Judith: “The bigger you are the more coordination and feedback is needed. For some people, this isn’t appealing, and for others it is hard to keep on top of more complex initiatives.” The limited opening time for consumers to collect their orders, only one and a half days per week, is another issue. And, she adds: “it is important to keep in mind that decision making in a collective is inclusive, but can be quite slow!”

The next step is to establish a real shop offering additional products such as pasta and bread, and opening six days per week. The anticipated challenges are finding enough customers to pay the rent and a few staff, and professionalising the organisation. “This shop will allow us to reach new people, who may find the collective inaccessible. But we will maintain the collective spirit as the shop too will be owned and run by a cooperative of urban citizens,” says Judith.

There are a few dozen collectives across the country now. But how do you set up a collective? Judith advises: “Just start. Decide what you want and how. You will learn by doing.” She adds that it is important to tackle difficulties as they arise and face up to things that are not working well.

Much more than customers

There is an annual members’ meeting to discuss issues on the farm

At Veld en Beek farm (www.veldenbeek.nl) near Wageningen, the 35 cows are owned by the farm’s customers, who bought a ‘cow-share’. In practice, the farmers work on and maintain the farm but don’t own the cattle. Hundreds of citizens financed the original purchase of cattle since the start in 1999.

Today, more than 1800 members buy their weekly milk, yoghurt, meat and vegetables through an online ordering system and collect it from large refrigerated walk-in containers in five nearby towns. Every member has a key to their nearest container. The system is based on trust and quality products: the members trust the farmers to take the agreed costs from their bank accounts, and the farmers trust the members not to take more than was agreed.

The members also have a voice in decisions regarding production methods and new developments. For example, based on members’ concerns, the farmers work to increase the time that calves spend with their mothers. Vice president of the association’s board Kees van Veluw: “We know that our members appreciate the fact that the cows graze outside (instead of in closed barns) as much as possible, the calves are kept with their mothers and the milk is produced without fertilizers and pesticides. Also, the cows have kept their horns and antibiotics are only used in cases of emergencies. Members have repeatedly said that they find this important.” The farm opens its doors to the public several times a year, and there is an annual members’ meeting to discuss issues on the farm. People who buy and drink this local organic milk are much more than customers.

What makes Veld en Beek so successful? Kees: “Veld en Beek is benefiting from the new food movement in the Netherlands. People are looking for local and transparent ways of food production, and they like having contact with a farmer now and then.” But Veld en Beek’s success has been accompanied by challenges. For example, in the context of municipal regulations, it was difficult to find space and approval for the walk-in containers. And, according to Kees, the learning process continues, “we are still searching for the best organisational model that accommodates the farmers, investors and consumers, three key groups of stakeholders in the farm.”

Building food hubs

Many similar initiatives have emerged in the last few years, providing important building blocks for the transition towards a more localised, sustainable and resilient food system in the Netherlands. However, to really be able to make a difference and provide a serious alternative to the mainstream food system it is necessary to scale up and coordinate in a better way. This is especially true in the Netherlands where the centralised and large-scale nature of the food system makes it impossible for small scale producers to enter mainstream retail. This means alternatives have to operate in a market with very low price margins and where consumers are used to convenience and one-stop shopping.

In response to these challenges, different short chain initiatives of producers and urban consumers are now being connected at a regional scale, forming regional, city-based food hubs which, on the one hand, bring together the demand from consumers and, on the other, aggregate products from local and ecological producers in surrounding areas. One example in Amsterdam is called ‘Ons Eten’ (Our Food) (www.onseten.nu) which brings together diverse actors including the provincial environmental federation to allow direct selling of regional produce from farmer to plate. More of these initiatives are popping up in other places across the Netherlands, of which various aim to supply local ecological produce to public and private institutions. This provides a promising outlook for what might be a next phase in the development of professional regionalised food systems in the Netherlands.

These connections are an important aspect of the emerging food movement in the Netherlands. When the initiatives gain further strength they may together represent a major challenge to the dominant system.

Greet Goverde-Lips, Janneke Bruil and Henk Renting

Greet Goverde-Lips is secretary of the platform Earth, Farmer, Consumer which unites farmer organisations and advocates more regulation and food sovereignty in Dutch and European politics (www.aardeboerconsument.nl).
Email: h.goverde@chello.nl

Janneke Bruil is the advocacy officer at ILEIA.
Email: j.bruil@ileia.org

Henk Renting works for RUAF Foundation.
Email: h.renting@ruaf.org

All authors are part of the “Food Otherwise” movement for fair and sustainable food and agriculture systems in the Netherlands and Flanders.

The post Producers and consumers build new food practices appeared first on Ileia.

A revolutionary change in the food system is not global; it is small scale and locally based

The expansion of cities and their increasing demands for food is paired with the challenges of improving rural livelihoods. Unsustainable consumption and trade continue to grow, and in particular the continued corporate takeover and dominance of the food and agriculture sector. This has left many urban families and their communities without access to affordable, nutritious, safe and fresh food. At the same time, these practices disenfranchise small scale food producers and rural people, reduce rural livelihoods opportunities and exacerbate rural poverty. This begs the question – how can we make better development decisions based on a more inclusive framework?

Urban–rural linkages in the food system

Rural–urban linkages can be best supported through making real change in the food system. The food system itself is complex and many-layered, including flows, exchanges and impacts across rural and urban areas – from food production, distribution, processing, marketing, consumption and waste, as well as supportive infrastructure.

A revolutionary change in the food system is not global; it is small scale and locally based.

Many issues and interventions are being discussed by governments and civil society that seek to better connect areas through territorial approaches to governance at the local level. Improved relationships between producers and consumers, which also support vulnerable populations in rural and urban areas, are vital. For many communities, this means preserving traditional and public market spaces, improving social protection and food support programmes, amending public procurement policies, and supporting direct purchasing schemes and community supported agriculture, are some of the many interventions that are needed

Local governments and authorities

Decentralisation of power and clear guidance for local authorities is key to carrying out international policy commitments and human rights obligations to support integrated rural–urban planning. Food systems are particularly important in this regard, as law and policy that dictate food waste, labour conditions and livelihood improvement, public procurement, land for food (including public land), zoning for urban and peri-urban food cultivation and production, and food retailer placement, among others, are often in the hands of city, municipal or regional authorities.

There are some key players currently leveraging this sort of change. For many years local government networks, including ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability and their annual Resilient Cities Forum, as well as the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) link local and regional governments together from cities of all sizes. Such networks seek to insert the needs and experiences of the local level into international policy processes as well as to build the capacity at the local level to engage directly with inhabitants, including those in peri-urban and rural areas away from urban centres.

From ‘city’ to ‘city region’

Cities do not exist in a vacuum and urban and rural linkages must be present in any ‘urban’ goal or plan for development

Urban– rural linkages are also a fashionable topic in international policy discourse. They are discussed in international processes such as the preparations for the Third United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, or Habitat III, due to take place in Quito, Ecuador in October 2016. Similarly, the development of the Post-2015 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals, the controversial, corporate-dominated Global Expo in Milan, and local government initiatives including the Seoul Declaration and the Urban Food Policy Pact, all seek to address the challenges that urban areas pose by creating stronger local and regional frameworks.

Although there are many doubts and complications of the process and outcomes (such as the lack of meaningful inclusion of civil society) the Post-2015 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals have had important effects related to urban–rural linkages. Importantly, it led to the streamlining of territorial approaches to governance, also referred to as city regions. This is a new concept. The development of Sustainable Development Goal 11 to ‘make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’ and the work by groups such as the Communitas Coalition and the City Region Food Systems collaborative has really changed the way we think about what is ‘urban’. They mainstreamed a new conception of the ‘city region’ as a replacement for the ‘city’ as our framework for reference when discussing sustainable urban development. Cities do not exist in a vacuum and this conception makes clear that urban and rural linkages must be present in any ‘urban’ goal or plan for development.

Democratising local food policy

The current development of the Urban Food Policy Pact led by the City of Milan has engaged some 45 cities across the globe to share their experiences, challenges and needs in implementing local food policy. The pact seeks to create a governance framework for city region approaches, as well as participatory decision making directly with civil society and small scale food producers, covering topics including governance, poverty alleviation, sustainable diets and nutrition, food production, supply and distribution, and food waste and loss. This is an important step to answer the question how local governments can improve governance and management of rural areas. It also addresses the need for food systems governance to be democratic and participatory, addressing the critical role of civil society in making those decisions in multi-stakeholder governing bodies at the local level. Food policy councils, collaborations between citizens and government officials, providing a forum for advocacy and policy development to create sustainable and just food systems, for example.

The City Region Food Systems collaborative is currently working together with different cities, civil society and international bodies and processes to advocate for integrated food systems planning or city region food systems. Urban areas are not the exclusive domain of any single set of actors or inhabitants, and rural communities have the right to benefit from urban development and vice versa. Technical solutions to feeding urban areas, as well as climate change, labour, climate change and investment must integrate the rural areas, as well as manage ecosystem services.

Meaningful changes

Although there is a resurgence of interest in the topic, stronger urban and rural links are not new. The original commitments in the 1976 Vancouver Declaration at the first UN conference on human settlements (Habitat I), and the Istanbul Declaration signed in 1996 at Habitat II recognised the critical links between rural and urban areas, and the need for balanced and holistic approaches to development.

Habitat II went further, declaring that local authorities and general decentralisation of power structures are critical to implement and support these linkages. However, the initial preparations for Habitat III and the continued direction of the UN-Habitat process make clear that these past commitments have been forgotten as they proceed with a solely ‘urbanist’ agenda. Pressure by civil society actors has resulted in a working group on rural–urban linkages within the Habitat process to closely follow the issues of city region food systems and land use. However, it remains to be seen if this will result in meaningful changes towards a more balanced and integrated urban–rural development.

Looking forward

Looking towards Habitat III and the other emerging policy discussions, ‘the right to the city’ framework has become an important civil society and local government approach to the management of the city and its rural hinterlands. The right to the city advocates equitable use of urban space according to the principles of sustainability, democracy, equity and social justice. It is a collective right of the inhabitants of the cities and the surrounding areas, giving priority to vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. It is a framework and approach that at its heart, seeks to promote the realisation of human rights and protection of marginalised communities, through participation, respect to the social function of land, property and the city region, and the sustainable management of the commons. This framework also acknowledges the role that social solidarity economy plays in supporting many communities, and it is imperative that these contributions are recognised in international policy.

As we continue to fill and expand urban spaces, it is critical that we reconfigure how we understand these spaces, and how they are governed, how they interact and impact other territories, and how peoples in and around them can lead dignified lives. There are many exciting opportunities, but each also has many challenges and risks. Civil society, from urban inhabitants to rural producers, must play meaningful roles in setting the agenda at the global and local level, and once set, it is up to local actors to implement policies and create real change.

Emily Mattheisen

Emily Mattheisen works for Habitat International Coalition – Housing and Land Rights Network, a global network that supports the defence, promotion and realisation of human rights related to housing and land in both rural and urban areas. Emily co-coordinates the urban food and nutrition constituency of the Civil Society Mechanism of the UN Committee on World Food Security.
Email: emattheisen@hic-mena.org

The post Perspectives: Creating city region food systems appeared first on Ileia.