Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com

RESEARCH COMMENTARIES: FOOD SYSTEMS RESEARCH PRIORITIES OVER THE NEXT 5 YEARS

Future food system research priorities: A sustainable food systems perspective from Ontario,

Alison D. Blay-Palmer,a * Irena Knezevic,b Peter Andrée,c Patricia Ballamingie,d Karen E. Landman,e Phil A. Mount,f Connie H. Nelson,g Erin Nelson,h Lori M. Stahlbrand,i Mirella L. Stroink,j and Kelly Skinner k

Submitted August 2, 2013 / Revised September 19, 2013 / Published online September 24, 2013

Citation: Blay-Palmer, A. D., Knezevic, I., Andree, P., Ballamingie, P., Landman, K. E., Mount, P. A., Nelson, C. H., Nelson, E., Stahlbrand, L. M., Stroink, M. L., & Skinner, K. (2013). Future food system research priorities: A sustainable food systems perspective from Ontario, Canada. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 3(4), 227–234. http://dx.doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2013.034.029

Copyright © 2013 by New Leaf Associates, Inc.

Abstract and disciplines that includes different models of Given the range and complexity of pressures on food systems and community visions of an food systems across the globe, we suggest that integrated food system; the need for focus on future research on sustainable food systems can be tensions and compromises related to increased clustered under three broad topics: the need for numbers and reach of sustainable food systems by integration across multiple jurisdictions, sectors, scaling out and up; and the need for appropriate governance structures and institutions. Compara- tive research that works directly with community- a * Corresponding author: Associate Professor, Department of based organizations to co-create and apply shared Geography and Environmental Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario; [email protected] b Postdoctoral Fellow, FoodARC, Mount Saint Vincent g Professor, Social Work, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, University, Halifax, Nova Scotia Ontario c Associate Professor, Political Science, Carleton University, h Postdoctoral Fellow, Institute for Community Engaged Ottawa, Ontario Scholarship, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario d Associate Professor, Geography and Environmental Studies, i PhD Candidate, Department of Geography and Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario Environmental Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario e Associate Professor, School of Environmental Design and Rural Development, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario j Associate Professor, Psychology, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario f Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, k Postdoctoral Fellow, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario Ontario

Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013 227 Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com research tools and then engage in common attention to tensions and compromises related to assessment projects offers ways to develop more increased numbers and reach of sustainable food connected scholarship. More extensive work using systems by scaling out and up; and appropriate concept maps, participatory action research, life- governance structures and institutions. cycle analysis, and urban/rural metabolic flows may First, it is increasingly important to explore help to develop, animate, and answer future different models of food systems and community research questions in more integrated ways, and visions of an integrated food system. A founda- will build on opportunities emerging from more tional consideration is that social, environmental, inclusive, connected, and multidisciplinary and economic find the appropriate approaches. Work in Ontario helps to illustrate mix or balance. Food is an excellent lens to use in research exploring the three themes through unpacking related research questions, as human embedded connections to communities of food in health, community well being, social justice, and the ongoing research project Nourishing the environment are understood as inherently Communities.1 interconnected when we adopt a food lens (Morgan, 2010). For example, school snack Keywords programs that purchase fruit directly from local governance, integration, scaling out, scaling up, producers who use low-impact farming methods sustainable food make the connections among human, community, economic, and ecological well being more explicit. n considering future directions for food Additionally, food can be foundational to a holistic systems research, it is useful to observe that notion of life lived well. Food can be described as a Iwork on alternative ways of conceptualizing vehicle for empowerment and social justice, as an food and food systems is in keeping with other opportunity to create community spaces for rela- efforts to resist neo-liberal pressures and transform tionships to develop, as an essential determinant of society, politics, and the economy (Borras & health and dignity, as well as a way of strengthen- Franco, 2012; Brenner, Peck & Theodore, 2010; ing the local economy. Clapp, 2012; Gibson-Graham, 2006; Heynen, 2010; Despite these synergistic opportunities, we Leyshon, Lee, & Williams, 2003; Marsden & tend to have research and organizations focused on Sonnino, 2012; Morgan & Sonnino, 2010; Power, economic development, food access, environmen- 2008; Swyngedouw, 2010; Wright, 2010). Some- tal , or food and health. What is needed what unusually, through direct, iterative engage- is more deliberate work to amplify collaboration, ment with their communities of food, researchers for example connecting health with agricultural have the potential to be grounded in the realities of departments to link production and consumption their food systems. This more holistic under- more deliberately. It is also important to dismantle standing challenges researchers to find paths for jurisdictional and political boundaries. Work on food system transformation — so that the work is territoriality and flows of food offer ways forward not only grounded in practice, but is also mindful in this regard (e.g., Garret & Feenstra, 1999; of the institutions and structures that frame, and Kloppenberg, Hendrickson, & Stevenson, 1996a; often confine, food systems. Peters, Bills, Wilkins, & Fick, 2009). Recent litera- ture reveals increasing interest in breaking down Future Research Directions the barriers between sectors and disciplines to Given the range and complexity of pressures on enhance theory and practice (Stockholm Environ- food systems across the globe, research on sustain- ment Institute, 2011). A just, sustainable, and viable able food systems can be clustered under three system is more profound than the mere broad topics as the need for integration across provision of food (Nelson, Knezevic, & Landman, multiple jurisdictions, sectors, and disciplines; 2013). For example, networks of food sharing and reciprocity are important for resilient indigenous 1 http://nourishingcommunities.ca (and, in the Canadian context, northern) food

228 Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013 Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com systems and provide a valuable lesson in integrated and address questions such as whether it is feasible thinking (Blay-Palmer, 2010; Skinner, Hanning, (or even appropriate) for local food systems to Desjardins, & Tsuji, 2013). emphasize direct sales or whether some form of Second, scale emerges as a pivot point, agglomeration will be needed to develop increas- prompting fundamental questions about how and ingly sustainable food systems (Goodman, DuPuis, whether sustainable regional systems will integrate & Goodman, 2012; Levkoe, 2011). Related place-based solutions (Mount, 2012). The scale questions could explore network approaches dimension represents both intensity and extent of (Sonnino & Griggs-Trevarthen, 2013), as well as impact, from micro- to macrosize projects cap- the role of social capital in developing regional tured through “scaling out” and “scaling up.” food innovation networks (Nelson et al., 2013; “Scaling out,” whereby a project or organization is Tisenkopfs, Lace, & Mierina, 2008). grown and/or replicated so it serves more people Figure 1 captures a continuum for the three over a larger area, and the extensive dimension, or considerations. The axes are not intended to be what Westley and colleagues would term “scaling exclusionary. The scale dimension represents both up” by growing individual projects so they achieve intensity and extent of impact from micro- to critical mass to either provide a service to all macro-size projects. Scaling out captures what people or are able to bring about institutional happens when a project or organization is grown change (Stroink & Nelson, 2013; Westley, Antadze, so that it serves more people over a larger area. Riddell, Robinson, & Geobey, 2011, p. 3). The extensive dimension, or what Westley and For example, does scaling up equate with colleagues would term scaling up, happens when shifting the alternative to the mainstream? And can individual projects grow so they achieve critical scaling out and up occur in a way that maintains mass to either provide a service to all people or are focus on place and integrates health, environment, able to bring about institutional and/or structural social justice, and economics? While there is com- change (Stroink & Nelson, 2013; Westley et al., pelling evidence that sustainable food systems need 2011). place-based solutions (Blay-Palmer, Landman, Third, the issue of governance requires con- Knezevic, & Hayhurst, 2013; Marsden, 2012), sideration. Here, scale and subsidiarity merge as we researchers and communities must engage in tackle questions of appropriate intervention points critical reflection to preclude “defensive localism” from the local to the global. This topic intersects with questions of Figure 1. Continuum for Sustainable Food Systems Research Questions power, class, and social justice through ques- Macro, global tions of “should” and “can” as we GOVERNANCE consider norma- tive discourse in Global the context of grounded reality. SCALE The role of the state — in Local particular, the Micro, household neoliberal state — as both an Compartmentalization Multidisciplinary/multisector/ jurisdictional collaboration enabler and a barrier to com- INTEGRATION munity food initiatives, as well

Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013 229 Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com as related questions of private versus state agri- research directions with a description of the food standards and regulation, need to be methods we use to demonstrate the “how” as well examined in situ and through comparative work as the “what.” (Andrée, Ballamingie, & Sinclair-Waters, 2013; Marsden et al., 2010). Further research with The Next Two Years: Medium-term historically marginalized communities, including Research Initiatives indigenous and racialized groups, women, and The Nourishing Communities research project is increasingly youth, is essential to understand the built on a strong, embedded tradition of specificities of appropriate (self-)governance community-engaged scholars. The three broad mechanisms (Alkon & Agyeman, 2011; Ballamingie themes described above ground our current & Walker, 2013; Nelson & Stroink, 2013). research, which, in a nutshell, examines the micro- The governance axis represents relative work that needs to be done to achieve more capacities for decision-making and subsidiarity sustainable food systems that are not solely focused along a continuum from local to global. on maximizing profits. Our researchers work The third dimension, integration, speaks to a directly with groups who are trying to make the number of considerations from compartmentalized transition, helping to figure out what it might look or focused approaches through to multidisci- like and how to deal with the challenges of the here plinary/multisector/jurisdictional collaboration. and now. Our work in the Nourishing Commu- Depicting the three themes together may assist nities project builds on the activist/academic with differentiating between various facets of tradition established in the 1980s and 1990s by the proposed and existing work. likes of Deb Barndt, Harriet Friedmann, Musafa Part of proposing future research is consider- Koc, Rod MacRae, Luc Mougeot, Joe Nasr, Wayne ing how to carry it out. Comparative research that Roberts and Gerda Wekerle. These individuals laid works directly with community-based organizations strong connections with some of the most to co-create and apply shared research tools and progressive food activist groups in the world (e.g., then engage in common assessment projects offers FoodShare and the Toronto Food Policy Council). ways to develop more connected scholarship. More They established a tradition of engaged scholarship extensive work using concept maps (Mount & that is now the bedrock for our work. It is impor- Andrée, 2013; Skinner et al., 2006), participatory tant to recognize these roots as they inform our action research, life-cycle analysis and urban/rural work going forward. metabolic flows may help to develop, animate, and As part of this tradition, and consistent with answer future research questions in more inte- much of food systems scholarship elsewhere, all grated ways, and will build on opportunities the scholars involved in the Nourishing Commu- emerging from more integrated, multidisciplinary nities research are deeply embedded in their approaches. respective communities. This means that there is What follows are the research topics our an ebb and flow to our research as it is guided by research team will continue to explore over the the reality of day-to-day life and the pressures from next two years and approaches developed through the intersecting demands of our work and our embedded connections with our communities communities. of food, in the ongoing research project Nourish- Our current research topics emerged from ing Communities.2 This research draws on the ongoing conversations with our community part- three broad themes of integration, scale, and ners through regular consultation, participatory governance identified in the previous section. We action research, workshops, and focus groups to do this to share both our research goals and build relationships (Knezevic, Landman, Blay- research process. We intersperse current and future Palmer and Nelson, 2013). The research crosses urban-rural perspectives and tends to focus on 2 This work is further elaborated at small- to medium-scale organizations. It is orga- http://nourishingcommunities.ca nized into three regional research nodes, each

230 Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013 Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com guided and informed by advisory committees pantry items, and allow clients to choose; urban composed of farmers, processors and distributors, food market pilot projects established in seven economic advisors, academics, and representatives underserviced social housing communities; inno- of farm organizations, nonprofit food groups, and vative initiatives aimed at urban gleaning and local governments. While each region has identified augmenting the urban foodscape; as well as new research directions based on community priorities regional initiatives such as a proposed food hub. In and researcher expertise, we are also pursuing the case of food and housing security, while opportunities for comparative work. The regional community-based actors focus a good deal of teams conduct their research independently, while effort on food, as housing prices continue to rise, constant reflection and the oversight of the pro- these food initiatives cannot get at the deeper issue vincial advisory committee ensures a coherent and of poverty on their own. On the flip side, however, complementary approach as well as inter-regional the research is showing that food and housing collaboration and tool-sharing. initiatives that work in tandem, or food initiatives In the context of pressures from the globalized geared toward people in social housing (as one neoliberal food system, and in a step toward example) can do wonders to build community and developing more local, resilient, scaled-up food tackle issues. In other words, this is a lesson in initiatives, the northern research node of Nourish- integration, in not seeing food (security) issues in ing Communities is focused on innovative models isolation, and in understanding the structural for financing the community food-related infra- causes of both food insecurity and housing structure desperately needed for producers in insecurity. northern in Ontario, particularly for those opera- The eastern and southwestern research nodes ting at small and medium-scale production levels. both identified land access for local, sustainable The models being explored include social financing production and opportunities to help farmers get through community bonds; providing access to access to local, as research loans and financial coaching for the charitable and priorities. This priority correlates with the obser- nonprofit sectors and community enterprise vations of a number of authors over the last 30 support and funding; and crowd sourcing. Com- years (Barham, Tropp, Enterline, Farbman, Fisk, & munity capital-building is another focus whereby Kiraly, 2012; Bryant, Russwurm & McLellan, 1982; businesses and nonprofits use monies that have Kloppenburg, Hendrickson, & Stevenson, 1996b; been allocated for advertising and publicity Richards, 1996). They seek to broaden the local budgets to sponsor and support community events food lens beyond niche, high-end products to and projects. Alternatively, infrastructure can be ensure it is accessible to all; therefore, we have funded through local and regional govern- honed in on initiatives that try to make the link ments and regional development agencies. Other between food access for all and fair livelihoods for alternative financing projects informing this farmers. We have been able to identify many research provide no-interest funding to food examples of land access models as working producers and processors; co-op “member loans” projects, each with its own emphasis, including generated on every dollar of sale; and CSAs in community farms that offer educational oppor- Canada and the UK where investments are repaid tunities; conservation and land trust properties as in product. land protection strategies; opportunities for sharing The eastern research node of Nourishing land, land-barter, and joint ownership. Other Ontario is focused on two research areas. The first models offer private, municipal, institutional, or seeks to conceptualize the intersections between greenbelt properties with long-term rental agree- housing insecurity and food access (Kirkpatrick & ments or special arrangements. Mentorship Tarasuk, 2011). With a focus on vulnerable sub- programs are provided through incubator farms populations living in social housing, this project and rent-to-own. Zoning and land use regulation explores opportunities for food access that offer are foundational pieces for sustainable local food fresh food and school supplies in addition to systems. The multitude of examples for all these

Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013 231 Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com key initiatives point to questions at the intersection accessibility in an institutional environment. of integration, scale, and governance generally. Intersections of food service procurers (Campbell More specifically, they illuminate the need for a & MacRae, 2013) and case studies that explore critical mass capable of affecting the food and sustainability strategies (Stahlbrand, 2013) provide agriculture landscape as a whole. important guidance for negotiating space for local Assessing the opportunities for farmers to and sustainable products within institutions. transition into local food markets is the second We examine these ongoing efforts to trans- shared area of research between southwestern and form food systems through the lens of the three eastern Ontario. Research focuses on alternatives broad themes, looking for spaces where integration that support new and immigrant farmers, as well as is or could be happening, where scaling up and intergenerational and production-based transitions, scaling out are or could be taking place, and where including initiatives that facilitate aggregation from new modes of food system governance are regional farms, as well as distribution, processing emerging, as well as how they could be improved. (both primary and secondary), and retailing alter- Through collaborative work with scholars in natives that open new markets (Day-Farnsworth, Cardiff, Ohio, Iowa, Maine, New York, Berlin, McCowan, Miller, & Pfeiffer, 2009; Friedmann, Montpellier and Kigali, we are set to develop 2007). Multiple approaches emerging in this area comparative research opportunities. In looking at include regional and midscale distribution, aggre- food through these lenses, we interrogate the gation and processing, and a constant stream of possibilities of new social, political, and economic new food hubs that includes multi-use processing relationships not only in the food system, but also facilities for value-added food producers, and in the larger domains of sustainability, social accessible retailers. Where direct links do not exist justice, and transformation. As a result, we are between farmers and consumers, certification and working with a place-based research agenda, but transparency are key dimensions of these new are also cognizant of and influenced by the wisdom systems. and interest of our collaborators beyond Ontario Three further areas of research focused on the — a productive gaze across scale that oscillates need for different forms of governance and how to between local and global. scale initiatives out and up are being explored through the southwestern research node. The first, References supply management, is in many ways a uniquely Alkon. A. & Agyeman, J. (Eds.) (2011). Cultivating Canadian challenge as we look for ways to continue Food Justice: Race, Class and Sustainability. to support farm income in those sectors that are Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. supply managed (i.e., dairy and poultry) that allows Andrée, P., Ballamingie, P., & Sinclair-Waters, B. (2013). for both greater flexibility and inclusion. Proposed Neoliberalism and the making of food politics in Eastern solutions related to supply management are Ontario. Manuscript submitted for publication. instructive. On-farm microdairies offer direct Ballamingie, P., & Walker, S. (2013). Field of dreams: selling and alternative marketing strategies suited to Just Food’s proposal to create a community food many family-scale farms, while several groups are and hub in Ottawa, Ontario. advocating for flexible or increased quota exemp- Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice tions that would allow farmers to engage in more and Sustainability,18(5), 529–542. direct sales. The second research focus explores http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2013.787975 flexible and scale-appropriate regulation, including Barham, J., Tropp, D., Enterline, K., Farbman, J., Fisk, that of provincial slaughterhouses, municipal J., & Kiraly, S. (2012). Regional food hub resource property tax, tax codes, and planning designations. guide. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of The third research area investigates alternative Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service. approaches to and models for the aggregation, http://dx.doi.org/10.9752/MS046.04-2012 processing, and distribution of locally produced food that specifically address questions of

232 Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013 Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com

Blay-Palmer, A. (Ed.). (2010). Imagining sustainable (2012). Alternative food networks: Knowledge, practice, and food systems: Theory and practice. Farnham, UK: politics. London: Routledge. Ashgate Publishing Company. Hayhurst, R., Dietrich-O’Connor, F., Hazen, S., & Blay-Palmer, A., Landman, K., Knezevic, I., & Landman, K. (2013) Community-based research for Hayhurst, R. (2013). Constructing resilient, food system policy development in the City of transformative communities through sustainable Guelph, Ontario Local Environment, 18, 606–619. “food hubs.” Local Environment: The International Heynen, N. (2010) Cooking up non-violent civil- Journal of Justice and Sustainability,18(5), 521–528. disobedient direct action for the hungry: Food not http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2013.797156 bombs’ and the resurgence of radical democracy in Borras, S. M., Jr., & Franco, J. C. (2012). Global land the US. Urban Studies 47, 1225–1240. grabbing and trajectories of agrarian change: A Kirkpatrick, S. I., & Tarasuk, V. (2011). Housing preliminary analysis. Journal of Agrarian Change, 12(1), circumstances are associated with household food 34–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471- access among low-income urban families. Journal of 0366.2011.00339.x Urban Health, 88(2), 284–296. Online at: Brenner, N., Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2010). After http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ neoliberalization? Globalizations, 7(3), 327–345. PMC3079041/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14747731003669669 Kloppenburg, Jr., J., Hendrickson, J., & Stevenson, G. Bryant, C. R., Russwurm, L. H.. & McLellan, A. G. W. (1996a). Coming In to the Foodshed, in W. (1982). The city’s countryside: Land and its management in Vitek & W. Jackson (Eds.), Rooted in the land: Essays the rural-urban fringe. London: Longman. on community and place (pp. 113–123). New Haven, Campbell, A. M., & MacRae, R. (2013). Local Food Connecticut: Yale University Press. Plus: The connective tissue in local/sustainable Kloppenburg, J., Hendrickson, J., & Stevenson, G. supply chain development. Local Environment: The (1996b). Coming in to the foodshed. Agriculture and International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 18(5), Human Values, 13(3), 33–42. 557–566. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01538225 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2013.788488 Knezevic, I., Landman, K., Blay-Palmer, A., and Nelson, Clapp, J. (2012). Hunger in the balance: The new politics of E. (eds.) (2013) Models and best practices for building international food aid. Ithaca, New York: Cornell sustainable food systems in Ontario and beyond. Report University Press. prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Day-Farnsworth, L., McCown, B., Miller, M., & Pfeiffer, and Food. Accessed online June 25, 2013 at: A. (2009). Scaling up: Meeting the demand for local http://nourishingontario.ca/models-and-best- food. Madison, Wisconsin: Board of Regents of the practices/ University of Wisconsin System, Center for Leyshon, A., Lee, R., and Williams, C. C. (Eds.). (2003). Integrated Agricultural Systems. Retrieved from Alternative economic spaces. London: Sage. http://www.cias.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/ Levkoe, C. Z. (2011). Towards a transformative food 2010/01/baldwin_web_final.pdf politics. Local Environment: The International Journal of Friedmann, H. (2007). Scaling up: Bringing public Justice and Sustainability, 16(7), 687–705. institutions and food service corporations into the http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2011.592182 project for a local, in Marsden, T. (2012). Towards a real sustainable agri-food Ontario. Agriculture and Human Values, 24(3), 389– security and food policy: Beyond the ecological 398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10460-006-9040-2 fallacies? The Political Quarterly, 83(1), 139–145. Garrett, S., & Feenstra, G. (1999). Growing a community http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2012. food system (Western Regional Extension Publication 02242.x WREP0135). Puyallup, Washington: Washington Marsden, T., & Sonnino, R. (2012). Human health and State University Cooperative Extension.. wellbeing and the sustainability of urban-regional Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2006) A postcapitalist politics. food systems. Current Opinion in Environmental Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Sustainability, 4(4), 427–430. Goodman, D., DuPuis, E. M., & Goodman, M. K. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.09.004

Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013 233 Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online www.AgDevJournal.com

Marsden, T., Lee, R., Flynn, A., & Thankappan, S. Stockholm Environment Institute. (2011). SEI Annual (2010). The new regulation and governance of food: Beyond Report. Retrieved from http://www.sei- the food crisis? New York: Routledge. international.org/mediamanager/documents/ Morgan, K. (2010). Local and green, global and fair: The Publications/SEI-AnnualReport-2011.pdf ethical foodscape and the politics of care. Skinner, K., Hanning, R. M., Desjardins, E., Tsuji, L. J. Environment and Planning A, 42(8), 1852–1867. S. (2013). Giving voice to food insecurity in a http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a42364 remote indigenous community in subarctic Ontario, Morgan, K., & Sonnino, R. (2010). The urban Canada: Traditional ways, ways to cope, ways foodscape: World cities and the new food forward. BMC , 13, 427. equation. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-427 Society, 3(2), 209–224. Skinner, K., Hanning, R. M., & Tsuji, L. J. S. (2006). http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsq007 Barriers and supports for healthy eating and physi- Mount, P. (2012). Growing local food: Scale and local cal activity for First Nation youths in northern food systems governance. Agriculture and Human Canada. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, Values, 29(1), 107–121. 65(2), 148–161. http://www.circumpolarhealth http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10460-011-9331-0 journal.net/index.php/ijch/article/view/18095 Mount, P., & Andrée, P. (2013). Visualising community- Sonnino, R., & Griggs-Trevarthen, C. (2013) A resilient based food projects in Ontario. Local Environment: social economy? Insights from the community food The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, sector in the UK. Entrepreneurship & Regional 18(5), 578–591. Development: An International Journal, 25(3-4), http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2013.788491 272–292. Nelson, C. & Stroink, M. (2013). Northern Ontario. In http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2012.710268 I. Knezevic, K. Landman, A. Blay-Palmer, & E. Stahlbrand, L. (2013, April). Municipal food procurement for Nelson (Eds.), Models and best practices for building sustainability: A case study of Markham, Ontario. Paper sustainable food systems in Ontario and beyond (pp. 16– presented at the annual conference of the American 67). Guelph, Ontario: Ontario Ministry of Association of Geographers, Los Angeles. Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Retrieved Stroink, M. L., & Nelson, C. H. (2013). Complexity and from http://www.uoguelph.ca/omafra_partner food hubs: Five case studies from northern ship/ktt/en/agrifoodrurallink/resources/ Ontario. Local Environment: The International Journal of MBPFullReportFINAL.pdf Justice and Sustainability, 18(5), 620–635. Nelson, E., Knezevic, I., & Landman, K. (2013). The http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2013.798635 uneven geography of local food projects in Swyngedouw, E. (2010). Impossible sustainability and southwestern Ontario. Local Environment: The the post-political condition [Reprint]. In M. Carreta, International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 18(5), G. Concilio, & V. Monno (Eds.), Making strategies in 567–577. spatial planning: Knowledge and values (pp. 185–206). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2013.788489 Dordrecht: Springer. Peters, C. J., Bills, N. L., Wilkins, J. L., & Fick, G. W. Tisenkopfs, T., Lace, I., & Mierina, I. (2008). Social (2009). Foodshed analysis and its relevance to capital. In J. D. van der Ploeg & T. Marsden (Eds.), sustainability. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, Unfolding webs: The dynamics of regional rural development 24(1), 1–7. (pp. 87–110). Assen, The Netherlands: Royal Van http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1742170508002433 Gorcum. Power, E. M. (2008). Conceptualizing for Westley, F., Antadze, N., Riddell, D. J., Robinson, K., & Aboriginal people in Canada. Canadian Journal of Geobey, S. (2011). Pathways to system change Public Health, 99(2), 95–97. Retrieved from (Social Innovation Generation Working Paper). http://journal.cpha.ca Waterloo, Ontario: University of Waterloo. Richards, D. G. (1996). Land, nature and human Retrieved from http://sig.uwaterloo.ca/highlight/ community: Wes Jackson’s vision of the domestic working-paper-pathways-to-system-change prairie. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 7(1), 69–93. Wright, E. O. (2010). Envisioning real utopias. London: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10455759609358664 Verso.

234 Volume 3, Issue 4 / Summer 2013