sign in sign up
<<
Home , Agricultural science, Agriculture in London, Agrochemical, Civic agriculture, Food Justice Movement, Fungicide

DEGREE PROJECT IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2017

Can urban become a planning strategy to address social-ecological justice?

JAVIER FERNÁNDEZ ANDRÉS

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

School of Architecture and Built Environment Department of , environmental and engineering

Can become a planning strategy to address social-ecological justice?

Javier Fernández Andrés

Degree Project in Environmental Strategies, Second Cycle

TRITA-SEED-EX-2017:09 www.kth.se

Can urban agriculture become a planning strategy to address social-ecological justice? Kan urban jordbruk bli ett planeringsstrategi för att hantera social-ekologisk rättvisa?

Degree project in Strategies for sustainable development, Second Cycle AL250X, 30 credits

Author: Javier Fernández Andrés

Supervisor: Rebecka Milestad

Examiner: Sara Borgström

Division of Environmental Strategies Research (fms) Department of Sustainable Development, and Engineering School of Architecture and the Built Environment KTH Royal Institute of Technology

Abstract

Last century witnessed an unprecedented growth of cities which has led to the consolidation of an eminently urbanised world . Meanwhile, agriculture has adopted industrial methods of production in the shape of large-scale, chemical-laden in the countryside, which, together with the liberalisation of global trade, have undermined the livelihood of small- scale peasants throughout the world, forcing many of them out of business. The has responded to the high rates of hunger and malnutrition with an extraordinary increase in production that has not solved problems, as these have turned out to be more a question of unequal access to food rather than insufficient supply. Furthermore, the activity of large agri-food corporations has resulted in the degradation of natural and an increasing pressure over already overburdened critical resources for food production.

Consequently, facing the imminent threat of climate change, more and more voices are questioning the of the current and rising against the burgeoning hunger and escalating inequalities resulting from it. Hence, several alternatives to the neoliberal food system are emerging these days with the aim of reducing social inequalities and curbing environmental degradation, being urban agriculture one of them. Precisely, this thesis explores, from a social-ecological justice perspective, whether urban agriculture can address issues of environmental and disparities in food distribution.

Although the many virtues of urban farming might not be enough to subvert the structures of power that are deeply rooted in the foundations of the present food regime, it could still play a significant role in alleviating the gaps in food needs. However, food security comes only after the core reasons of poverty have been addressed and social justice is achieved in the larger society. The pathway towards a greater social and ecological justice seems to require not only to re- examine how to feed the urban population, but also a significant transformation that goes beyond aspects from the whole food supply chain and embraces societal systemic change. Sammanfattning

Det förra århundradet bevittnade en exempellös tillväxt av städer som har lett till konsolideringen av en övervägande urbaniserad världsbefolkning. Under tiden har jordbruket antagit industriella produktionsmetoder i formen av storskaliga och kemiskt laddat åkrar, som tillsammans med liberaliseringen av världshandel, har underminerat småböndernas levebröd över hela världen och tvingat många av dem i konkurs. Livsmedelsindustrin har svarat på de höga nivåerna av hunger och undernäring med en extraordinär ökning av produktionen som inte har löst livsmedelssäkerhetsproblem, eftersom dessa har blivit mer en fråga om ojämn tillgång till mat istället för bristande matförsörjning. Dessutom har de stora livsmedelsföretagens verksamhet resulterat i nedbrytningen av naturliga ekosystem och i en ökande belastningen av kritiska resurser för livsmedelsproduktion som redan är överbelastade.

Inför det överhängande hotet om klimatförändrigar, ifrågasätter allt fler röster livsmedelssystemets hållbarhet och resa sig mot den växande hungern och de eskalerande ojämlikheterna som härrör från det. Därför växer flera alternativ till det neoliberala livsmedelssystemetet idag fram i syfte att minska sociala ojämlikheter och begränsa miljöförstöring; det urbana jordbruk är en av dem. Denna avhandling undersöker, ur ett social- ekologiskt rättvisa perspektiv, om urbana jordbruket kan hantera frågor om miljöförvaltning och skillnader i livsmedelsfördelning.

Även om de många förderlarna med urbana jordbruk kanske inte räcker för att underminera maktstrukturerna som är djupt rotade i grunden för den nuvarande livsmedelsregimen, kan det fortfarande spela en viktig roll för att lindra luckorna i livsmedelsbehoven. Livsmedelssäkerhets kommer emellertid efter att de grundläggande orsakerna till fattigdom är löst och social rättvisa uppnås i det större samhället. Vägen mot en större social och ekologisk rättvisa verkar behöva inte bara ompröva hur man matar people mänsklighet, men öckså en betyndade transformation som går utöver aspekter från hela livsmedelsförsörjningskedjan och omfattar den systemiska samhällsförändringar. Table of contents

1. Introduction 9 1.1. Overall aim and research question 10 1.2. Why a social-ecological justice perspective? 10 1.3. Methodology 11 2. The consolidation of the current food system 16 2.1. Industrialisation, globalisation and centralisation: the driving forces behind the current food system 16 2.2. The imminent threat of climate change 17 3. Food security 19 3.1. Food insecurity 19 3.2. Definition and evolution of the “food security” concept 20 3.3. A counternarrative: the “the ” discourse 21 3.4. Factors affecting food security 22 4. Structural inequalities in the current food system 23 4.1. A major impediment to small-scale ’ livelihoods 23 4.2. Spatial differences in food security: food deserts 24 4.3. Racial geographies and structural racism 25 4.4. The impact of on the environment 25 5. Urban agriculture 28 5.1. An alternative to the current food system 28 5.2. Definition 29 5.3. Re-emergence of urban agriculture 30 5.4. Places where food can be grown 31 6. Urban agriculture addressing social injustice 32 6.1. Role of urban agriculture in improving food security 32 6.2. Role of urban agriculture in improving physical and mental 33 6.3. Urban agriculture as an eminently “white and rich” practice 34 6.4. Women’s empowerment and gender equality 35 6.5. Is urban agriculture reproducing inequality? 35 7. Social role of urban agriculture 37 7.1. Community empowerment and cultural identity 37 7.2. Social inclusion and immigrant integration 38 7.3. Children’s 38 7.4. Political activism and democratic citizenship 39 7.5. Consumer awareness 39 8. Environmental effect of urban agriculture 40 8.1. Lowering the energy and emissions embodied in food transportation 40 8.2. Reducing the urban heat island effect and balancing the urban microclimate 41 8.3. Mitigating storm water impacts 41 8.4. Improving nutrient cycling 41 8.5. Increasing urban 42 9. Potential future of urban agriculture 43 9.1. The provision of food in cities 43 9.2. Principal barriers to broad implementation 44 9.2.1. Access to vacant land and tenure security 44 9.2.2. The viability of farming the city 44 9.2.3. Urban health risks 45 9.2.4. Consumer lifestyle, time dedication and lack of interest 46 9.2.5. Economic accessibility 46 10. Discussion 47 11. Conclusions 52 Reference list 55 Appendix. Literature database 65 ❶ Introduction

In the course of history, cities have served as catalysts for economic growth and social progress (Orsini et al., 2013). However, until the global process of urbanisation was set in motion by the consolidation of the Industrial Revolution and the advent of the modern capitalist economy in the late 19th century, there were still just a few large cities in the world. The 20th century witnessed the major shift from a rural to an urban world, as cities grew into metropolitan regions, accommodating an unprecedented migration from the countryside in search of wage labour (Angotti, 2015). At the turn of the century, urban inhabitants were just the 15% of the planet’s total population, while one century later this figure crossed the 50% threshold (Orsini et al., 2013), making the 21st century the ‘first urban century’ (Stewart et al., 2013).

The current 7.5 billion global population (United Nations, 2017) is expected to continue growing in the decades to come (Orsini et al., 2013), generating an ever-increasing demand for housing, food, employment, transportation, and health and sanitation services; something which will not be easy to satisfy (Besthorn, 2013). In most developing countries, where largest and fastest growing cities primarily concentrate (Rakodi, 1997), the rate at which urbanisation occurs is outpacing the growth of services and employment (Armar-Klemesu, 2000).

In the particular case of food, as urban sprawl consumes fertile land, agriculture is increasingly being confined to the countryside, where production has adopted industrial practices during last century. In consequence, the heavy dependence of cities on vast areas of rural land to feed their inhabitants (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000) is exacerbating the spread of hunger in many cities of the world (Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007). Although cities were once considered land of opportunity and improved living conditions (Orsini et al., 2013), more than ever poverty and malnutrition are turning out to be urban phenomena (Mougeot, 1999). In consequence, how to supply the world’s increasing population with enough and adequate food is becoming an impending concern (Kremen et al., 2012).

The decline, degradation and rising costs of some critical resources for food production, such as water, fossil fuels and other non-renewable sources of energy and , are posing a serious threat to food provision worldwide (Donovan et al., 2011). In the face of climate change, an imminent global oil-supply crunch and continued price volatility will accentuate the vulnerability of conventional food systems that are already being affected by global warming through ‘reduced and unpredictable rainfall, increasing temperatures and heatwaves, and extreme weather events’ (Donovan et al., 2011, p.8).

As a result, more and more voices are raising lately against the unsustainability of the current global food system and the escalating inequalities and burgeoning hunger resulting from it. It is unlikely that the planet will be able to bear in the long run an urbanised humanity that depletes the planet resources beyond its ecological carrying capacity and uses the as its particular dumping site. Therefore, issues of environmental sustainability and equitable social development could not be more relevant these days, when a significant transformation of food production and supply chains seems to be required for the sake of the future -being of the Earth (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; Donovan et al., 2011).

9

Cities are inevitably called to spearhead the pathway towards a more just and sustainable world, so re-examining how to feed adequately the whole urban population is becoming one of the quintessential challenges of this century (Ackerman et al., 2014; Morgan, 2015). Growing concern about ecological issues has aroused interest in the production of organic and locally-grown food. Likewise, urban agriculture is emerging in different formats as a planning response which often embraces practices of these latter alternative movements to the global food model. However, it is also valued for leading human beings to a healthier lifestyle, creating social bonds in local communities, revitalising decrepit vacant lots and as a leisure activity. Meanwhile, in a very different context, agriculture has never stopped being an extended practice in cities of the Third World as a livelihood strategy for millions of people to address food insecurity.

1.1. Overall aim and research questions

The aim of this thesis is to conduct a literature study with the goal of evaluating from a social- ecological justice perspective the feasibility of urban agriculture to address the inequalities and unsustainable practices stemming out from the current global food model in order to transform it in a more equitable and fair system.

Within this framework, this thesis sets out to address two basic research questions which ramify into several subquestions:

(i) how can urban agriculture potentially address these inequalities and unsustainable practices? a. how can urban agriculture contribute to food security? b. which is the effect of urban agriculture in the environment? c. which social role can urban agriculture projects play within a community? d. are urban agriculture projects really democratic, fair, equitable and environmentally sound? (ii) how could urban agriculture play out in the future in order to be able to fulfil this goal? a. does urban agriculture contribute to climate change adaptation? b. has urban agriculture potential capacity to supply the whole urban population? c. which obstacles to broader implementation could urban agriculture find out?

1.2. Why a social-ecological justice perspective?

In view of escalating environmental problems associated with climate change, sustainability is a word that seems to be on everyone’s lips these days. However, the vagueness of the term leaves room for varying interpretations that result in different sustainability perspectives. Generally, these discourses have focused on environmental stewardship, biodiversity and intergenerational equity; leaving aside issues of poverty, health, cultural diversity and unequal distribution within the present generation (Agyeman et al., 2003).

In turn, there is evidence that disenfranchised, marginalised groups of society are more at risk of living in environmentally degraded environments, while are more exposed to worst environmental hazards and have disproportionate access to basic resources for survival than more affluent population. In many cases, these conditions are not only a matter of low income

10 but also of racial and ethnic discrimination. Hence, framed as a civil rights issue, the environmental justice movement is fruit of the struggle to advocate for the equal degree of protection from environmental burdens and human health risks, and the equal access to services, regardless of , ethnicity, national origin or income (Ferris et al., 2001; Emmet, 2011).

Because of the narrow focuses of most sustainability discourses, until now very few attempts have been made to address properly both the human impact on the environment, and the just distribution of environmental impacts and resources within present and future generations (Gunnarsson Östling & Svenfelt, 2017). The need to put an end to distributional inequalities, while at the same time protecting ecological support systems that sustain societies with indispensable services, calls for a holistic approach that can integrate both perspectives. In this vein, the concept of social-ecological justice coined by Gunnarsson-Östling & Svenfelt (2017) emerges with the aim to address ‘power and influence, both inter and intra-generational justice, both local and distant support systems, both visible and non-apparent dependence on ecosystems, both environmental benefits and burdens”.

In this particular case, there are, on one hand, many studies that have evaluated the environmental advantages of urban agriculture and, on the other hand, some authors which have also studied the role of urban agriculture enhancing food security. But little research has addressed simultaneously the injustices and the unsustainable practices inherent to the conventional food system, being the literature on how urban agriculture could ameliorate them very limited. In consequence, this thesis aims to contribute with a broader and deeper understanding of the potential role of urban agriculture as an urban planning strategy to deal with both social and ecological justice issues.

1.3. Methodology

Since urban agriculture is a very broad subject comprising a varied range of interrelated disciplines and diverse practices, a literature study has been considered the most suitable method to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the urban agriculture phenomenon in such a way that it does not delve into the specificities of a particular context or an specific application, but attends to the broad picture of it by analysing both previous literature reviews and study cases which can show how the diverse nature of urban agriculture is employed for different aims in different parts of the world with varied outcomes.

In the first stage, with the literature research in mind, a few topics linked to urban agriculture and justice were listed (see figure below), along with some keywords associated to each one of these subjects. All these words where later introduced along with ‘urban agriculture’ in two principal literature search engines: Google Scholar and KTH’s Primo. As usually ‘urban agriculture’ and ‘urban farming’ are used indistinctively in the literature, both terms were introduced in the research. The same procedure was done with ‘local agriculture’, ‘local farming’, ‘’ and ‘sustainable farming’ for the same reason despite their dissimilarities.

11

Fig.1 Urban agriculture and interrelated topics

147 papers came out from this research, which were compiled in a Microsoft Excel grid used as a database (See Appendix). After reading the abstract, introduction and conclusions of each article, a first impression allow the author to mark in this database the few topics that each paper addressed with a black cell in their corresponding column, while at the same time writing down their key words. This database helped overviewing and organising the reading process, as all these papers could be sorted there by date, author and subject easily. As well, it helped summarising the research findings as, after reading all papers, the Microsoft Word file containing the notes written down for each paper followed the chromatic classification of topics included in the database columns. At the same time, in the database the cells were marked in black or not depending if relevant findings about these topics were found in the corresponding article, something which was of use for organising faster and easily all the results.

As well, this task allowed a first sifting from which 127 articles passed, so this time they were read from beginning to end in thematic blocks. However, only 99 of them were used later as sources in this thesis. As well, as it was being written, there was need to consult 50 additional sources. While reading these articles, the author aimed to identify the different disparities and unsustainable practices of the food system, and looked for possible solutions to them that can come from urban agriculture, either by exploring case studies that have successfully addressed them or by examining the work of authors that analyse the potential application of it.

In this sense, the surveyed literature embraces different topics and encompasses research performed both in developed and developing countries. The article selection is limited to works published in English and it comprises mostly peer-reviewed articles. Due to language constraints, the number of cases studies performed in English-speaking countries is preponderant. In order to capture the modern state of the art of this ever-changing discipline, the selection is based mainly in articles written in the 21th century, although there are some exceptions from the 1990s.

12

Academic papers written before this date have been intentionally excluded. Below it is compiled some graphic information regarding the surveyed literature.

EXCLUSION FOOD SOVEREIGNTY SUPPLY HUMAN HEALTH POVERTY OBSTACLES GLOBAL FOOD FUTURE SOCIAL VALUES PLANNING FOOD SECURITY JUSTICE L O C A L F O O D ENV. SUSTAINABILITY

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Fig.2 Topics in surveyed literature1

Fig.3 Academic quality of surveyed literature

1 Two main topics have been assigned to each paper, thereby these numbers represent the times that a topic is dealt with in the total papers surveyed.

13

Fig.4 Research institution's region of affiliation of surveyed authors2

Fig.5 Geographical location of case studies

From now on, this thesis is organised as follows. First of all, it will be necessary to provide some conceptual background on how the current food system has consolidated (Chapter 2) and on food insecurity (Ch.3). Then comes the analytical framework in which the detrimental effects of this system on both living beings and the environment are examined, as well as the structural inequalities stemming from it (Ch.4). Thereafter, the focus is put then on the phenomenon of urban agriculture (Ch.5) before assessing in the results separately its potential role in addressing social inequalities (Ch.6), community issues (Ch.7) and environmental concerns (Ch.8). Next

2 In the case of co-authored papers, the research institution’s region of the world with more than 50% of co-authors has been chosen as predominant. When none of them fulfils this condition, each region has been considered.

14 chapter studies the potential capacity of urban agriculture to feed the population and scrutinises which obstacles could urban agriculture face in case of broader implementation (Ch.9). In the end, the key findings of the literature study are critically discussed (Ch.10) and some planning recommendations are outlined as a conclusion (Ch.11).

15

❷ The consolidation of the current food system

2.1. Industrialisation, globalisation and centralisation: the driving forces behind the current food system

Despite agriculture has been practised by humans for more than 10,000 years, during the last 50 years it underwent its greatest transformation in the course of history. The second half of the 20th century witnessed a dramatic change in the structure of the food system led by three main driving forces: industrialisation, centralisation and globalisation (Kremer & DeLiberty, 2011).

By the 1960s, in the context of the ‘’, the shift towards an agricultural system heavily reliant on fuel-powered machinery, genetically modified varieties, and synthetic chemical inputs enabled an extraordinary increase of yields in such a short period of time (Horrigan et al., 2002). Aimed at increasing the and the efficiency of the food system, critics accuse industrialisation of placing machinery and chemical inputs before people and natural processes (La Trobe & Acott, 2000), thus resulting in the decline of agricultural employment. On the contrary, in the drive for competitiveness and due to the advantages of economies of scale, field and farm sizes have increased massively, while farming techniques and markets have become more standardised, leading to high levels of homogeneity across food systems (Tscharntke et al., 2005; Kremen et al., 2012).

The intensification and mechanisation of agriculture was accompanied by the signature of global free-trade treaties which fuelled the globalisation of the food system (La Trobe & Acott, 2000). As Jarosz (2014) highlights, this meant the deepening implementation of neoliberal ideology into exchange and financial markets, which, in conjunction with low transportation costs thanks to the ubiquity of fossil fuels, have made distances and borders less relevant to national economies.

At the same time, government policies enabled a few large agri-food companies to take control over the whole food chain (production, processing, distribution and marketing) in pursue of economics of scale efficiencies (Kremer & DeLiberty, 2011). Small-scale farmers and retailers have been the main victims of the centralisation of the food economy since they were deprived of their source of economic sustenance unless they joined the industrial sector (La Trobe & Acott, 2000). A reduced number of agri-food transnational companies exercise great control over the entire food system nowadays (Cameron & Wright, 2014), especially within the middle section of the food supply chain, which includes “the purchasers of raw agricultural commodities, food industry processors, grocery outlets, chain restaurants and the agro-input firms that produce seeds, agrochemicals, fertilisers, and other inputs” (Galt et al., 2014, p.135).

However, this enormous concentration of power is much lower at the farm level than in the other stages, since the food processing industry has sought numerous ways of wealth accumulation which do not imply to have direct ownership of the means of agricultural production. Through with small-scale producers, the largest food processing companies dictate the standards of an ever-increasing homogeneous production (Dixon et al., 2007; Galt et al., 2014).

16

Nevertheless, the few small farm holdings that operate on the margins of this monopolised market also suffer the consequences in the form of extreme competition from major supermarkets and limited power to determine prices (Mason & Knowd, 2010).

With the purpose of maximising production and reducing labour costs, agri-food firms provide farmers with powerful incentives (credit, processing facilities, seeds, technical assistance and markets) to specialise in a single crop variety under some strict production standards (Röling & Wagemakers, 1998 cited in Kremen et al., 2012). However, since monocropping practices make crops more vulnerable to pests (Horrigan et al., 2002), farmers become dependent on the usage of high volumes of (, and ) which they need to purchase from an agent and apply with the help of an agricultural extension expert trained in pesticide use (Kremen et al., 2012). Therefore, these days farmers need to rely on several relationships to compete efficiently in supply chains: apart from the aforementioned, food corporations, whom they need to negotiate, and banks, in seek of loans which they have to repay.

Furthermore, industrial agriculture found in a good partner with whom to work hand-in-hand to make food production more efficient and profitable. In order to counteract ever evolving plant diseases, traditional plant breeders used to search for a desired trait from a closely related species that could breed with the plant in question through natural mechanisms. However, in the last decades, since are more susceptible to pests and plant diseases due to great volumes planted contiguously, market forces have urged plant breeders to find a quicker solution: transgenic crops. Genetic engineering has allowed to implant just a single gene that confers resistance which can come from anywhere in the plant or animal kingdom. Nevertheless, crop genes are manipulated to confer resistance to the that are used to kill undesired weeds (Horrigan et al., 2002).

2.2. The imminent threat of climate change

The threat of climate is becoming a serious global concern as modern society continues to increase its consumption rate of natural resources to the point of compromising some ecosystem services that sustain life on Earth. The planet’s temperature is expected to rise at least 2°C by 2050 by effect of the high concentration of gases in the atmosphere. Global warming is likely to affect severely climate events, bringing drastic changes in rainfall patterns which would imply more severe and frequent floods, , storms and heat waves (Dubbeling et al., 2009; Friel et al., 2011).

The negative impacts from climate change are predicted to affect disproportionately the most disadvantaged sections of society because their vulnerable position leaves them without adaptive capacity to extreme events. Although developing countries are the ones that have done the least to cause global warming, their population will be more exposed to the temperature rise, especially those living in unplanned settlements, where the built environment is weaker and green spaces inexistent. Their limited financial resources constrain their access to potential technological adaptations to climate change, hence raising equity questions (Dubbeling et al., 2009; Friel et al., 2011). Therefore, alternative, more equitable adaptations than technology improvement are calling for ‘developing much more resource-poor yet enjoyable and fulfilling livelihoods based in more localised economies’ (North, 2010, p.586).

If cities are already feeling the pressure to provide an increasing urban population with basic services such as food, researchers venture to predict that climate change would only exacerbate

17 this stress after extreme events will trigger massive migration of people from the countryside to urban areas (De Zeeuw et al., 2011). Not only that, but, under current agricultural practices, there are serious doubts whether there would be enough arable land available to feed the whole humanity (Besthorn, 2013). Despite not being so pessimistic, Wallgren & Höjer (2009) affirm, in this sense, that the food system will inevitably be conditioned by the impact of global warming, but also by the need to adapt to and energy shortage.

18

❸ Food security

3.1. Food insecurity

After 2008 financial crisis and the consequent austerity policies introduced by governments that have devastated the most disenfranchised social strata worldwide, food insecurity has ceased to be an issue restricted to the Third World to turn out to be one of the most pressing concerns of the 21st century (Ackerman et al., 2014; Cadieux & Slocum, 2015). However, food insecurity shows two different faces depending on the socioeconomic hemisphere it is looking at.

About 800 million people worldwide suffer from undernutrition, an epidemy which wounds mostly the Third World (Dixon et al., 2007). The most damaging effects of the current food system manifest more clearly in the Global South in the form of hunger (Corrigan, 2011). The severe consequences resulting from it are stunted growth and protein-energy and micronutrient malnutrition, which lead to high mortality rates, especially among children (Wittman et al., 2010). But, even in the absence of malnutrition, chronic food shortage is ‘associated with increased incidence and virulence of infectious diseases, school and work absences, fatigue, and problems with concentration’ (Brown & Jameton, 2000, p.25).

In contrast, although poverty and hunger are escalating in the Global North due to increasing unemployment rates and reduced public assistance, the cases of undernutrition are there more limited, being the current high rates of obesity and diabetes signs of pronounced food insecurity, since this latter is not only a matter of food quantity, but of quality too (Ackerman et al., 2014; Mougeot, 1999; Sonnino, 2016).

The intensification of and processed food commodity chains, along with the aggressive marketing of a myriad of food choices through mass media, has incited of cheap, high-calorie food in affluent countries (Dixon et al., 2007; Freudenberg et al., 2011). In developed countries, last decades have witnessed a generalised transition towards dietary patterns consisting in abundant consumption of processed and red , dairy, sweets, refined grains and soft drinks, while intakes of fruit and vegetables have been significantly reduced (Dixon et al., 2007). Consequently, the Western-type diet has become characterised by too high energy intakes, plenty of saturated fat, salt and added sugars; and low rates of fibre, complex carbohydrates and other essential nutrients.

This has contributed severely to the spread of obesity, elevated cholesterol levels and hypertension (NFA, 2005; Donovan et al., 2011; Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013). All three are risks factors for chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis and certain types of cancer (colon breast and prostate) (Horrigan et al., 2002; Corrigan, 2011). Moreover, obesity could have also some psychological repercussions in the form of anxiety, depression and low self-esteem (Williams et al., 2015). Of course, sedentary life has been another crucial contributory to overweight and obesity, with ‘the growth of motoring, the invasion of TV and computers and an ever-more automatized workplace in recent decades’ (NFA, 2005, p.23) playing a great role in the decrease of physical activity.

As urban become poorer, it is unlikely that this situation will tone down in the immediate future. Instead, it will probably heighten due to forthcoming ecological pressures,

19 such as climate change, water unavailability and increasing degradation. Hence, ensuring access to quality food is becoming more and more a question of national security and not just a moral imperative (Donovan et al., 2011; Sonnino, 2016).

3.2. Definition and evolution of the “food security” concept

The genesis of the food security concept is often set in 1948, when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights included food between the fundamental rights of human being (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Morgan, 2015), but the term by itself emerged during the 1970s when policy discourses of the international community introduced it in the context of large-scale food shortages and diminishing world food supplies (Maxwell, 1996; Armar-Klemesu, 2000).

According to Jarosz (2014), the first definition of the term appeared in the report of the World Food Conference of 1974, which was aimed primarily at governments and pointing at international food supply and prices, as:

‘availability at all times of adequate world supplies of basic food-stuffs… to sustain steady expansion of food consumption… and to offset fluctuations in production and prices’ (United Nations, 1975 cited in Maxwell 1996: 156).

Initially, the first conceptualisation of food security adopted a productivist frame as famines were associated with food unavailability and inefficient food supply. Therefore, to mitigate world hunger, governments and agri-business corporations in developed nations aimed to liberalise agricultural trade and integrate it into global capital markets, while increasing production to not only meet their domestic consumption but to supply the demand of developing countries (Dibden et al., 2013; Rosin, 2013). Scientific and technological were strongly encouraged under the Green Revolution banner to increase productivity, contributing to the concentration of food production in the hands of fewer and increasingly larger agri-business multinationals (Armar- Klemesu, 2000; Haletky et al., 2006; Sonnino, 2016).

However, the next decade a new narrative around food security changed the emphasis from the food supply to a demand-side perspective that stressed access to food rather than availability. While food crises persisted in the Global South, the pioneering work of Amartya Sen (1981) on food entitlement evinced that famine coexists with adequate food supply, so it is a question of inequitable distribution based on a wide range of political and socioeconomic causes (Dilley & Boudreau, 2001; Gladwin et al., 2001; Corrigan, 2011; Morgan, 2015). Consequently, Sen’s theory consequently shifted the focus from the national or international level (macro) to the individual or household level (micro) (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Sonnino, 2016).

During this period, neoliberalism put the emphasis upon household ability to purchase food within the global, corporatized food channels rather than upon producing food as a subsistence strategy (Jarosz, 2011). Therefore, according to this, the most disadvantaged people are responsible for alleviating their own hunger, either by increasing their economic purchasing power or their crop productivity.

However, over the years, the food security discourse incorporated a human rights perspective and identified poverty as the root cause of world hunger (Jarosz, 2014). In this context, a hunger relief network of food banks and pantries surfaced in low-income urban neighbourhoods of developed countries to counteract food insecurity (Campbell, 2004). In response, some future

20 definitions claimed for ‘the right to feed oneself in dignity’ by socially just methods, instead of just being fed (United Nations, 2010).

All in all, the Food and Agriculture Organisation’s definition has been considered as the most recognised and inspiring definitions of food security, a condition which exists:

‘When all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food which meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life’ (FAO, 2003 cited in Morgan 2015, p.1383)

3.3. A counternarrative: the “food sovereignty” discourse

The food sovereignty discourse has its origin in the foundation in 1993 of “La ” transnational agrarian movement, which encompasses farmers organisations from all over the world that are united in radical opposition to the increasing globalisation and centralisation of the current industrial, capital-intensive and corporate-led food system promoted by the World Trade Organisation, Western countries and agri-food multinationals (Wittman et al., 2010; Block et al., 2012).

As a grassroots resistance against the neoliberal model of agriculture, this movement aims to serve as an alternative paradigm to the monopolistic control of food production and the power relations behind it. It aims to counter the destructive neoliberalist policies that have undermined local productive capacities, hence destroying the livelihoods of many peasants, eroding their communities and globalised poverty and hunger, while at the same time damaging the natural environment. Instead, it advocates to return the productive resources (land, water, seeds, and natural resources) to the hands of the farmers (Wittman et al., 2010).

The food sovereignty principles are very closely linked to democracy, equity and social justice (Wittman et al., 2010). Therefore, its discourse put a strong emphasis on the right of each community to control their access to food and define its own food and agricultural systems (Via Campesina, 2001). At the local level food sovereignty addresses the lack of decision-making autonomy of the most vulnerable by empowering them ‘to produce food in a safe manner, to regulate production, and to choose their own level of self-reliance’, rather than following the orders of large agri-food corporations (Block et al., 2012, p.205).

Furthermore, the definition of food sovereignty compiled in “La Via Campesina” declaration of 2001, Our World is Not for Sale is the following:

‘The right of people to define their own food and agriculture; to protect and regulate domestic agricultural production and trade in order to achieve sustainable development objectives; to determine the extent to which they want to be self-reliant; to restrict the dumping of products in their markets (…). Food sovereignty does not negate trade, but rather it promotes the formulation of trade policies and practices that serve the rights of peoples to safe, healthy, and ecologically sustainable production.’ (Via Campesina, 2001, p.1)

21

3.4. Factors affecting food security

Household and individual’s access to adequate food needs to be considered in both quantitative (i.e., caloric sufficiency) and qualitative terms (i.e., variety, safety and cultural acceptability) (Armar-Klemesu, 2000). Over time it has become an increasingly complex issue, as it can be constrained by a bunch of different circumstances that go beyond economic access, such as lack of time, no transportation, no accessible grocery store, diminished physical mobility and inefficient public policy (Kortright & Wakefield, 2011; Dixon, 2014).

Nevertheless, most scholars agree on pointing out monetary income as the most determinant predictor of food insecurity after urbanisation has exacerbated the need for city residents to purchase most of the food they eat, which has made them dependant on commercially processed foodstuff (Armar-Klemesu, 2000). This could leave certain social groups, such as the elderly, single-parent households and large families, in a vulnerable situation (Rose, 1999).

The overreliance on food purchases exposes people to the fluctuations of the local and global economy, and particularly to the efficiency of the food marketing system (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Garrett & Ruel, 2000). Consequently, the capacity to purchase good-quality food of those engaged in low-paying employment or unemployed is undermined directly or indirectly by currency devaluations, rising , salary reductions, formal-job retrenchment, high land prices and elimination of subsidies for food, housing, transportation and health care (Mougeot, 1999; Corbould, 2013). As food budgets are elastic in comparison with these four latter rigid expenses, poor households have no other choice than to adjust their consumption to cheaper, higher-calorie sources with low nutritional value (Haletky et al., 2006, Zezza & Tasciotti, 2010; Corbould, 2013) as they cannot afford to cover their daily minimum requirements of nutrient- rich fruit and vegetables (Orsini et al., 2013).

But middle- or upper-class households are not immune to food insecurity, as anyone could be caught up in harried urban lifestyles induced by the stress of conciliating work and private life. This perhaps less obvious impediment could prevent from investing enough time to buy and cook from raw and healthier ingredients, and then rely more on the convenience of processed, prepared or fast food, which are less time-consuming (Bellows & Hamm, 2001; Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007).

22

❹ Structural inequalities in the current food system

4.1. A major impediment to small-scale farmers’ livelihoods

During last decades, World Bank’s development model for global agriculture, reinforced by Western countries subsidies, has favoured large-scale, commodity-based agricultural corporations and food manufacturers over smallholder farmers and retailers (Dixon et al., 2007; Bonacich & Alimahomed-Wilson, 2011). Government support for intensive food production and cheap food imports have seriously undermined small peasant’s activities worldwide, leaving them in a non-viable bargaining position against the giant enterprises of the Global North, to whose economies of scale and efficiency they cannot compete (La Trobe & Acott, 2000; Knowd et al., 2006).

Food surpluses resulting from overproduction in the food industry have impelled a decline in prices that has compromised the chances of making a living from farming throughout the world in an epoch when food purchases represent the smallest share of Northern consumers’ income in history. Global free-trade treaties have opened the door for industrialised countries to export surpluses of less nutritious food, sometimes through food aid dumping, to developing countries.

Furthermore, Northern countries imports of high-quality food items produced in developing countries, which locals often cannot afford, have led to export-oriented and hard-currency- earning agricultural policies in the Third World which have dictated crop choices, as well as determined agricultural credit programs and incentives. The lure of food exports has been necessarily accompanied there by the substitution of the exported production by lower-quality staple food imports from the Global North, which sometimes are even foreign to local diets (Mougeot, 1999).

As a result, most developing countries have become net food importers and hence heavily dependent on far-off sources of nutrition, developing neo-colonial relationships with richer countries which result in significant food insecurity concerns (Lang, 1999; Mougeot, 1999). The cause of this unequal terms of trade has been the simultaneous rollback of protectionist policies in the Global South and the subsidisation of the agricultural sector in the Global North (Weis, 2007). Therefore, the autonomy and resilience of local communities has been undermined as they have lost control over their most basic necessities -food among them- and have become unnecessarily dependent on the import of foreign goods that otherwise could be produced locally (Grewal & Grewal, 2012).

On the local scale, the entrance of subsidised foreign food in the market has forced many small- scale peasants out of business due to their inability to compete with the resultant price decrease, as it increases supply while demand remains the same (Mougeot, 1999). As peasants are not able to make a living from agriculture, they end being swallowed up by global market forces and do not have other choice that leaving their land (La Trobe & Acott, 2000; McIlvaine-Newsad & Porter,

23

2013). The same can be said about local food retailers, who are squeezed out by the entry of supermarket and convenience store chains (Dixon et al., 2007).

This has inevitably supposed a major impediment to livelihoods of many people (Lang, 1999; Mougeot, 1999; Haletky et al., 2006; Dixon et al., 2007), who are displaced from their mean of subsistence in their homeland because they can neither be competitive in the market nor self- sufficient to feed themselves. Consequently, thousands of people in developing countries are pushed to join the international migration streams that link the Global South to the Global North to work in the industrial agriculture sector (Lang, 1999). Nevertheless, despite supporting the consumptive needs of the Northern population, many times farmworkers do not become full members of the society, as their low wages, long workdays and “undocumented” status keeps them excluded from the rights and benefits of the dominant political economy (Galt et al., 2014).

In turn, the rise of the agri-food industry has eroded significantly the economic viability of rural communities worldwide. Industrial employ nowadays less local people and farmers end up receiving a smaller share of the final product value; something that has decreased the power considerably (Nicolson, 1997; in La Trobe & Acott, 2000). Facing the difficulties of making a living in the countryside, people increasingly migrate to cities, thus leading to rural depopulation (Dixon et al., 2007; Kremen et al., 2012) and contributing even more to the rise of the agri-food and fast-food industries (Mason & Knowd, 2010).

4.2. Spatial differences in food security: food deserts

For some decades, the consolidation of the food industry has triggered the rise of food retailing giants, something which has progressively let out of business small-scale, local food shops. At the same time, these big corporations have generally followed a ‘redlining’ strategy consisting in pulling their outlets out of those urban areas where they see insufficient economic return and an unacceptably high crime risk (Howe & Wheeler, 1999). This has left some low-income neighbourhoods without ready access to food outlets other than high-priced corner shops, with poor and ethnically-diverse communities suffering disproportionately the most detrimental effects of it (Eisenhauer, 2001; Larsen & Gilliland, 2008).

These areas characterised by poor, inadequate access to healthy and affordable food in comparison with higher-income neighbourhoods are named ‘food deserts’ (Meenar & Hoover, 2012; Mok et al., 2014). The lack of large-scale supermarkets cohabits with a plethora of fast food restaurants and a limited number of small, quick-stop type convenience stores selling boxed and canned goods, and a wide array of unhealthy snacks, sweets and sugary beverages. Moreover, the scarce produce they sell, if any, is much more expensive than at supermarkets and of less quality (Lane et al., 2008; Alkon & Norgaard, 2009; Corrigan, 2011; Besthorn, 2013). Therefore, people living in food deserts have to rely on highly-processed and less nutritious food, so they face serious difficulties to achieve the balance food intake recommended for a healthy diet (Dunn, 2010).

Beyond food prices and availability, another critical barrier faced by inhabitants of low-income neighbourhoods is poor access to public transportation, especially after the expansion of urban sprawl has exacerbated the dependence on private cars, a privilege which people experiencing financial hardship are often deprived of. Therefore, the location of supermarkets becomes crucial to access to a nutritionally adequate diet. Otherwise, traveling to a grocery store involves usually

24 long travel times by public transport, aggravated with the burden of carrying groceries along the journey, something extremely arduous for the elderly or for disabled persons.

If one takes into account the increasing costs of public transportation and that low-income neighbourhoods are poorly served by it in many cities worldwide, the problem is further accentuated, leaving convenience stores with limited food options as the only viable choice (Corrigan, 2011; Donovan et al., 2011). The proliferation of car-based cities only exacerbates this problematic as supermarket chains move further away from inner cities where they can acquire plots capable of accommodating large parking requirements (Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996).

Patterns of inequity are also visible in the predominance of fast food restaurants in low-income neighbourhoods and racially segregated communities. However, not only their density is higher in these communities, but the offer of healthy menu options in both fast food and full-service restaurants is lower than in wealthier neighbourhoods. This disparity is attributable to the same reasons that contribute to the limited availability of grocery stores: a weak retail climate and low wages compromising profitability (Corrigan, 2001).

This cycle of deprivation in which disadvantaged people end up locked has also health consequences, since limited food access in food deserts is correlated with patterns of hunger and poor nutrition that result in higher rates of diet-related diseases in comparison with more affluent neighbourhoods (Campbell 2004; Shigley, 2009; Donovan et al., 2011).

4.3. Racial geographies and structural racism

For some decades, scholars have denounced the disparities suffered by non-white communities regarding access to healthy food, some of which spring from social and political institutions, and, ultimately, from the very structure of society. Discrimination begins when non-white farmers are denied of loans and subsidies in the Global North, something which has enabled an agricultural sector dominated by white people. But structural racism continues when, after being deprived access of producing fresh and healthy food, communities of colour have to face greater difficulties to purchase it because of poverty (Alkon & Norgaard, 2009).

Several studies have revealed a negative correlation between grocery stores and the percentage of African American residents in the United States (Morland et al., 2002), demonstrating that food deserts are more abundant in black and lower-income neighbourhoods. This lack of access to nutritious food is often cited as the reason behind the disproportionate rates of diet-related illnesses suffered by communities of colour (Alkon & Norgaard, 2009; Curran & González, 2009).

4.4. The impact of industrial agriculture on the environment

These days, more and more scholars accuse the current industrial food production model of incurring in harmful consequences on the environment and compromise the finite carrying capacity of the Earth’s resources. In order to sustain its productive capacity, industrial agriculture relies upon vast amounts of land and fresh water (Besthorn, 2013), which are consumed at unsustainable rates. Its heavy dependence on fossil fuels and agrochemicals leads to massive environmental degradation in the form of air pollution, water contamination, soil depletion and erosion, biodiversity loss, , ecological dead zones, and increased greenhouse gases which induce an increasingly deeper and accentuate global warming

25

(Horrigan et al., 2002; Besthorn, 2013). Therefore, the price of food might have been lowered in the last decades, but it has come at the price of a huge toll on ecosystems (La Trobe & Acott, 2000).

After the advent of fossil fuel transportation and international agricultural trade liberalisation, distances have become irrelevant (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000). This has set in motion the massive transportation of food around the world, generating tons of greenhouse emissions and waste, polluting natural ecosystems and depleting finite resources (Grewal & Grewal, 2012). Nowadays, imported goods are cheaper, but these environmentally damaging costs are externalised, meaning that they are not reflected in the final price. Government subsidies to transport infrastructure, fossil fuel energy sources, agrochemicals and commodity crops underpin cheap food, helping to maintain the nature of the industrialised agri-food system and hence heightening the so-called food-miles problem (Lang, 1999; Kremen et al., 2012).

In the from the farm to the dinner plate, food passes through quite a few energy-intensive processes (production, processing, packaging, storage, transportation and disposal) which consume large amounts of fossil fuel with harmful environmental costs (Horrigan et al., 2002; Specht et al., 2014). It Is not only the energy consumed in each step, but also the employed in transporting food over long distances from stage to stage; processes which not only consume a lot of energy but also generate large volumes of waste when using non-recyclable packages (La Trobe & Acott, 2000) and add price to the final cost for the consumer. In fact, estimations hold industrial agriculture responsible for between one fifth and one third of the human-generated emissions of greenhouse gases, being besides the biggest generator of methane and nitrous oxide emissions, which have more severe consequences on global warming than carbon dioxide (Horrigan et al., 2012).

Regarding food production, monocultures are irrigated with different types of agrochemicals (fertilisers, , , herbicides, etc.) that, due to a low percentage of efficiency, leave its bulk to impact the environment, contaminating both surface and groundwater, soil and air (Pimentel, 1995). The strong reliance of intensive agriculture on chemical inputs is considered the reason behind the decline in soil productivity and fertility (La Trobe & Acott, 2000). The overuse of agrochemicals increases gradually the acidity of the soil, which might eventually impede plant growth (Horrigan et al., 2002). Chemically fertilised crops are also associated with less diversity of plant and animal species (Horrigan et al., 2002). Nevertheless, it ends up being a vicious cycle, since, as targeted species end up developing resistance against pesticides, larger quantities must be applied and more fertiliser is needed to achieve good yields (La Trobe & Acott, 2000).

Although traditional agriculture is dependent on biodiversity for pollination or nutrient cycling, current monocropping practices represent also an alarming threat to wildlife within and surrounding crops, where the number of species has been reduced due to the high use of agrochemicals and the replacement of diverse habitats for homogeneous fields. Moreover, the consolidation of the seed industry has considerably diminished the availability of nonhybrid plant varieties (La Trobe & Acott, 2000). Only a few species can thrive in the high-nitrogen environments that result from excessive fertiliser application, so they often end up crowding out other species in the ecosystem (Moffat, 1998; Horrigan et al., 2002).

Meanwhile, the so-called “gene revolution” has delivered a quick and efficient solution to an industry urged by the pressure of the market, but it is changing ecosystems extremely fast. For , the one-gene resistance provided is just a single line of defence against pests and diseases;

26 a resistance that in naturally-regulated ecosystems used to consist in a complex of hundreds of gens working together that “may have taken thousands of years for a wild plant to develop” (Horrigan et al., 2002, p.448). Furthermore, herbicide-resistant genes can spread from crops to wild relative species, giving birth to ‘superweeds’ that would complicate even more. As well, this practice could give way to more virulent pests, public health impacts, the extinction of some pollinators and the destruction of natural habitats (Horrigan et al., 2002).

The consolidation of the seed industry has represented a way for large agri-food firms to take more control of the corporate-driven food system, since now they monopolise the patenting and genetic manipulation of seeds (Wittman et al., 2010), so that they rely on first-generation hybrids, forcing farmers to buy new seeds of them every year. As a consequence, traditional varieties are disappearing at an alarming rate (Horrigan et al., 2002)

Finally, large land surfaces are dedicated to producing grains in intensive monocultures with the purpose of supplying feedlots and factory farms where , hogs and poultry are raised to meet increasing human demand for meat (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000). Despite it is not their natural source of nutrition, diets have become higher in grains such as maize or soybeans, and lower in grass. The human act of eating grain-fed livestock instead of eating grain directly entails a large loss of food energy, hence making this form of food production very resource intensive (Horrigan et al., 2002). Moreover, the huge concentration of livestock in factory farms has other negative impacts on the environment, such as topsoil destruction and pollution from large quantities of animal waste. Last but not least, animal confinement in overcrowded conditions, along with several practices of blatant disregards for animal welfare, has raised ethical concerns about the treatment of animals in intensive factory farms (Horrigan et al., 2002).

27

❺ Urban agriculture

5.1. An alternative to the current food system

Urban agriculture has re-emerged in developed countries, among a few other initiatives, as part of a counter-cultural food movement that aims to challenge the current food system from different ways, embracing alternative production and distribution systems, a reduced geographical range and labelling schemes for fairly-traded and sustainable-grown food.

One of these alternative production systems is organic agriculture, which refuses the spray of agrochemicals over food crops. Instead, it advocates for the usage of renewable methods of fertilisation and in order to stop contaminating the environment, consuming non- renewable resources and affecting negatively human health. Likewise, tends to embrace , which favours soil fertility and benefits local biodiversity. Organic food sponsors defend that it tastes better than conventional food, while some studies have revealed that organic products contain a larger proportion of vitamins and trace elements (, n.d. cited in La Trobe & Acott, 2000).

Unlike organic farming, the sustainable agriculture movement does not respond to a series of prescribed practices or strict production methods, but to a holistic understanding of farming from an ecological perspective which, acknowledging that the planet’s natural resources are finite, considers long-term implications of agricultural practices in order to mitigate the environmental harms of them. Sustainable agriculture systems tend to be small-scale, profitable farms which are characterised for crop diversification. Generally, they make a greater use of sources than conventional farms and use fewer chemical inputs, although they do not have rigid regulations in that regard (Horrigan et al., 2002).

In another vein, local food systems consist in food production and distribution networks which aim to build more self-sufficient food schemes by bringing production in the vicinity of consumption, thereby reducing considerably the number of middlemen in the supply chain (Feenstra, 2002). In contrast with the current food model, local food movements endeavour to obtain their basic necessities within the shortest possible distance, hence freeing municipalities from depending on international trade to be fed and also reducing the ecological footprint inherent to the global transportation of goods (North, 2010; Grewal & Grewal, 2012). Conceived as a method to counteract corporation control of the food system by marketing food more directly, local systems are supposed to revitalise local communities and reconnect people with the food they eat.

Alternative food distribution channels such as community-supported agriculture or vegetable box schemes are beginning to be in vogue these days. Community-supported agriculture links directly producers and consumers by the latter agreeing to pay to the formers a share of the total produce before the growing season begins. In return, apart from a fresh produce shipment on a weekly basis, consumers may have some privileges in some cases, such as get a say in the production decision-making, and visiting and helping in the farm if they wish (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; La Trobe & Acott, 2000; Jacques-Menegaz, 2006). This mutual agreement implies that the risks are shared between producers and consumers.

28

In a similar way, vegetable box schemes provide customers with a selection of fresh, seasonal organic fruit and vegetables that are delivered weekly from a local farm to the customer’s door or to a local drop-off point. Usually, they function by subscription and there is no much room for choice except for box size; variety comes on the basis of seasonality and availability (La Trobe & Acott, 2000). Generally, both of these initiatives keep production and consumption more local, besides helping farmers to continue in business by finding a guaranteed market for their harvest and bypassing the many middlemen in the food supply chain (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000).

As well, city councils and alternative food movements have promoted lastly farmers’ markets (Cohen & Ilieva, 2015), which were the traditional form of food distribution until the 1950s, in order to provide an outlet for small-scale local producers to involve directly in the retail sale of their fresh produce and help them to counteract the power of supermarket and wholesaler chains (La Trobe & Acott, 2000; De Bon et al., 2010). Moreover, in times of escalating privatisation of urban spaces, the location of farmers’ markets in public spots contributes to vivify the surrounding streets and attract more people to local retail business (Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996; La Trobe & Acott, 2000; Cohen & Ilieva, 2015).

Lastly, fair trade certification systems emerged with the aim of helping peasants shorten lengthy and inefficient trading chains by circumventing the multiple intermediaries of the conventional market, and thus receiving a larger share of the produce’s final selling price. These certifications encourage consumers to pay more equitable prices for fair trade labelled food, thus the full costs of production are covered; something which not only secures the livelihood of farmers, but also safeguards natural resources and future investment necessities (WFTO & FLO, 2009). In this way, fair trade protects traditional forms of production, ensures decent working conditions and raises awareness of the need for change in conventional trade.

5.2. Definition

The first official definition of urban agriculture came out at the United Nations International Conference on Human Habitats held in Istanbul in 1996 as:

‘an industry that produces, processes, and markets food, fuel, and other outputs, largely in response to the daily demand of consumers within a town, city, or metropolis, on many types of privately and publicly held land and water bodies found throughout intra-urban and peri-urban areas.’ (Smit et al. 1996 cited in Mees & Stone, 2012, p.7).

Nevertheless, this definition, due to being very narrow, did not captured the essence of urban agriculture, which embraces a wide range of distinct practices carried out by various actors, very diverse plot locations and different purposes. For instance, the emphasis of these definitions on industrial production forgets about all the initiatives that do not have a commercial end point, which go from the livelihood strategy practised by most disadvantaged households to improve food self-sufficiency to the environmentally-friendly form of spending leisure time for high- income citizens (Stewart et al., 2013).

This is the reason why probably the simplest and most encompassing way of defining urban agriculture would be as:

‘the production of food and non-food plant and tree crops and (livestock, fowl, fish, and so forth), both within (intra-) and fringing (peri-) built-up urban areas’ (Mougeot, 1994, p.1).

29

Still, the boundaries of what is considered urban and what is not are blurred (Bryld, 2003; De Bon et al., 2010). For this reason, some authors encourage to see urban agriculture as a dynamic concept (Bryld, 2003) whose distinctiveness should not be its specific location within a pre-set boundary, but the fact that is embedded in the urban ecosystem (Richter et al., 1995 cited in Mougeot, 2000, p.9), or under the city’s social, ecological and economic sphere of influence (Bryld, 2003), which are both still, in fact, vague concepts too.

5.3. Re-emergence of urban agriculture

Although in the last few years urban agriculture has gained popularity to the point of becoming a growing trend which has attracted the attention of public authorities in developed countries (Bohn & Viljoen, 2011), it is not a novelty, but quite the contrary. However much agriculture is nowadays immersed in the rural imaginary, agricultural practices within city walls have existed since thousands of years ago (Castillo, 2003). In past historical eras, crop production and livestock breeding in the urban landscape helped populations last through sieges, shortages, droughts or civil strife in the surrounding countryside. In those days, markets were poorly developed and transportation was much slower than today, so cities were quite isolated entities (Ellis & Sumberg, 1998) in comparison with current global interconnectedness.

In fact, agriculture was a vivid component of the urban scene until the late 19th century (Lynch et al., 2001), when the conjunction of three modern era forces, the Industrial Revolution, the evolution of the megacity and the invention of refrigeration, made city officials opt for the elimination of urban food production, mainly for public health concerns (Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007). Nevertheless, previously, urban allotments had helped many proletarians to supplement low wages during the early industrial era (Martin & Marsden, 1999; Pemunta & Obara, 2012), hence helping governments to quell political unrest (McClintock, 2010).

Since that time, agriculture was viewed in the Western world as a constraint on urban development, whose focus shifted towards industrial and activities (Slater, 2001). Even so, in period of exceptional crises, such as in times of economic recession or food shortages, or on the occasion of war, urban agriculture came again to prominence (McClintock, 2010; Mok et al., 2013).

Although Third World inhabitants have continued to cultivate city land, in developed countries the advent of supermarket chains and the adoption of consumerist lifestyles delivered the final blow to urban agriculture (Press & Arnould, 2011). But recently, coinciding with another exceptional crisis, when the ongoing global economic breakdown collides with the threat of climate change, urban agriculture has come again to the fore, imbued of environmental awareness and aimed at combating poverty and food insecurity (Brown & Jameton, 2000).

Nowadays, the Global North and the Global South present two contrasting realities regarding urban agriculture. If Northern tend to be people doing fine economically who seek recreational benefits, social interaction and organic food production (Nugent, 2000; Galt et al., 2014), Southern farmers, in contrast, are usually poor urban residents who strive to survive, thus cultivating for home subsistence and sometimes earn some money from their crops.

30

5.4. Places where food can be grown

The area destined for food production in urban farming enterprises depends upon availability and purpose, ranging from micro-scale, purely subsistence-oriented intentions or recreative production to large-scale, fully commercialised ventures (De Zeeuw et al., 2000; Bellows et al., 2003). Leaving aside private , as community gardens require minimal upfront investment and do not impede later development (Rosol, 2005), vacant lots have often been the sites chosen for cultivation in inner cities. Vacant lots have proliferated with urban sprawl and can be rented until more lucrative land uses for these spaces come out (Corrigan, 2011).

However, there are many more potential places for this activity in urban landscapes, as it is the case of land that it is unattractive for urban development or otherwise not suitable for building construction, such as water bodies or risk-prone areas (Smit & Nasr, 1992; Brown & Jameton, 2000). This strategy not only optimises productive and multi-functional land use, but also adds economic value to plots that otherwise would have not (Kaufman & Bailkey, 2000; Dubbeling et al., 2009).

A comprehensive list of private and public spaces that can be used for urban agriculture would be: backyards, windowsills, walls and fences, balconies, rooftops gardens, balconies, decks, basements, barns, cellars, parks, open spaces, school gardens, roadsides, utility rights-of-way, airport buffers, water bodies, stream banks, floodplains, drainage way-leaves, wetlands, ponds, steep slopes, -prone areas and vacant lots of industrial estates (Smit & Nasr, 1992; Ellis & Sumberg, 1998; Bryld, 2003; Dubbeling et al., 2009).

31

❻ Urban agriculture addressing social injustice

6.1. Role of urban agriculture in improving food security

Despite in the Global North urban agriculture may be seen as a novelty or a subversive practice, it is performed in many cities of Africa, Latin America and Asia by the urban poor as an essential livelihood strategy to supplement diets and incomes in the absence of better employment opportunities (Ellis & Sumberg, 1998; Galt et al., 2014).

Despite the urban poor are who would benefit the most from it, urban agriculture has the potential of improving the nutritional status of every household, regardless of class social status, by providing secure and direct access to fresh and healthy food outside the conventional market channels. Food confers people the means to produce for themselves fresh produce that contribute to increase their regular intake of fruits and vegetables, and hence to maintain year-round a more balanced and diversified diet, rich in valuable micronutrients (Dubbeling et al., 2009; Zezza & Tasciotti, 2010; Kortright & Wakefield, 2011; Colasanti et al., 2012; Corbould, 2013; Badami & Ramankutty, 2015).

Growing and harvesting creates and allegiance to fresh food which besides can be promoted in community gardens through nutrition education, and be especially of help in the case of low- income households, who usually tend to dedicate their purchasing power on unhealthy food items that fill them up and put low-calorie, nutrient-dense produce aside (Bellows et al., 2003; Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007; Blaine et al., 2010).

Strong scientific evidence shows that changing towards a plant food-dominated diet would yield significant health benefits by reducing the risk of suffering some chronic diseases such as obesity, hypertension, elevated cholesterol level, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and certain types of cancer (Messina & Burke, 1997), all of which are fruit of the excessive fat and protein intakes that characterise animal-based diets (Horrigan et al., 2002). On the contrary, the types of fats and carbohydrates included in plant-based diets are generally favourable to human health. Moreover, these dietary patterns are rich in fibre, essential minerals, vitamins and fatty acids, while providing a bunch of bioactive components such as antioxidants, phenolic compounds and phytoestrogens that protect against many chronic diseases (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013).

Therefore, in order to improve the fat quality and lower energy density of the diet, experts recommend switching from high-fat to low-fat meat and dairy by prioritising fatty fish, poultry and vegetarian alternatives like pulses, nuts and seeds over processed and red meat, since the former provide essential, unsaturated fatty acids unlike the saturated of the latter. As well, they suggest changing to vegetable oils and -based fat spreads (Horrigan et al., 2002; Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013).

Likewise, for decreasing energy intake, nutritionists warn against food products with added sugars, such as sweets, soft drinks, candy, cakes, biscuits, ice cream, savoury snacks, breakfast

32 cereals and alcohol drinks. At the same time, they advise of the dangers of refined grains and sifted flour, which should be avoided in favour of whole grains and whole-grain flour. A reduction of the salt intake is encouraged too by both choosing low-salt food items and limiting the amount of salt used in cooking (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013).

However, there is another way through which urban agriculture impacts on food security at the household level. It becomes an income source that takes pressure off household’s food budgets (Haletky et al., 2006), either as a commercial venture selling the production surplus or because of the “opportunity cost” created, as producers are relieved from buying the foodstuff they grow. Therefore, this expenditure savings can be expended in food items or in other pressing needs of the household economy that they cannot afford otherwise, something which increases their room for manoeuvre (Bryld, 2003, Haletky et al., 2006; De Zeeuw et al., 2011, Corbould, 2013; Stewart et al., 2013).

Urban agriculture projects may not have enough potential to feed the whole population, but they could definitely be critical as a survival strategy for the food insecure (Bryld, 2003), for whom improving food availability and quality would be a major step forward in reducing their vulnerability (Specht et al., 2014). Besides, not only the socio-economic status of those involved is benefitted, as some food gardening initiatives donate part of their harvest to emergency food providers, which usually run short of fresh fruits and vegetables because retailers, restaurants, processors and other suppliers rarely contribute with them (Bellows et al., 2003).

6.2. Role of urban agriculture in improving physical and mental health

Scholars coincide to defend that the mere act of caring for food plants has several often- undervalued benefits for both physical and mental human health (Armar-Klemesu, 2000). Along with a balanced diet, a healthy lifestyle should go hand in hand with adequate physical activity with the purpose of preventing cardiovascular diseases and facilitating the maintenance of a stable body weight.

Gardening is precisely a practise that fosters outdoors physical exercise and is fitted for almost everyone, even for activity-reduced persons such as pregnant women or cancer survivors, since it ranges from ‘fine motor involvement when cutting flower stems, (…) to aerobic gross motor tasks such as turning a pile’ (Brown & Jameton, 2000, p.28). In a time of overwhelming rates of obesity and sedentarism, the promotion of an active lifestyle with daily routines like this becomes extremely important (Bellows et al., 2003).

In the same way, mental health and personal wellness benefits of are plentiful. Growing plants is considered to increase self-esteem, pride, confidence, personal satisfaction and efficacy. In addition, gardening is a good habit to have regularly time to relax, disconnect from the noise and the hurry of urban life, and release stress, fear, anger, blood pressure and muscle tension (Brown & Jameton, 2000; Bellows et al., 2003; Kortright & Wakefield, 2011).

Regular exposure to the natural environmental is also found to be profitable for children’s cognitive development, as it has been correlated with higher test scores and self-discipline (Taylor et al., 2002; & Evans, 2003), greater coordination, motor fitness and agility (Fjørtoft, 2001) and reduced bullying behaviour (Macias, 2008). Not only that, children’s participation in community gardens has been used as a method of reducing attention deficit disorder, and as a

33 social strategy to deal with crime or desperation inherent to underprivileged urban environments (Kuo & Sullivan, 2001; Taylor et al., 2001).

Furthermore, horticulture is also used as a method for both illness prevention and healing therapy. Some health professionals use it to treat patients with mental illness with the purpose of improving their social skills, self-esteem and use of leisure time, but also to help patients lessen their dependence on medication (Hailweil & Nierenberg, 2007). Besides, it is a good method to treat people who have suffered traumatic events, such as women who had been sexually abused or that had been victims of domestic violence, since gardens could be a source of solace where to reassert themselves and recover their sense of self-worth (Slater, 2001). Lastly, some prisons have incorporated gardens in their programs to enhance the mental outlook of prisoners through pride in nurturing the life of a (Bellows et al., 2003)

6.3. Urban agriculture as an eminently “white and rich” practice

In developed countries, the urban agriculture movement has received strong critique for not paying enough attention to questions of race and class privilege as its wide array of initiatives tend to be dominated by white, upper middle-class people and are often located in well-off neighbourhoods (Friel et al., 2011). Moreover, the presence of urban gardens in low-income communities trigger many times gentrification processes that push residents out of their dwellings (Specht et al., 2014).

The acute need of addressing white hegemony in the urban agriculture discourse is evident in non-white neighbourhoods, where this kind of initiatives often attract little participation of these minority communities (Meenar & Hoover, 2012; Hoover, 2013) due to the predominance of whitened cultural practices that make non-white people feel excluded (Guthman, 2011). In the same vein, the produce sold at farmers’ markets and community-supported agriculture farms tends to be out of reach for people of limited financial means. Even when efforts have been made to serve disenfranchised communities by offering discounts to low-income households, the participation has continued to be insignificant for the same reason (Kato, 2013; Cohen & Ilieva, 2015). Furthermore, agriculture is rejected by some ethnic and racial minorities as it reminds them past histories of colonisation, oppression, and dispossession (Meenar & Hoover, 2012; Jarosz, 2014).

The intersection of whiteness and wealth in these exclusive environments is embodied by a set of cultural values, such as an emphasis on gourmet food and the romanticising of European food culture (Poulsen, 2016), that erects a cultural barrier for non-white that goes beyond economic constraints (Slocum, 2007; McIlvaine-Newsad & Porter, 2013). The dismissal of urban agriculture by some minorities constraints the ability of the alternative food movement to address the inequalities of the current food system (Alkon & McCullen, 2011; Guthman, 2011).

Furthermore, the most vulnerable groups in society often find structural barriers when it comes to urban farming in an equitable way. A few studies have noticed race- and class-based disparities in the inequitable distribution of financial resources, in accessing to land and legal tenure, and in obtaining permissions to build community gardens or hold farmers’ markets on city property (Cohen & Reynolds, 2014; Reynolds, 2015). As Reynolds (2015) assert, the disparities stemming from structural racism compromise seriously the integrity of the whole urban agriculture movement.

34

Alternative agri-food projects need to be careful to avoid resembling the conventional, neoliberal agri-food system that they intend to overcome by committing the same injustices that are so embedded in society. According to Reynolds (2015, p.253), ‘if racism is an organising social paradigm, and if race is linked to class, then any system within this paradigm can be expected to replicate race- and class-based disparities’; the same can be said of gender. Therefore, it is not enough to create inclusive projects; equal representation comes when the decision-making process is open to everyone regardless of class, gender and race. Only in this way asymmetries of power and privilege can be torn down (Allen, 2004).

6.4. Women’s empowerment and gender equality

Unfortunately, around the world gender is still the source of deeply institutionalised inequalities that condition women in all walks of life. In many developing countries, the low-social status of women makes them predominant among poor urban farmers, since cultivation is a task which easily fits their daily work pattern of conventionally-assigned domestic responsibilities, especially when plots are located close to the residence (Slater, 2001; Hovorka, 2006), and because men usually regard agriculture as a marginal activity, not proper enough for them (Maxwell, 1995).

In consequence, a debate arises whether urban agriculture can be a double-edged sword for women. On one hand, as an economic livelihood strategy, some authors consider it an empowering activity for female members, since they take more control over household food consumption and may even introduce themselves into commercial activity. In the context of powerlessness, they conceive gardens sites of resistance where women can fight societal constraints (Slater, 2001).

But, on the other hand, it must not be overlooked that women carry out this activity because gender-segregated labour force often does not provide better opportunities for them within larger employment structures, hence adding more load to their daily burden. A burden that besides prevents women from acquiring higher-paying occupations and that, therefore, could become a low-income trap imprisoning unskilled women (Bryld, 2003; Hovorka, 2006). Urban agriculture may have potential to enable women’s empowerment to tear down the barriers of inequitable gender relations that subordinated them, but, as Hovorka (2006, p.60) cleverly reminds, ‘such transformation, and ultimately emancipation, will be achieved when women’s participation (…) comes out of choice rather than need’.

6.5. Is urban agriculture reproducing inequality?

Urban agriculture has received some criticism due to being a mean which, instead of serving the aim of putting an end to the inequalities within the current food system, shores up the same neoliberal ethos that it is supposed to transform, thus accommodating unequal and unjust capitalist relations of production (Hovorka, 2006; Cadieux & Slocum, 2015).

In this vein, some authors denounce that these initiatives subsidise capitalism as they relieve the state from the responsibility of improving people’s quality of life by creating provisioning systems that fulfil this function. Thus, urban agriculture has been critically assessed as a neoliberal project that does not contest the current power structure, but bolsters government’s welfare cutbacks,

35 roll-back of social safety nets, and neglect of disenfranchised communities (Hovorka, 2006; McClintock, 2014).

Disguised under a rhetoric of community self-reliance that confers food gardening projects a local resistance and social struggle façade, urban agriculture paves the way for neoconservative agendas of deregulation and downsizing of the government (Power, 1999; McClintock, 2014). As workers are feeding themselves, it becomes a strategic response to social rift that allows wages to stay low and buttresses against the expansion of supermarkets chains in poor neighbourhoods, while facilitating the ongoing accumulation of capital on the upper classes of society (McClintock, 2010).

36

❼ Social role of urban agriculture

In developed countries, contrary to the same practice in the Third World (Duchemin et al., 2009), urban agriculture projects get past mere food production and end up playing diverse roles within a community which often turn out to preponderate among their goals. Hence gardens become a playground of different social functions, such as community development, social integration, solidarity, leisure, education, employment, and political activism (Duchemin et al., 2009).

7.1. Community development and cultural identity

Many urban farming initiatives around the world have emerged in former vacant city spaces of low-income communities that once were symbols of the urban blight. By filling with greenery these bleak landscapes associated with crime, waste and anti-social behaviours, these projects have counteracted the lack of green spaces in deprived neighbourhoods in an inexpensive way that, going beyond the pure aesthetic motives, has created mundane or everyday spaces that have revitalised and beautified neglected communities (Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996; Altieri et al., 1999; Ferris et al., 2001). The physical transformation of these sites has altered their previous meaning while creating new meeting places for productive recreation and everyday interaction.

In communities that are unstable and divided, urban agriculture can play an active role in alleviating conflict, individualism and seclusion (Slater, 2001; Levkoe, 2006). As gathering points for different age, ethnic and socioeconomic groups where social ties are strengthened as people interact with each other and share agricultural knowledge for mutual benefit, urban gardens and farms contribute to break down stereotypes of race, class, and gender (Bellows et al., 2003; Levkoe, 2006, McIlvaine-Newsad & Porter, 2013).

Once this kind of barriers are torn down and each other’s differences are embraced, collaborating hand-in-hand in these inclusive spaces can help to provide neighbours with trust, civic engagement, pride and, eventually, a common cultural identity that awakens a sense of local distinctiveness and belonginess to the community. Therefore, after all, urban agriculture can end up building a strong, cohesive community where all voices are heard; a community that feels empowered to take back the control of the neighbourhood and improving it (Howe & Wheeler, 1999; Power, 1999; Bellows et al., 2003; Levkoe, 2006; Grewal & Grewal, 2012; Ackerman et al., 2014).

Furthermore, previous community garden projects have proved to be an effective method to tackle crime. The community involvement in urban gardens, especially in areas with high crime levels, has been positively correlated with reductions in violence, trash dumping, burglaries, thefts, drug use and dealing, juvenile delinquency, fires and violent deaths (Howe & Wheeler, 1999; Bellows et al., 2003; Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007). Moreover, since gardens gather people

37 of all ages, adults feel more secure allowing their children to move freely in these safe, green and populated spaces as they will be cared by the community (Bellows et al., 2003)

7.2. Social inclusion and immigrant integration

These days, when neoliberalism is accelerating the withdrawal of the state from many social functions (Drescher, 2001), urban farming initiatives can play an important social role in the social inclusion of disadvantaged and often discriminated people or social groups, such as female- headed households, unemployed, immigrants, ethnic minorities, refugees, asylum seekers, elders, retired, disabled, indigents or juvenile first time offenders (Howe & Wheeler, 1999; Drescher, 2001; Kortright & Wakefield, 2011; Milbourne, 2012; Orsini et al., 2013). Their involvement in urban agriculture offers them the opportunity to establish social contacts, build reciprocal social bonds, participate in the social texture of the community and develop a sense of belonging that undermines their social void (Drescher, 2001; Duchemin et al., 2009; Orsini et al., 2013).

Furthermore, many authors have underlined the potential of urban farms to become excellent vehicles for job training and skills development; something which is especially effective in underserved communities with high rates of unemployment, these projects could offer educational programmes in farming, gardening, cooking, and nutrition for marginalised youths and adults (Bellows et al., 2003; Haletky et al., 2006; Ackerman et al., 2014), who would acquire knowledge and skills transferable to labour sectors other than agriculture (Meenar & Hoover, 2012)

7.3. Children’s education

This kind of spaces could even be integrated as hands-on teaching facilities where children can learn about food production, nutrition and nature. On one hand, when integrated in the school curriculum, these activities could be used as educational resources that can ease the understanding of concepts of not only and , but also natural science, mathematics, physics, chemistry, geography and cross-curricular subjects such as environmental studies (Howe & Wheeler, 1999; Orsini et al 2013).

On the other hand, by teaching how food is produced, there is hope to raise awareness among the new generations about their impact on the environment and empower them to make better, educated choices in the future about the food system and the environment (Iles, 2005; Blyth & Menagh, 2006).

Understood not only as recreational but educational sites too, children would find in urban gardens safe places to experiment, take responsibilities and risks, and learn and recover from mistakes; places where they can learn to respect and care for each other while producing something of value. Life lessons, after all, which would instil a work ethic and a sense of responsibility in them (Levkoe, 2006; Colasanti et al., 2012).

38

7.4. Political activism and democratic citizenship

Community and urban farms are places where people of different ages, ethnicities, races and income levels gather together and engage elbow to elbow to grow food (Dubbeling et al., 2009). In this way, projects which include mechanisms for diverse participation become sites which foster civic engagement as people, when struggling collectively to solve problems and fulfil their responsibilities, gain civic virtues and learn the social skills needed to act democratically within a system that resembles the functioning of society (Levkoe, 2006; Travaline & Hunold, 2010).

By cultivating democratic citizenship, these collective spaces increase community confidence, consciousness and skills, thus encouraging many people who once felt powerless, alienated from politics, to engage in broader issues beyond food growing and make a difference (Iles, 2005). Participants felt empowered to influence the food system, take political action beyond it and hence shape their own future (Levkoe, 2006; McClintock, 2014).

These ideas resonate with Lefebvre’s idea of the right to the city, which reacts to the disenfranchisement of urban population by encouraging people to produce collective urban spaces with mundane routines and neighbourly relations, with the ultimately end of using them as a point of departure to reshape the urban environment and effectuate transformative processes of social change (Colasanti et al., 2012; Shillington, 2013). In this regard, community gardens can be conceived as a reappropriation of land, a reclamation of a community space that assembles people working for a common good and awakens their political consciousness (Levkoe, 2006; McIlvaine-Newsad & Porter, 2013).

7.5 Consumer awareness

The direct experience of growing food, or sometimes just having access to locally grown food, is expected to not only enhance the valuation of seasonal, organic, and fresh produce, and increase their demand, but to make consumers more aware of their food choices and the impact that these have on both their health and the environment (Bellows et al., 2003; Travaline & Hunold, 2010; Colasanti et al., 2012; Meenar & Hoover, 2012; Sanyé-Mengual et al., 2016).

Nowadays, the overwhelming predominance of fast food business and large supermarkets have given to people the misleading impression that foodstuff comes out in standardised shapes, sizes and forms, conveniently hygienic, packaged and even pre-cooked, ready to be eaten. Hence, urban agriculture, by reacquainting people with natural processes, could encourage citizens to react to the way food is produced and stimulate more initiatives and support for sustainable development (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; Madaleno, 2001).

39

❽ Environmental effect of urban agriculture

In need of both mitigation and adaptation measures to climate change, urban agriculture emerges as a strategy that provides both by diminishing the environmental impact and the dependency on fossil-fuel transportation in comparison with the current food system (Brown & Jameton, 2000). This is because locally grown food reduces the energy use and emissions inherent to food transportation, but it also enables the of organic waste, hence lessening the pressure on natural resources. Under the threat of climate events, urban gardens supply the city with a vegetative cover that improves air quality, reduces the necessity of spending energy on cooling systems in buildings, and mitigates the risk of flooding (Dubbeling et al., 2009). Moreover, in the context of enfeebled provision capacity of the rural areas due to increasing desertification and declining soil fertility, urban agriculture reduces the demand of land dedicated to food production in the countryside (Deelstra & Giradet, 2000; Asomani-Boateng, 2002).

8.1. Lowering the energy and emissions embodied in food transportation

Either as a self-sufficiency strategy or as a commercial endeavour, to which cities provide a huge market, urban agriculture reduces the distance that food travels from producer to consumer, thereby lowering the energy embodied in transportation and decreasing food spoilage (Ackerman et al., 2014). Besides, the massive transportation of food in the global economy consumes large quantities of fossil fuel and pollutes the environment, so every initiative that opts for food system localisation would help to reduce these negative externalities (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; North, 2010; Bonacich & Alimahomed-Wilson, 2011).

As a consequence of less transportation, the greenhouse gas emissions are decreased too. However, urban gardens improve air quality by another mean as well: as it is the case for any green space, vegetation sequesters carbon dioxide, absorbing airborne pollutants and reducing suspended dust through plant foliage (Bellows et al., 2003; Brown & Jameton, 2000; Bryld, 2003; Orsini et al., 2013; Sanyé-Mengual et al., 2016).

Nevertheless, urban agriculture has been criticised from some environmental quarters for boosting the spreading of the city even further as they occupy inner-city plots which could be devoted to high-density housing. Urban sprawl has been demonstrated to be more energy- consuming and emission-intensive than high-density developed areas due to the strong private car dependency of the former (Mok et al., 2014).

Likewise, more negative criticism has pointed to the massive amounts of energy that would be required to grow vegetables in indoor farms -meant to save city space- because of the necessary artificial light and, in case of unfavourable environments to cultivate certain species, warmth (Specht et al., 2014).

40

8.2. Reducing the urban heat island effect and balancing the urban microclimate

In the face of an expected temperature rise of at least 2°C, one of the main adaptation measures that urban agriculture provides to the city consists in minimising the phenomenon called “urban heat island effect” (UHI) by increasing the amount of vegetation within the urban environment (Akbari, 2002). The conversion of land into vast superficies of concrete and asphalt with abundant heat-absorbing surfaces is the main reason behind the higher temperatures that may be felt in urban areas in comparison with the surrounding rural environments (Getter & Rowe, 2006), which can lead to an increment of 0.6-12°C (Ackerman et al., 2014).

Hence, as urban farms contribute to the expansion of green areas within the urban matrix, they help to reduce local temperatures through plant evapotranspiration and by providing shade, which blocks and redistributes solar radiation. Furthermore, trees and plants increase humidity in arid climates and introduce more pleasant odours to the urban environment (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; Akbari, 2002; Bryld, 2003). By regulating the urban microclimate, vegetation also contributes to reduce the energy needed to satisfy the cooling demand of buildings, thereby reducing the pressure on energy sources and yielding more affordable energy bills for households in view of escalating prices (Dunn, 2000; Dubbeling et al., 2009; Lin et al., 2015).

8.3. Mitigating storm water impacts

The omnipresence of impervious surfaces in urban areas also prevents rainwater from soaking into the ground, hence impeding groundwater recharge and leading to increased volumes of runoff during natural events such as rain or snowmelt. In episodes of high volume and high velocity storm flows, this increases significantly the risk of floods, and sewer overflows. Besides, water runoff collects oil, grease, toxins, , nutrients and other pollutants present on pavements and , thereby polluting nearby waterways, something which could represent a health hazard and an eyesore (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; Dunn, 2000).

In contrast, agricultural plots provide cities with permeable surfaces which drain normally rainwater and runoff through the soil, hence acting as storm attenuation services thanks to the of higher runoff volumes (Dubbeling et al., 2009, in De Zeeuw et al., 2011; Ackerman et al., 2014; Lin et al., 2015). In consequence, urban water management is improved, the risk of hazard events is reduced and groundwater resources are recharged (Dunn, 2000; Lerner & Eakin, 2011). Given the threat of more frequent extreme climate events with climate change, this gains importance as an adaptation measure.

8.4. Improving nutrient cycling

Urban agriculture projects represent a great opportunity to recycle the vast amounts of waste generated in a metropolitan area (Armar-Klemesu, 2000). Many scholars coincide in pointing linear metabolic systems -those with one-way flow of resources- as obsolete and unsustainable. In order to embrace long-term sustainability, they agree that cities should adopt circular metabolic systems, resembling natural ecosystems, where urban outputs are ‘regarded as crucial inputs into urban production systems’ (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000, p.51).

41

In this vein, urban farms are potential sites where organic household waste can be reused to produce compost to use it as a nutrient source for crops (Smit & Nasr, 1992; Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; Grewal & Grewal, 2012). As well, the same organic waste resulting from harvested produce of farms and markets can be recycled into mulch, which, after decomposing, enhances soil fertility. Therefore, recycling organic matters becomes an environmentally-friendly alternative to chemical fertilisers which lessens pressure on natural resources, but also a relief to the stream (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Brown & Jameton, 2000; De Zeeuw et al., 2011; Lerner & Eakin, 2011). Likewise, composting organic matter also serves as bioremediation for contaminated , hence diminishing the chance that plants absorb toxic substances (Brown & Jameton, 2000).

Following the same logic of closing resource loops, rain and wastewater can be used for rather than freshwater, especially in cities suffering from , which then can be prioritised for drinking and other domestic uses. Furthermore, nutrient-rich wastewater acts as a substitute of chemical inputs (Smit & Nasr, 1992; Grewal & Grewal, 2012). However, both household waste and wastewater reuse require an adequate urban infrastructure, something which could be an important barrier in many developing countries (Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007).

Last but not least, it is important to remark that reusing and recycling are not the only approaches to urban waste reduction; the first step is to generate less amount of waste. Urban agriculture is beneficial in this sense too, as it reduces the need for food packaging, since the main purpose of it is to assure that food does not get damaged while traveling long distances (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000).

8.5. Increasing urban biodiversity

Integrated in the green infrastructure of a city, urban gardens are a great opportunity to increase urban biodiversity by repopulating the urban landscape with a wide variety of plants which in turn attract some animal species, such as beneficial soil , , birds, and reptiles, among others. These small green patches in the asphalt jungle attenuate the habitat fragmentation caused by urbanisation, hence helping to preserve some species by providing food, resting spaces, and protection along migratory flight (Brown & Jameton, 2000; Bellows et al., 2003). Moreover, this vegetative structure and its inherent biodiversity support essential ecosystem services such as pollination, seed dispersal and pest regulation (Barthel et al., 2010).

However, some authors remark that not all biodiversity is necessarily beneficial for a city because, in some cases, biological invasions might kick out native species or alter their genetic composition in the long run, something which might bring negative side effects that could potentially harm native ecosystems, hence damaging delivery (Lin et al 2015).

42

❾ Potential future of urban agriculture

9.1. The provision of food in cities

The level of self-reliance that cities can realistically achieve through urban agriculture is an essential debate in the context of the struggle towards reducing food insecurity of the urban poor. Most authors agree that urban agriculture cannot be expected to feed the whole population within a city area (Armar-Klemesu, 2000), but it can contribute with at least some main staples, which according to Smit et al.’s analysis (1996 cited in De Zeeuw et al., 2000, p.168) of several studies, can cover half or more of the nutritional requirements in all but the harshest climates; something which would attract more political support for urban agriculture. Some may argue that in the modern age of globalisation complete isolation is impractical, but having access to such a basic need as food without relying on external resources offers economic stability, autonomy and survival capacity on the occasion of forthcoming environmental and climate changes (Mok et al., 2014).

Quantifying the land surface needed for a household subsistence is a great challenge, since it depends upon a great bunch of constraining factors, such as ‘the availability and condition of land for gardening, the seed species, weather conditions, the reliability of a water source, the length of the growing season, and the ’s skill’ (Brown & Jameton, 2000, p.25). Nevertheless, a few researchers have attempted to estimate it under some average conditions. In this vein, Minnich (1983 cited in Grewal & Grewal 2012, p.2) affirmed that a 10m2 plot is enough to provide a household with its yearly vegetable needs, including much of the required vitamin intake. Whereas, Eberhard (1989 cited in Slater, 2001, p.635) states that at least a 30m2 garden is needed to produce just the half of the vegetable requirements.

The variety of food that can be grown in urban environments is remarkable, but due to the space constraints, considering that the distribution channel is decisive in the economic and environmental costs of food, in terms of cost advantage it is preferable to prioritise short cycle and highly perishable crops in urban gardens (Orsini et al., 2013). Therefore, vegetable crops are the best choice within cities as they are one of the most expensive items in the food basket due to being highly perishable, which result in considerable costs of transportation and packaging (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; De Zeeuw et al., 2011).

Orsini et al. (2013) recommends dedicating peri-urban areas to medium- or long-cycle crops and fruit . Grains are the crops capable of withstanding longer journeys, extensive storage and minimal packaging, so they could be left for terrains outside the city, where their large land requirements -as low-yield crops- can be easily meet, but as close as possible to the city in order to avoid long-distance transportation (Barrs, 1997). Other plausible options in cities are medicinal, aromatic and ornamental species, small livestock breeding and beekeeping, which apart from honey production would provide pollination services (Mougeot, 2000; Grewal & Grewal, 2012).

43

9.2 Principal barriers to broad implementation

9.2.1. Access to vacant land and tenure security

As urban land is scarce and expensive, especially in densely populated areas, access to vacant land becomes one of the most limiting constraints for farming in the city. Agriculture competes with other potential uses for soil, such as residential, industrial and commercial (Duchemin et al., 2009; Donovan et al., 2011), being usually relegated to the lowest priority due to the core principle of “highest and best use” that rules land-use planning (Donovan et al., 2011; Thibert, 2012; Angotti, 2015).

In fact, in some areas of the world, city planners are still reluctant to include urban planning in urban master plans, as food production is seen as a rural issue which hampers more productive urban development (Orsini et al., 2013). It is even considered an illegal activity in many developing countries due to bringing reminiscences from the past that do not adjust to the modern and progressive image that their cities want to exhibit (Bryld, 2003).

The situation is further aggravated in the case of private land, as lucrative incentives lead landowners to sell their plots to residential and commercial developers, who are usually the highest bidders (Garnett, 2000; Asomani-Boateng, 2002). However, in developing countries this does not impede a wide array of informal and insecure tenure arrangements (Ellis & Sumberg, 1998) for the temporary use of land until real estate development pressure increases land value (Corbould, 2013, Stewart et al., 2013). This acute problem of land unavailability results in uneven patterns of land security which favour better-off urban residents (Mkwambisi et al., 2011), since poor people do not have property titles to land and often are forced to occupy land illegally in order to subsist (Asomani-Boateng, 2002).

Lack of tenure rights implies the constant threat of being evicted from their land at any time or of having their harvest stripped (Asomani-Boateng, 2002; Bryld, 2003). This prevents urban farmers from long-term investments, such as adopting sustainable practices or planting long- term crops, thus often limiting cultivation to short-cycle plants which fit best this uncertainty (Corbould, 2013; Orsini et al., 2013). Several voices claim that prohibition should be lifted in these places, and urban farming legally protected, if they want to attain a greater food security.

9.2.2. The viability of farming in the city

Cities present a few obstacles to the implementation of farming within their environment that compromise the viability of urban agriculture. Absence of sunlight due to tall buildings casting large shadows over plots constitute a challenge for most edible plants (Hailweil & Nierenberg, 2007), as well as contaminated urban soils.

The quality of the urban topsoil is often quite poor, containing low levels of organic matter and high concentrations of lead and other resulting from constant leaded gasoline emissions; also from being littered with several waste types (garbage, glass, rubble, shards of concrete and other building materials) and many other effluents from past and current toxic industrial activity. This makes many plots not suitable for cultivation as produce grown there may absorb polluting substances that could pose severe health risks (Altieri et al., 1999; Kachenko & Singh, 2006), although pesticide-laden rural soils would not offer a much healthier solution (Angotti, 2015). Therefore, disadvantaged communities are more exposed to the risk of

44 consuming contaminated food grown in the city, as studies have revealed that brownfields are disproportionately located in their neighbourhoods (Mok et al., 2014).

Although they are pricey, importing healthy soil and alternative farming methods, such as organoponics, or , could be a more feasible solution for the poor condition of the urban soil -also for the limitation of space in the latter case- (Altieri et al., 1999; Corbould, 2013; Angotti, 2015) since decontamination costs are more elevated (Specht et al., 2014). These novel methods would allow to cultivate produce in rooftop and vertical gardens, hence providing a solution for the lack of sunlight (Hailweil & Nierenberg, 2007)

9.2.3. Urban health risks

Several scholars have observed that agricultural practices might pose a serious threat to public health within cities if proper regulation and prevention measures are not implemented (Orsini et al., 2013; Stewart et al., 2013).

First of all, risks might come from the spread of pathogens resulting from the inappropriate use of contaminated wastewater for irrigation, and organic manure and non-composted waste as fertiliser, which are related to biological pollution of food through contact with edible parts of the plants (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Deelstra & Girardet, 2000; De Zeeuw et al., 2011; Orsini et al., 2013). Appropriate sorting, treatment and recycling waste infrastructure would be necessary to minimise the risks of using solid and liquid waste, but this is not a trivial issue in many cities of the Third World (Armar-Klemesu, 2000).

Food plants cultivated close to roads with high traffic, railways or industrial discharges are also likely to absorb airborne pollutants, especially in the case of green leafy vegetables (Ellis & Sumberg, 1998; Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Bryld, 2003; Orsini et al., 2013). On this account, maintaining crops at a prudential distance from these toxic environments is strongly recommended (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000).

As well, agricultural production attracts rodents and insects which contribute to the spread of diseases within cities (De Zeeuw et al., 2000). This might be especially problematic in tropical climes, where the presence of standing water from irrigation provides breeding sites for malaria- vectoring mosquitoes (Hamilton et al., 2013). Nevertheless, Hamilton et al. (2013) claims against policies that ban urban agriculture for this reason, arguing that first this risk should be weighed against the benefits that farming provides in terms of food security.

Finally, stockbreeding in the urban environment is probably the most serious public health threat as animals are important carriers of parasites, and viruses, some of which can be transmitted to humans (Armar-Klemesu, 2000; Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007). However, apart from transmittance of epidemic diseases, animal husbandry brings other nuisances to cities, such as noise, smell, visual untidiness and the difficulty to dispose of huge amounts of manure (Ellis & Sumberg, 1998; De Zeeuw et al., 2000). Therefore, the adoption of strict hygienic measures is an indispensable requirement, but, even so, several authors recommend keeping or relocating livestock breeding at a safe distance to the city (Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007; De Bon et al., 2010).

45

9.2.4. Consumer lifestyle, time dedication and lack of interest

Between the constraints to the spread of urban agriculture, people’s lack of willingness to grow their own food should be contemplated, especially in developed countries, where not only it is currently not a question of survival, but where food is taken for granted since it is readily available to be chosen in the supermarket shelves (Colasanti et al., 2012; Corbould, 2013). It should be acknowledged that not everyone would be motivated to get their hands dirty in a community garden; that people might prefer to engage in other recreational activities and to maintain intact their beloved instead of converting it into an edible garden (Grewal & Grewal, 2012).

Even in developing countries where urban agriculture as a source of livelihood is a more common practice, at some point in the future it might be difficult to justify the persistence of food production if land becomes increasingly scarce and new employment opportunities arise for households (Lerner & Eakin, 2011).

Furthermore, sustaining a productive edible garden requires a considerable amount of time, effort and commitment; a constraint that might dissuade many people from practising it, since for employed people it could be really hard to conciliate personal and working life with such a time-consuming activity (Kato, 2013; Orsini et al., 2013).

Besides, mass media and advertising have played, and will continue to play, a decisive role in shaping human social behaviour, where a culture of processed and fast food consumption has long been established, creating expectations of instant gratification regarding food and discouraging people from the long process of growing their own (Colasanti et al., 2012). For many consumers, strong marketing campaigns make it more difficult to resist the temptation of consuming unhealthy food items (NFA, 2005). As well, consumer expectations will need to accept the seasonality of produce and their diversity, meaning that the appearance of fruit and vegetables might not always be perfect and their size not homogeneous either.

Consumerist values are far away from the alternative food approach to social justice and environmental sustainability, so undoubtedly a profound change of dominant culture values and lifestyle would be necessary, embracing diet changes, and food preparation and sourcing changes (Power, 1999; Colasanti et al., 2012); something which would not be easy as food is a cornerstone of social identity (Warde, 1997). However, Wallgren & Höjer (2009) defend that food consumption is an activity that can change quickly, since previous food choices do not compromise future decisions. Nevertheless, such a transformation would require strong education and divulgation campaigns able to change consumption trends and raise awareness of the value of local self-reliance, sustainable food systems and healthy diets (Grewal & Grewal, 2012).

9.2.5. Economic accessibility

Limited financial resources, together with high start-up costs and expensive city land values, are constraints that hamper significantly the spread of urban farming, especially among the most disadvantaged population (Corbould, 2013; Cohen & Reynolds, 2014). Difficulties in obtaining public subsidies often compel alternative food initiatives to rely on volunteers rather than remunerated workers, while depending on foundation grants and individual donations (Cohen & Renyolds, 2014). In order to boost urban agriculture projects, Barrs (1997) suggests governments and city councils to give small farmers start-up grants or loans, and to subsidise some agricultural inputs such as municipal compost.

46

❿ Discussion

Considering the unprecedented growth of cities during last century and the population projections for the coming years, which predict the consolidation of an eminently urbanised planet, how to feed the increasing urban population arises as one of the major challenges of humanity. The high rates of hunger and malnutrition besetting the world corroborate this, while the imminent threat of climate change only aggravates it.

The need to respond to population pressure and impending resource scarcity casts serious doubts on the long-term sustainability of the current food system, due to its heavy dependence on fossil fuels and other non-renewable resources. Besides, industrial food production consumes renewable resources at a faster rate than nature can regenerate them and pollutes the environment with toxic emissions which damage ecosystems, contribute to global warming and have detrimental effects to human health (Horrigan, 2002; Grewal & Grewal, 2012).

The liberalisation of global trade has undermined even more the livelihood of small-scale peasants, who cannot compete with cheap food imports entering domestic markets and have difficulties to subsist because of export-oriented agricultural policies which dictate crop choices and determine subsidies (Mougeot, 1999). The economic interests of large agri-food corporations are the only actors who gain from the present paradigm, where farmers have become the less profitable level of the supply chain, as it favours agricultural-input industries, middlemen, distributors and retailers above them.

The enormous production increase brought by the Green Revolution has paid high environmental costs which have not translated into a solution to global hunger, but quite the opposite. The current justice model consisting in using production surpluses as food aid has not succeeded because it does not address the root causes of hunger and malnutrition (Kremen et al., 2012). Research has shown that food insecurity problems are not a question of insufficient supply, but of unequal access and distribution of food, encompassing issues of both quantity and quality, which result in high incidence of malnutrition cases around the world caused by both under- and overconsumption.

Therefore, confronted by impending social and environmental challenges, increasing evidence denotes that ensuring the long-term sustainability of the food system should be everyone’s concern, even for those who do not fear for tomorrow’s meals (Wittman et al., 2010). Several alternatives to the neoliberal, corporate-led food system have emerged in recent times, urban agriculture among them, which pursue new synergies between production and consumption capable of reducing social inequalities and curbing environmental degradation. This makes evident that, first of all, it is important to acknowledge that there is not a single, all-encompassing solution for these issues. On the contrary, the contrasting realities between Northern and Southern countries require distinct, context-specific solutions in accordance with the capacities and constraints of each set of circumstances (Mougeot, 1999).

Nor is there a universal notion of justice, thereby making it a goal difficult to pursue, since each interpretation might call for distinct solutions (Kato, 2013). However, after exploring different facets of urban agriculture throughout this thesis, one might think that it has potential to play

47 some role in addressing social-ecological justice, although enabling systemic change might be another matter altogether.

As we have seen before, urban agriculture is a vague term that encompasses a wide range of different formats and practices of plant cultivation and livestock breeding within the city. However, some particularities of the urban environment make urban farming initiatives more prone to embrace some features of the alternative systems mentioned above, regardless of the hemisphere where they are allocated.

For instance, either as a livelihood strategy aimed at self-consumption or as a commercial enterprise, to which the city provides an assured market to sell the produce, urban agriculture adopts indeed the shape of a local food system. Therefore, it reduces considerably food transportation and hence its consequent pollution and . Meanwhile, it builds at the same time more self-sufficient communities as they become less reliant on the global market to obtain part of their diet. Furthermore, the average plot size of backyards, rooftops and other vacant lots in the city does not incite farmers to conduct intensive agriculture practices, especially when growing for self-consumption, so food gardens tend to be more diverse in terms of crop variety and often employ less external inputs. Precisely, diversity and self-reliance are two essential qualities to build more robust and resilient food systems (Mougeot, 1999).

Regardless of socioeconomic status, involvement in urban farming provides citizens with a safe and affordable source of healthful sustenance, but it is especially pertinent in the case of most disadvantaged people, since otherwise their purchasing power might not allow them to buy fresh fruits and vegetables which are essential to maintain a balanced and nutritious diet. However, as limited financial means are not the only constraint that minorities face when accessing to this kind of food, the allocation of food gardens in low-income neighbourhoods also counteracts partially the negative health consequences inherent to the proliferation of food deserts.

Moreover, some urban agriculture initiatives, when implemented as community gardens, also address some structural deficiencies that underserved communities suffer, such as poor access to education and employment opportunities by offering educational and skills training programmes, and lack of green open spaces by transforming vacant lots abandoned to filth into vivid spaces of social interaction and recreation. As well, they help to strengthen communities by building social bonds and a common cultural identity in unstable and divided neighbourhoods, hence facilitating social inclusion for those living on the fringe of society and preventing youth of falling into a life of crime.

From an ecological perspective, the proliferation of urban agriculture would help to mitigate in some way the effects of climate change and to adapt to the new reality resulting from it. Integrated in the green infrastructure of the city, food gardens alleviate storm water impacts and reduce the urban heat island effect, hence helping to cope with extreme heat (Deelstra & Girardet, 2000). Besides, cities offer urban farms a great amount of solid and liquid waste which can be used as organic inputs in agriculture, provided that an appropriate infrastructure exists to do so. Thereby, urban farms would break with the still ubiquitous linear model of consuming resources by closing the loop and recycling some waste. These are all outcomes that, to a greater or lesser extent, any kind of green space would provide, but urban farming has the particularity that besides it would reduce the dependence on the global transportation of goods too, which is very resource-consuming and whose affordability might be in danger in the light of a future oil crunch.

48

Adaptation measures to climate change are becoming increasingly relevant in urban planning. Nevertheless, if the aim is to keep from incurring in the same injustices of the past, they must be implemented in such a way that they do not turn out to be a privilege of developed countries or of high-income people; especially when the detrimental effects of global warming are expected to be suffered the most in poorest countries and by the most disadvantaged people, despite being precisely the ones that have done least to cause them (Morgan, 2009). In this vein, urban farms enhance the adaptive capacity of neighbourhoods without making socioeconomic distinctions.

All these virtues mentioned above, however, do not lead by themselves towards greater social justice if the structures of inequality and power relations that are deeply rooted in society are not extirpated. Otherwise, the laudable intentions of urban agriculture initiatives will only serve to fill the gaps left by the neoliberalist system, as it relieves the state from the responsibility of feeding the population, hence serving as a useful strategy to avert social unrest, in fact (Hovorka, 2006). If they are not especially addressed, class, race and gender disparities will still be perpetuated.

Providing people with the tools to feed themselves in the form of new sites of food production does not address the core reasons of poverty. Inequalities spring from social and economic hierarchies inherent to the capitalist system that allow elites to maintain their supremacy and subjugate some minorities and social groups based on race, ethnicity, gender, nationality, age, religion, sexual orientation or disability (Galt et al., 2014). These hierarchies are not only present in the food system, but reproduced throughout all layers of society. Indeed, the same alternative food movement is often criticised for its white, upper-middle class supremacy, reflecting the society in which it is established.

In consequence, urban agriculture by itself does not represent necessarily a challenge to the status quo. Grassroots initiatives such as urban agriculture could bring many benefits to local communities and can even mitigate the magnitude of social-ecological injustices and inequalities, but eradicating them altogether would probably require a food system reform capable of shaking the foundations of neoliberalism, something which would be asking too much of urban agriculture (Galt et al., 2014; McClintock, 2014). Only the direct intervention of the state could perhaps face up to the increasing power of large agri-food corporations, but nowadays this seems unlikely to happen.

If the state were to play a central role in the food system and municipalities were to conceive urban agriculture, in practice, as a public service aimed to supply their population with fresh and healthy food, public supervision of food resources would probably be a more effective way to ensure that they are produced sustainably and distributed equitably. This would mean a fundamental change of values within the food system, which would pass from the current conception of food as a commodity to considering it a right, a common good. Conceived as an integral part of the community, urban agriculture would contribute to public welfare by guaranteeing that everyone has access to enough nutritious food through means that prioritise quality and sustainability over yield, and need over greed.

Municipalities could set aside available vacant lots for local farmers and manage their usufruct. By dispossessing large agri-food companies of their monopolistic position, people would regain partial control over the food system, hence turning it into a more democratic, dynamic, inclusive, nonexploitative and ecologically-sound scheme. Being closer to their food source would allow people to know how what they eat has been produced, and consequently they would be entitled to make better choices based on justice and sustainability.

49

When farmers are compiled to follow the rules of large agri-food corporations and export- oriented agricultural policies, if they want to have a chance to subsist, they usually need to become heavily dependent on external inputs and are relegated to the less profitable level of the food system structure. In contrast, either as a public service or as a conglomeration of grassroots initiatives, urban agriculture projects return productive resources to the hands of those who work the land, providing them with a viable way of self-provisioning or with an alternative distribution channel that bypasses the tedious infrastructure of the global supply and enables them to make a living without having to compete on uneven conditions with food industry giants. On a broader scale, a more independent peasantry from the mechanisms of global trade would mean for many developing countries to alleviate the neo-colonial relationships that Western countries have imposed on them, which hamper their autonomy and development (Lang, 1999).

As well, a stronger alternative sustainable system to the current industrial food regime would alleviate the amount of damage that is continuously induced to ecosystems, while relieving the pressure on already overburdened natural resources. Otherwise, the risk of suffering irreversible biodiversity and habitat losses is high, as it is the risk of compromising the capacity of the planet to provide several ecosystem services too.

Utopic visions aside, urban farming still has to demonstrate that it can be integrated in a broader scale in the city without becoming a nuisance for urban life or a public health hazard. As well, some doubts arise regarding the supply of safe food products grown in a toxic environment. Likewise, the supply capacity of urban farming is quite uncertain. However much future prospects envision large multi-storey greenhouse buildings and high-yield production techniques, for instance, it seems unfeasible nowadays that urban agriculture could supply enough food to feed the urban population, unless blind faith is placed in technological advances. Hence, a more cautious approach would be to find an optimal balance between local self-sufficiency and global interconnectedness (North, 2010). In this vein, local food requirements should be met as far as possible by a combination of local and regional sources, while, for those food items which cannot be produced locally or regionally, international trade standards should adhere to the principles of fair trade and organic farming.

All in all, achieving social justice in the larger society is certainly a precondition of true food security and not the other way around. Hunger can only be eliminated if the deep-rooted ills that oppress the poor are addressed (Freudenberg et al., 2011) through policies that promote employment and income generation, that enhance working conditions and guarantee a living wage for everyone, that ensure access to a decent housing, education and health care services to everybody, etc.; all in all, policies aimed at guaranteeing a decent standard of living to ‘allow every citizen the stability and security to participate fully in society’ (Power, 1999, p.35).

Otherwise, food policies aimed at enhancing food security will only reinforce individualistic solutions which do not have much room of improvement (Power, 1999). Placing too much responsibility on the consumer would imply assuming every individual to have the choice to change their consumer behaviour in order to make more sustainable choices in the future (e.g. between buying organic and conventional food), hence ignoring that many people do not have enough financial means to even consider them.

Even so, acknowledging that it will not be a silver bullet, but instead one of the many means working together towards food security and social-ecological justice, urban agriculture can still turn out to be a useful planning strategy aimed at filling the present gaps in food needs originated by unequal food access. As it is unlikely that systemic change will occur in the short-term, urban

50 farming could mitigate food injustices and inequalities until the global-scale societal transformation came to an end, either by facilitating self-provisioning or by providing better distribution systems of healthy food. What is more, urban agriculture can play a great role in raising awareness about the current neoliberal food regime, hence acting as a catalyst for food system reformation towards a more just and equitable order. Thereby, food gardens could become sites where participants might feel empowered to put pressure on their governments and make a change in society by taking action.

51

⓫ Conclusions

The aim of this thesis was to explore the inequalities and unsustainable practices that stem from the current global food system and the potential role that urban agriculture can play, as an urban planning strategy, in addressing and overcoming them. In order to do so, a social-ecological approach was chosen with the aim of shedding some light in this study with a novel holistic approach that could offer an encompassing understanding of both social equity and environmental sustainability issues associated with food. Along the way, the author has been able to confirm that most of the articles revised address either one or the other, but never both simultaneously. Likewise, although urban agriculture is a multidimensional practice, research has usually addressed very specific subjects from it, hence hindering to obtain a comprehensive picture from it.

However, urban agriculture is also a vague concept which embraces under the same term a wide array of different practices in diverse context which often have varying outcomes. Therefore, the results from one contextualised initiative are difficult to extrapolate to any other situation, thus making difficult to outline general statements about it. When it comes to identify social and environmental concerns within the current food system, in contrast, the task gets simpler as there is significant consensus among researchers. The same cannot be said from disparities reproduced within the same urban agriculture movement, an underresearched topic to which the author hopes to have contributed too, as critique in this sense is not very common in the literature.

In any case, the conclusions of this study are not far from previous results. Achieving food security only through urban agriculture seems a chimera these days. The power structures and relations within the food system are so deeply rooted and agri-food corporations are so powerful that it would be necessary a systemic change capable of bringing social remedies that go beyond the mere availability of food, such are income redistribution, quality education and equal job opportunities (Brown & Jameton, 2000). Even so, in spite of not representing a real challenge to the status quo, the integration of farming in urban planning still can be fruitful in terms of climate change adaptation and social injustice alleviation. For this reason, some policy recommendations are outlined below.

The role of municipalities has been recognised as key to the spread of urban agriculture. Therefore, a good place to start would be to integrate urban gardens in urban development plans as part of the city’s green infrastructure. Even a specific implementation plan for urban agriculture could be developed, contemplating the creation of a public agency in charge of all urban farming affairs which would help to provide a legal framework to this practice and to establish links with municipal services such as waste management.

As part of this strategy, municipalities could identify and map the vacant lots within city boundaries which are suitable for farming (Thibert, 2012). Once this inventory is created, a municipal department could be responsible of managing the terms and conditions of the lease contracts to both individual households and community groups depending on the circumstances of each particular case. In the case of public land, municipalities may lease portions of land in planned multifunctional spaces to community projects preferably, as thus these sites can serve not only for food production, but also for other uses, such as recreation or education. On the

52 other hand, in order to stimulate urban agriculture in private property too, municipalities could provide tax incentives to those landowners that make their parcel available for farming on a temporal basis (De Zeeuw et al., 2011; Angotti, 2015).

To this end, a protocol should be created to define the criteria for land grant and credit services which prioritises the access to the most disenfranchised people, but accessible to everyone. Among these regulations, medium-term occupancy licenses should be established to assure tenure security (De Zeeuw et al., 2011). Moreover, a certain quota of these spaces could be reserved to racial and ethnical minorities, as well as to women-headed households (Lee-Smith, 2010), with the purpose of ensuring that all social groups have equal opportunities and are fairly represented according to their demographics.

In the case of community gardens, studies have demonstrated that “bottom-up” approaches ensure a higher community involvement which translates afterwards to more success in achieving social goals (Corrigan, 2011). Therefore, measures should be taken to ensure the participation of neighbours from the very beginning in decision-making through inclusive and deliberative processes of participation. As well, hierarchical structures should be avoided in the leadership of these projects (Reynolds, 2015). A good way to overcome any reluctance or rejection to these initiatives would be to develop firstly pilot projects where people can familiarise with the functioning of and possible benefits of urban agriculture, while breaking down prejudices.

The implementation of these projects would profit from the presence of extension workers that could provide training and technical support to participants in practices like organic production methods, non-chemical pest and ecological soil fertility management, composting or rainwater collection (De Zeeuw et al., 2000). Moreover, these workers could supervise that all urban farms follow the health regulations to avoid potential human health risks (Brown & Jameton, 2000), including strict regulations regarding the use of agrochemical inputs under threat of penalty. This duty would require awareness campaigns from the urban agriculture public agency.

Nevertheless, the task of these extension workers and, by extension, of the public agency could also have an active divulgation role. In this sense, community projects could hold growing and cooking workshops not only for participants, but for backyard gardeners. In these sites, little cards could be distributed among the attenders with step-by-step recipes based on fresh produce, containing its nutritional value, with the aim of promoting healthful diets (Hu et al., 2013). Frequented public spaces could become the site of farmers markets and harvest festivals. Likewise, urban farming could be encouraged in public and private entities, such as schools and hospitals, where participants could take advantage of its educational and therapeutic advantages too.

Finally, on the global scale, the current standards of labelling schemes such as fair trade and organic food should be revised; only afterwards a merger of both certification systems in a labelling partnership could be contemplated embracing the production of just and ecologically sustainable food simultaneously, something which could be promoted by the international community through tax incentives and bans on unhealthy products.

However, after all it is still uncertain how the dominant market forces of the corporate-led food regime would adapt to a situation in which they would cease to hold the incommensurable power that they have nowadays and whether the good intentions of the urban agriculture movement would be enough to withstand their response. This would be an interesting field of future research which has hardly been explored yet. As well, as seen previously, there is a worrying knowledge gap when it comes to the integration of poor, non-white communities in urban

53 farming initiatives of the Western world. The reasons behind their reluctance to participate seem clear, but exploring the strategies on how to integrate them would be a study subject to explore further. Lastly, there is still an ongoing discussion on the real potential capacity of a city to feed their inhabitants, from which no clear conclusions have been drawn yet and which turns out to be a key factor in this matter; however, considering the necessity of remaining economically sustainable while feeding the urban population takes the discussion to the next level.

54

Reference list

Ackerman, K. et al., 2014. Sustainable food systems for future cities: the potential of urban agriculture. The Economic and Social Review, 45(2), pp.189-206.

Agyeman, J., Bullard, R.D. & Evans, B., 2003. Just sustainabilities: development in an unequal world. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Akbari, H., 2002. Shade trees reduce building energy use and CO2 emissions from power plants. Environmental Pollution, 116, S119-S126.

Alkon, A.H. & McCullen, C.G., 2011. Whiteness and farmers markets: performances, perpetuations… contestations? Antipode, 43(4), pp.937-959.

Alkon, A.H. & Norgaard, K.M., 2009. Breaking the food chains: an investigation of food justice activism. Sociological Inquiry, 79(3), pp.289-305.

Allen, P., 2004. Together at the table: sustainability and sustenance in the American agrifood system. Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

Allen, P., 2010. Realizing justice in local food systems. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 3(2), pp.295-308.

Altieri, M.A. et al., 1999. The greening of the ”barrios”: urban agriculture for food security in Cuba. Agriculture and Human Values, 16(2), pp.131-140.

Angotti, T., 2015. Urban agriculture: long-term strategy or impossible dream? Lessons from Prospect Farm in Brooklyn, New York. Public Health, 129(4), pp.336-341.

Armar-Klemesu, M., 2000. Urban agriculture and food security, nutrition and health. In: N. Bakker et al., ed. 2000. Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Feldafing: Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE), pp.99-118.

Asomani-Boateng, R., 2002. Urban cultivation in Accra: an examination of the nature, practices, problems, potentials and urban planning implications. Habitat International, 26(4), pp.591-607.

Badami, M.G. & Ramankutty, N., 2015. Urban agriculture and food security: a critique based on an assessment of urban land constraints. Global Food Security, 4, pp.8-15.

Barrs, R., 1997. Sustainable urban food production in the city of Vancouver: an analytical and strategy framework for planners and decision-makers. Vancouver: City Farmers, Canada’s Office of Urban Agriculture.

Barthel, S., Folke, C. & Colding, J., 2010. Social-ecological memory in urban gardens: retaining the capacity for management of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 20(2), pp.255-265.

Bellows, A.C. & Hamm, M.W., 2001. Local autonomy and sustainable development: testing import substitution in localizing food systems. Agriculture and Human Values, 18(3), pp.271- 284.

55

Bellows, A.C., Brown, K. & Smit, J., 2003. Health benefits of urban agriculture. Community Food, 1-8.

Besthorn, F.H., 2013. Vertical farming: social work and sustainable urban agriculture in an age of global food crises. Australian Social Work, 66(2), pp.187-203.

Blaine. T.W., Parwinder, S.G., Dawes, A. & Snider, D. Profiling community gardens. Journal of Extension, 48(6), 6FEA6.

Block, D.R., Chávez, N., Allen, E. & Ramirez, D., 2012. Food sovereignty, urban food access, and food activism: contemplating the connections through examples from Chicago. Agriculture and Human Values, 29(2), pp.203-215.

Blyth, A. & Menagh, L., 2006. Froom rooftop to restaurant: a university café fed by a rooftop garden. The Canadian Organic Grower, Fall 2016, p.50-54.

Bohn, K. & Viljoen, A., 2011. The edible city: envisioning the continuous productive urban landscape (CPUL). Field Journal, 4(1), pp.149-161.

Bonacich, E. & Alimahomed-Wilson, J., 2011. Confronting racism, capitalism, and ecological degradation: urban farming and the struggle for social justice in black Los Angeles. Souls, 13(2), pp.213-226.

Bryld, E., 2003. Potentials, problems, and policy implications for urban agriculture in developing countries. Agriculture and Human Values, 20(1), pp.79-86.

Brown, K.H. & Jameton, A.L., 2000. Public health implications of urban agriculture. Journal of Public Health Policy, 21(1), pp.20-39.

Cadieux, K.V. & Slocum, R., 2015. What does it mean to do food justice? Journal of Political , 22, 1.

Cameron, J. & Wright, S., 2014. Researching diverse food initiatives: from backyard and community gardens to international markets. Local Environment, 19(1), pp.1-9.

Campbell, M.C., 2004. Building a common table: the role for planning in community food systems. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 23(4), pp.341-355.

Castillo, G.E., 2003. Livelihoods and the city: an overview of the emergence of agriculture in urban spaces. Progress in Development Studies, 3(4), pp.339-344.

Cohen, N. & Ilieva, R.T., 2015. Transitioning the food system: a strategic practice management approach for cities. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 17, pp.199-217.

Cohen, N. & Reynolds, K., 2014. Resource needs for a socially just and sustainable urban agriculture system: lessons from New York City. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 30(1), pp.103-114.

Colasanti, K., Hamm, M.W. & Litjens, C.M., 2012. The city as an “agricultural powerhouse”? Perspectives on expanding urban agriculture from Detroit, Michigan. Urban Geography, 33(3), pp.348-369.

Corbould, C., 2013. Feeding the cities: is urban agriculture the future of food security? Future Directions International, [Online] 1 Nov. Available at:

56

[Accessed 17 September 2017]

Corrigan, M.P., 2011. Growing what you eat: developing community gardens in Baltimore, Maryland. Applied Geography, 31(4), pp.1232-1241.

Curran, C.J. & González, M.T., Food justice as interracial justice: urban farmers, community organizations and the role of government in Oakland, California. The University of Miami Inter- American Law Review, 43(1), pp.207-232.

De Bon, H., Parrot, L. & Moustier, P., 2010. Sustainable urban agriculture in developing countries. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 30(1), pp.31-32.

De Zeeuw, H., Guendel, S. & Waibel, H., 2000. The integration of agriculture in urban policies. In: N. Bakker et al., ed. 2000. Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Feldafing: Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE), pp.161-180.

De Zeeuw, H., van Veenhuizen, R. & Dubbeling, M., 2011. The role of urban agriculture in building resilient cities in developing countries. Journal of , 149(S1), pp.153- 163.

Deelstra, T. & Girardet, H., 2000. Urban agriculture and sustainable cities. In: N. Bakker et al., ed. 2000. Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Feldafing: Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE), pp.43-66.

Dibden, J., Gibbs, D. & Cocklin, C., 2013. Framing GM as a food security solution. Journal of Rural Studies, 29(2), pp.59-70.

Dilley, M. & Boudreau, T.E., 2001. Coming to terms with vulnerability: a critique of the food security definition. Food Policy, 26(3), pp.229-247.

Dixon, J. et al., 2007. The dimensions of urban food systems. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 84(1), pp.118-129.

Dixon, B.A., 2014. Learning to see food justice. Agriculture and Human Values, 31(2), pp.175- 184.

Donovan, J., Larsen, K. & McWhinnie, J.A., 2011. Food sensitive planning and urban design: a conceptual framework for achieving a sustainable and healthy food system. Melbourne: National Heart Foundation of Australia (Victorian Division).

Drescher, A.W., 2003. The German gardens: a model for poverty alleviation and food security in Southern African cities. Proceedings of the Sub-Regional Expert Meeting on , Stellenbosch, South Africa, pp.159-167.

Dubbeling, M., Campbell, M.C., Hoekstra, F. & van Veenhuizen, R., 2009. Building resilient cities. Urban Agriculture Magazine, 22, pp.3-11.

Duchemin, E., Wegmuller, F. & Legault, A.M., 2009. Urban agriculture: multi-dimensional tools for social development in poor neighbourhoods. Field Action Science Report, 2, pp.1-8.

Dunn, A.D., 2010. Siting green infrastructure: legal and policy solutions to alleviate urban poverty and promote healthy communities. Boston College Environmental Affairs, 37, pp.41-66.

57

Eisenhauer, E., 2001. In poor health: supermarket redlining and urban nutrition. GeoJournal, 53(2), pp.125-133.

Ellis, F. & Sumberg, J., 1998. Food production, urban areas and policy responses. World Development, 26(2), pp.213-225.

Emmett, R., 2011. Community gardens, ghetto pastoral, and environmental justice. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 18(1), pp.67-86.

Feenstra, G., 2002. Creating space for sustainable food systems: lessons from the field. Agriculture and Human Values, 19(2), pp.99-106.

Ferris, J., Norman, C. & Sempik, J., 2001. People, land and sustainability: community gardens and the social dimension of sustainable development. Social Policy & Administration, 35(5), pp.559-568.

Fjørtoft, I., 2001. The natural environment as a playground for children: the impact of outdoor play activities in pre-primary school children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), pp.111- 117.

Freudenberg, N., McDonough, J. & Tsui, E., 2011. Can a food justice movement improve nutrition and health? A case study of the emerging food movement in New York City. Journal of Urban Health, 88(4), pp.623-636.

Friel, S. et al., 2011. Urban health inequities and the added pressure of climate change: an action-oriented research agenda. Journal of Urban Health, 88(5), pp.886-895.

Galt, R.E., Gray, L.C. & Hurley, P., 2014. Subversive and interstitial food spaces: transforming selves, societies, and society-environment relations through urban agriculture and foraging. Local Environment, 19(2), pp.133-146.

Garnett, T., 2000. Urban agriculture in : rethinking our food economy. In: N. Bakker et al., ed. 2000. Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Feldafing: Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE), pp.477-500.

Garrett, J.L. & Ruel, M.T., 2000. Achieving urban food and nutrition security in the developing world. International Food Policy Research Institute, 3.

Getter, K.L. & Rowe, D.B., 2006. The role of extensive green roofs in sustainable development. HortScience, 41(5), p.1276-1285.

Gladwin, C.H., Thomson, A.M., Peterson, J.S. & Anderson, A.S., 2001. Addressing food security in Africa via multiple livelihood strategies of women farmers. Food Policy, 26(2), pp.177-207.

Gottlieb, R. & Fisher, A., 1996. Community food security and environmental justice: searching for a common discourse. Agriculture and Human Values, 13(3), pp.23-32.

Grewal, S.S. & Grewal, P.S., 2012. Can cities become self-reliant in food? Cities, 29(1), pp.1-11.

Gunnarsson-Östling, U. & Svenfelt, Å., 2017. Sustainability discourses and justice: towards social-ecological justice. In: R. Holifield, J. Chakraborty & G. Walker, ed. 2017. The Routledge handbook of environmental justice. New York: Routledge.

58

Guthman, J., 2008. “If they only knew”: the unbearable whiteness of alternative food. In: A.H. Alkon & J. Agyeman, ed. 2011. Cultivating food justice: race, class, and sustainability. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pp.263-281.

Haletky, N., Taylor, O., Weidmer, J. & Gerbing, S., 2006. Urban agriculture as a solution to food insecurity: West Oakland and People’s Grocery. In: M. Jacques-Menegaz & N. Haletky, ed. 2006. Urban action: a journal of urban affairs. San Francisco: San Francisco State University, pp.49-57.

Halweil, B. & Nierenberg, D., 2007. Farming the cities. In: L. Starke, ed. 2007. State of the world 2007: our urban future. Washington, D.C.: W.W. Norton & Company, pp.48-63.

Hamilton, A.J. et al., 2013. Give peas a chance? Urban agriculture in developing countries. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 34(1), pp.45-73.

Hoover, B.M., 2013. White spaces in black and Latino spaces: urban agriculture and food sovereignty. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 3(4), pp.109- 115.

Horrigan, L., Lawrence, R.S. & Walker, P., 2002. How sustainable agriculture can address the environmental and human health harms of industrial agriculture. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(5), pp.445-456.

Hovorka, A.J., 2006. Urban agriculture: addressing practical and strategic gender needs. Development in Practice, 16(1), pp.51-61.

Howe, J. & Wheeler, P., 1999. Urban food growing: the experience of two UK cities. Sustainable Development, 7(1), pp.13-24.

Hu, A., Acosta, A., McDaniel, A. & Gittelsohn, J., 2013. Community perspectives on barriers and strategies for promoting locally grown produce from an urban agriculture farm. Health Promotion Practice, 14(1), pp.69-74.

Iles, J., 2005. The social role of community farms and gardens in the city. In: A. Viljoen, K. Bohn & J. Howe, ed. 2005. Continuous productive urban landscapes: designing urban agriculture for sustainable cities. Oxford: Architectural Press, pp.82-88.

Jacques-Menegaz, M., 2006. Film review: The Future of Food. In: M. Jacques-Menegaz & N. Haletky, ed. 2006. Urban action: a journal of urban affairs. San Francisco: San Francisco State University, pp.58-60.

Jarosz, L., 2011. Defining world hunger: scale and neoliberal ideology in international food security policy discourse. Food, Culture & Society, 14(1), pp.117-139.

Jarosz, L., 2014. Comparing food security and food sovereignty discourses. Dialogues in Human Geography, 4(2), pp.168-181.

Kachenko, A.G. & Singh, B., 2006. Heavy metals contamination in vegetables grown in urban and metal smelter contaminated sited in Australia. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 169(1), pp.101-123.

Kato, Y., 2013. Not just the price of food: challenges of an urban agriculture organization in engaging local residents. Sociological Inquiry, 83(3), pp.369-391.

Kaufman, J. & Bailkey, M., 2000. Farming inside cities: entrepreneurial urban agriculture in the United States. Cambridge, M.A.: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.

59

Knowd, I., Mason, D. & Docking, A., 2006. Urban agriculture: the new frontier. Changing City Structures, 23.

Kortright, R. & Wakefield, S., 2011. Edible backyards: a qualitative study of household food growing and its contributions to food security. Agriculture and Human Values, 28(1), pp.39-53.

Kremen, C., Iles, A. & Bacon, C., 2007. Diversified farming systems: an agroecological, systems- based alternative to modern industrial agriculture. Ecology and Society, 17(4), 44.

Kremer, P. & DeLiberty, T.L., 2011. Local food practices and growing potential: mapping the case of Philadelphia. Applied Geography, 31(4), pp.1252-1261.

Kuo, F.E. & Sullivan, W.C., 2001. Environment and crime in the inner city: does vegetation reduce crime? Environment and Behavior, 33(3), pp.343-367.

La Trobe, H.L. & Acott, T.G., 2000. Localising the global food system. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 7(4), pp.309-320.

Lane, S.D. et al., 2008. Structural violence, urban retail food markets, and low birth weight. Health & Place, 14(3), pp.415-423.

Lang, T., 1999. Food policy for the 21st century: can it be both radical and reasonable? In: M. Koc et al., ed. 1999. For hunger-proof cities: sustainable urban food systems. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, pp.216-224.

Larsen, K. & Gilliland, J., 2008. Mapping the evolution of ‘food deserts’ in a Canadian city: supermarket accessibility in London, Ontario, 1961-2005. International Journal of Health Geographics, 7(1), 16.

Lee-Smith, D., 2010. Cities feeding people: an update on urban agriculture in equatorial Africa. Environmental & Urbanization, 22(2), pp.483-499.

Lerner, A.M. & Eakin, H., 2011. An obsolete dichotomy? Rethinking the rural-urban interface in terms of food security and production in the global south? The Geographical Journal, 177(4), pp.311-320.

Levkoe, C.Z., 2006. Learning democracy through food justice movements. Agriculture and Human Values, 23(1), pp.89-98.

Lin, B.B., Philpott, S.M. & Jha, S., 2015. The future of urban agriculture and biodiversity- ecosystem services: challenges and next steps. Basic and , 16(3), pp. 189-201.

Lynch, K., Binns, T. & Olofin, E., 2001. Urban agriculture under threat: the land security question in Kano, Nigeria. Cities, 18(3), pp.159-171.

Macias, T., 2008. Working toward a just, equitable, and local food system: the social impact of community-based agriculture. Social Science Quarterly, 89(5), pp.1086-1101.

Martin, R. & Marsden, T., 1999. Food for urban spaces: the development of urban food production in England and Wales. International Planning Studies, 4(3), pp.389-412.

Mason, D. & Knowd, I., 2010. The emergence of urban agriculture: Sidney, Australia. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 8(1-2), pp.62-71.

Maxwell, D.G., 1995. Alternative food security strategy: a household analysis of urban agriculture in Kampala. World Development, 23(10), pp.1669-1681.

60

Maxwell, S., 1996. Food security: a post-modern perspective. Food Policy, 21(2), pp.155-170.

McClintock, N., 2010. Why farm the city? Theorizing urban agriculture through a lens of metabolic rift. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 3(2), pp.191-207.

McClintock, N., 2014. Radical, reformist, and garden-variety neoliberal: coming to terms with urban agriculture’s contradictions. Local Environment, 19(2), pp.147-171.

McIlvaine-Newsad, H. & Porter, R., 2013. How does your garden grow? Environmental justice aspects of community gardens. Journal of Ecological Anthropology, 16(1), pp.69-75.

Meenar, M.R. & Hoover, B.M., 2012. Community food security via urban agriculture: understanding people, place, economy, and accessibility from a food justice perspective. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 3(1), pp.143-160.

Mees, C. & Stone, E., 2012. Zoned out: the potential of urban agriculture planning out to turn against its roots. Cities and the Environment (CATE), 5(1), 7.

Messina & Burke, 1997. Position of the American Dietetic Association: vegetarian diets. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 97(11), pp.1317-1321.

Milbourne, P., 2012. Everyday (in)justices and ordinary environmentalisms: in disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods. Local Environment, 17(9), pp.943-957.

Mkwambisi, D.D., Fraser, E. & Dougill, A.J., 2011. Urban agriculture and poverty reduction: evaluating how food production in cities contributes to food security, employment and income in Malawi. Journal of International Development, 23(2), pp.181-203.

Moffat, A.S., 1998. Global nitrogen overload problem grows critical. Science, 279(5353), pp.988- 989.

Mok, H.F. et al., 2014. Strawberry fields forever? Urban agriculture in developed countries: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 34(1), pp.21-43.

Morgan, K., 2009. Feeding the city: the challenge of urban food planning. International Planning Studies, 14(4), pp.341-348.

Morgan, K., 2015. Nourishing the city: the rise of the urban food question in the Global North. Urban studies, 52(8), pp.1379-1394.

Morland, K., Wing, S., Diez Roux, A. & Poole, C., 2002. Neighbourhood characteristics associated with the location of food stores and food services places. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 22(1), pp.23-29.

Mougeot, L., 1994. African city farming from a world perspective. In: A.G. Egziabher et al., 1994. Cities feeding people: an examination of urban agriculture in East Africa. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, pp.1-22.

Mougeot, L., 1999. For self-reliant cities: urban food production in a globalizing South. In: M. Koc et al., ed. 1999. For hunger-proof cities: sustainable urban food systems. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, pp.11-25.

Mougeot, L., 2000. Urban agriculture: definition, presence, potentials and risks. In: N. Bakker et al., ed. 2000. Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Feldafing: Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE), pp.1-42.

61

Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013. Nordic Nutrition Recommendations 2012. Part 1: summary, principles and use. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.

North, P., 2010. Eco-localisation as a progressive response to peak oil and climate change: a sympathetic critique. Geoforum, 41(4), pp.585-594.

Nugent, R., 2000. The impact of urban agriculture on the household and local economies. In: N. Bakker et al., ed. 2000. Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Feldafing: Deutsche Stiftung für internationale Entwicklung (DSE), pp.67-95.

Orsini, F., Kahane, R., Nono-Womdim, R. & Gianquinto, G., 2013. Urban agriculture in the developing world: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 33(4), pp.695-720.

Pemunta, N.V. & Obara, T.B., 2012. Toward a reconceptualization of the “urban” and “rural” as conceptual and analytical categories in the social . Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 3.

Pimentel, D., 1995. Amounts of pesticides reaching target pests: environmental impacts and ethics. Journal of Agricultural and , 8(1), pp.17-29.

Poulsen, M.N., 2016. Cultivating citizenship, equity, and social inclusion? Putting civic agriculture into practice through urban farming. Agriculture and Human Values, 34(1), pp.135- 148.

Power, E.M., 1999. Combining social justice and sustainability for food security. In: M. Koc et al., ed. 1999. For hunger-proof cities: sustainable urban food systems. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, pp.30-37.

Press, M. & Arnould, E.J., 2011. Legitimating community supported agriculture through American pastoralist ideology. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11(2), pp.168-194.

Rakodi, C., 1997. Global forces, urban change, and urban management in Africa. In: C. Rakodi, ed. 1997. The urban challenge in Africa: growth and management of its large cities. Tokyo: United Nations University Press, pp.17-73.

Reynolds, K., 2015. Disparity despite diversity: social injustice in New York City’s urban agriculture system. Antipode, 47(1), pp.240-259.

Rose, D., 1999. Economic determinants and dietary consequences of food insecurity in the United States. The Journal of Nutrition, 129(2), pp.517S-520S.

Rosin, C., 2013. Food security and the justification of productivism in New Zealand. Journal of Rural Studies, 29(2), pp.50-58.

Rosol, M., 2005. Community gardens: a potential for stagnating and shrinking cities? Examples from Berlin. Die Erde, 136(2), pp.165-178.

Sanyé-Mengual, E. et al., 2016. Resolving differing stakeholder perceptions of urban rooftop farming in Mediterranean cities: promoting food production as a driver for innovative forms of urban agriculture. Agriculture and Human Values, 33(1), pp.101-120.

Shigley, P., 2009. When access is the issue: what cities are doing to get healthy food into underserved neighborhoods. Planning, 75(8), pp.26-31.

Shillington, L.J., 2013. Right to food, right to the city: household urban agriculture, and socionatural metabolism in Managua, Nicaragua. Geoforum, 44, pp.103-111.

62

Slater, R.J., 2001. Urban agriculture, gender and empowerment: an alternative view. Development Southern Africa, 18(5), pp.635-650.

Slocum, R., 2007. Whiteness, space and alternative food practice. Geoforum, 38(3), pp.520-533.

Smit, J. & Nasr, J., 1992. Urban agriculture for sustainable cities: using wastes and idle land and water bodies as resources. Environmental and Urbanization, 4(2), pp.141-152.

Sonnino, R., 2016. The new geography of food security: exploring the potential of urban food strategies. The Geographical Journal, 182(2), pp.190-200.

Specht, K. et al., 2014. Urban agriculture of the future: an overview of sustainability aspects of food production in and on buildings. Agriculture and Human Values, 31(1), pp.33-51.

Stewart, R. et al., 2013. What are the impacts of urban agriculture programs on food security in low and middle-income countries? Environmental Evidence, 2(1), 7.

Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F.E. & Sullivan W.C., 2001. Copint with ADD: the surprising connection to green play settings. Environment and Behavior, 33(1), pp.54-77.

Taylor, A.F., Kuo, F.E. & Sullivan, W.C., 2002. Views of nature and self-discipline: evidence from inner city children. Journal of , 22(1-2), pp.49-63.

Thibert, J., 2012. Making local planning work for urban agriculture in the North American context: a view from the ground. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32(3), pp.349- 357.

Travaline, K. & Hunold, C., 2010. Urban agriculture and ecological citizenship in Philadelphia. Local Environment, 15(6), pp.581-590.

Tscharntke, T. et al., 2005. Landscape perspective on agricultural intensification and biodiversity – ecosystem service management. Ecology Letters, 8(8), pp.857-874.

United Nations, 2010. The right to adequate food. Geneva: United Nations. Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights.

United Nations, 2017. prospects 2017. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. [online] Available at: [Accessed 16 September 2017].

Via Campesina, 2001. Our world is not for sale. Priority to people’s food sovereignty. WTO out of food and agriculture. [online] Available at: [Accessed 17 September 2017]

Wallgren, C. & Höjer, M., 2009. Eating energy: identifying possibilities for reduced energy use in the future food supply system. Energy Policy, 37(12), pp.5803-5813.

Warde, A., 1997. Consumption, Food & Taste. London: Sage Publications.

Weis, T., 2007. The global food economy: the battle for the future of farming. London: Zed Books.

Wells, N.M. & Evans, G.W., 2003. Nearby nature: a buffer of life stress among rural children. Environment and Behavior, 35(3), pp.311-330.

63

Williams, E.P. et al., 2015. Overweight and obesity: prevalence, consequences, and causes of a growing public health problem. Current Obesity Reports, 4(3), pp.363-370.

Wittman, H., Desmarais, A. & Wiebe, N., 2010. The origins & potential of food sovereignty. In: H. Wittman, A. Desmarais & N. Wiebe, ed. 2010. Food sovereignty: reconnecting food, nature and community. Oxford: Pambazuka, pp.1-14.

Zezza, A. & Tasciotti, L., 2010. Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security: empirical evidence from a sample of developing countries. Food Policy, 35(4), pp.265-273.

64

Appendix. Literature database

65

REFERENCE TITLE URB FUT SEC SOV POV SUS LOC GLO SUP JUS SOC EXC OBS PLA HEA Sustainable food systems for future cities: the Ackerman, et al., 2014 1 1 potential of urban agriculture Breaking the food chains: an investigation of Alkon & Norgaard, 2009 1 1 food justice activism The greening of the "barrios": urban Altieri, et al., 1999 1 1 agriculture for food security in Cuba Urban agriculture: long-term strategy or Angotti, 2015 impossible dream? Lessons from Prospect 1 1 Farm in Brooklyn, New York Urban agriculture and food security, nutrition Armar-Klemesu, 2000 1 1 and health Urban cultivation in Accra: an examination of Asomani-Boateng, 2002 the nature, practices, problems, potentials and 1 1 urban planning implications Urban agriculture and food security: a critique Badami & Ramankutty, 2015 based on an assessment of urban land 1 1 constraints Bellows, et al., 2003 Health benefits of urban agriculture 1 1 Vertical farming: social work and sustainable Besthorn, 2013 urban agriculture in an age of global food 1 1 crises Food sovereignty, urban food access, and food Block, et al., 2012 activism: contemplating the connections 1 1 through examples from Chicago Confronting racism, capitalism, and ecological Bonacich & Alimahomed-Wilson, 2011 degradation: urban farming and the struggle 1 1 for social justice in black Los Angeles

Brown & Jameton, 2000 Public health implications of urban agriculture 1 1

Potentials, problems, and policy implications Bryld, 2003 1 1 for urban agriculture in developing countries Cadieux & Slocum, 2015 What does it mean to do food justice? 1 1 Researching diverse food initiatives: from Cameron & Wright, 2014 backyard and community gardens to 1 1 international markets Livelihoods and the city: an overview of the Castillo, 2003 1 emergence of agriculture in urban spaces Havana's popular gardens: sustainable Chaplowe, 1998 1 1 prospects for urban agriculture Transitioning the food system: a strategic Cohen & Ilieva, 2015 1 1 practice management approach for cities Resource needs for a socially just and Cohen & Reynolds, 2014a sustainable urban agriculture system: lessons 1 1 from New York City REFERENCE TITLE URB FUT SEC SOV POV SUS LOC GLO SUP JUS SOC EXC OBS PLA HEA Urban agriculture policy making in New York's Cohen & Reynolds, 2014b "new political spaces": strategizing for a 1 1 participatory and representative system Assessing the local food supply capacity of Colasanti & Hamm, 2010 1 1 Detroit, Michigan The city as an "agricultural powerhouse"? Colasanti, et al., 2012 Perspectives on expanding urban agriculture 1 1 from Detroit, Michigan Feeding the cities: is urban agriculture the Corbould, 2013 1 1 future of food security? Growing what you eat: developing community Corrigan, 2011 1 1 gardens in Baltimore, Maryland Food justice as interracial justice: urban Curran & González, 2011 farmers, community organizations and the role 1 1 of government in Oakland, California Sustainable urban agriculture in developing De Bon, et al., 2010 1 1 countries. A review De Zeeuw, et al., 2000 The integration of agriculture in urban policies 1 1 The role of urban agriculture in building De Zeeuw, et al., 2011 1 1 resilient cities in developing countries Deelstra & Girardet, 2000 Urban agriculture and sustainable cities 1 1 Place, work, and civic agriculture: common DeLind, 2002 1 1 fields for cultivation Are local food and the local food movement DeLind, 2011 taking us where we want to go? Or are we 1 1 hitching our wagons to the wrong stars? Dixon, 2014 Learning to see food justice 1 1 The health equity dimensions of urban food Dixon, et al., 2007 1 1 systems Food-sensitive planning and urban design: a conceptual framework for achieving a Donovan, et al., 2011 1 1 sustainable and healthy food system (p.5-9, 67-70, 71-73) Dynamics and sustainability of urban Drechsel & Dongus, 2010 1 1 agriculture: examples from sub-Saharan Africa The German allotment gardens: a model for Drescher, 2001 poverty alleviation and food security in 1 1 Southern African Cities Sustaining urban agriculture requires the Dubbeling & Merzthal, 2006 1 1 involvement of multiple stakeholders Dubbeling, et al., 2009 Building resilient cities 1 1 Urban agriculture: multi-dimensional tools for Duchemin, et al., 2009 1 1 social development in poor neighbourhoods REFERENCE TITLE URB FUT SEC SOV POV SUS LOC GLO SUP JUS SOC EXC OBS PLA HEA Siting green infrastructure: legal and policy Dunn, 2010 solutions to alleviate urban poverty and 1 1 promote healthy communities Food production, urban areas and policy Ellis & Sumberg, 1998 1 1 responses Community gardens, ghetto pastoral, and Emmett, 2011 1 1 environmental justice People, land and sustainability: community Ferris, et al., 2001 gardens and the social dimension of 1 1 sustainable development Can a food justice movement improve nutrition Freudenberg, et al., 2011 and health? A case study of the emerging food 1 1 movement in New York City Urban health inequities and the added Friel, et al., 2011 pressure of climate change: an action-oriented 1 1 research agenda Subversive and interstitial food spaces: transforming selves, societies, and society- Galt, et al., 2014 1 1 environment relations through urban agriculture and foraging Urban agriculture in London: rethinking our Garnett, 2000 1 1 food economy Community food security and environmental Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996 1 1 justice: searching for a common discourse Grewal & Grewal, 2012 Can cities become self-reliant in food? 1 1 Urban agriculture as a solution to food Haletky, et al., 2006 1 1 insecurity: West Oakland and people's grocery Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007 Farming the cities 1 1 Give peas a chance? Urban agriculture in Hamilton, et al., 2013 1 1 developing countries. A review White spaces in black and Latino spaces: urban Hoover, 2013 1 1 agriculture and food sovereignty How sustainable agriculture can address the Horrigan, et al., 2002 environmental and human health harms of 1 1 industrial agriculture Urban agriculture: addressing practical and Hovorka, 2006 1 1 strategic gender needs Urban food growing: the experience of two UK Howe & Wheeler, 1999 1 1 cities Community perspectives on barriers and Hu, et al., 2013 strategies for promoting locally grown produce 1 1 from an urban agriculture farm Jacques-Menegaz, 2006 Film review: The future of food 1 1 Comparing food security and food sovereignty Jarosz, 2014 1 1 discourses REFERENCE TITLE URB FUT SEC SOV POV SUS LOC GLO SUP JUS SOC EXC OBS PLA HEA Not just the price of food: challenges of an Kato, 2013 urban agriculture organization in engaging 1 1 local residents Knowd, et al., 2006 Urban agriculture: the new frontier 1 1 Edible backyards: a qualitative study of Kortright & Wakefield, 2011 household food growing and its contributions 1 1 to food security Diversified farming systems: an Kremen, et al., 2012 agroecological, systems-based alternative to 1 1 modern industrial agriculture Local food practices and growing potential: Kremer & DeLiberty, 2011 1 1 mapping the case of Philadelphia La Trobe & Acott, 2000 Localising the global food system 1 1 Food policy for the 21st century: can it be both Lang, 1999 1 1 radical and reasonable? Lee, 2000 Urban agriculture 1 1 An obsolete dichotomy? Rethinking the rural- Lerner & Eakin, 2011 urban interface in terms of food security and 1 1 production in the global south Learning democracy through food justice Levkoe, 2006 1 1 movements The future of urban agriculture and Lin, et al., 2015 biodiversity-ecosystem services: challenges 1 1 and next steps Luokkala, 2014 Food and urban gardening in planning Urban agriculture under threat: the land Lynch, et al., 2001 1 1 security question in Kano, Nigeria Food in the city: urban food movements and Lyons, et al., 2013 1 1 the (re)-imaging of urban spaces Working toward a just, equitable, and local Macias, 2008 food system: the social impact of community- 1 1 based agriculture Cities of the future: urban agriculture in the Madaleno, 2001 1 1 third millennium Municipal food strategies and integrated Mansfield & Mendes, 2013 approaches to urban agriculture: exploring 1 1 three cases from the global north Food for urban spaces: the development of Martin & Marsden, 1999 1 1 urban food production in England and Wales The emergence of urban agriculture: Sydney, Mason & Knowd, 2010 1 1 Australia Highest and best use?: access to urban land Maxwell, 1996 1 1 for semi-subsistence food production Poverty and sustainable cities in South Africa: May & Rogerson, 1995 1 1 the role of urban cultivation Why farm the city? Theorizing urban McClintock, 2010 1 1 agriculture through a lens of metabolic rift REFERENCE TITLE URB FUT SEC SOV POV SUS LOC GLO SUP JUS SOC EXC OBS PLA HEA Radical, reformist, and garden-variety McClintock, 2014 neoliberal: coming to terms with urban 1 1 agriculture's contradictions How does your garden grow? Environmental McIlvaine-Newsad & Porter, 2013 1 1 justice aspects of community gardens Community food security via urban agriculture: understanding people, place, Meenar & Hoover, 2012 1 1 economy, and accessibility from a food justice perspective Zoned out: the potential of urban agriculture Mees & Stone, 2012 1 1 planning to turn against its roots Growing Buffalo's capacity for local food: a Metcalf & Widener, 2011 1 1 systems framework for sustainable agriculture Mies, 2005 The subsistence perspective 1 1 Everyday (in)justices and ordinary Milbourne, 2012 environmentalisms: community gardening in 1 1 disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods Urban agriculture and poverty reduction: evaluating how food production in cities Mkwambisi, et al., 2011 1 1 contributes to food security, employment and income in Malawi Strawberry fields forever? Urban agriculture in Mok, et al., 2014 1 1 developed countries: a review Feeding the city: the challenge of urban food Morgan, 2009 1 1 planning Nourishing the city: the rise of the urban food Morgan, 2015 1 1 question in the Global North For self-reliant cities: urban food production in Mougeot, 1999 1 1 a globalizing South Urban agriculture: definition, presence, Mougeot, 2000 1 1 potentials and risks Background material for the action plan on National Food Administration, 2005 healthy dietary habits and increased physical 1 1 activity Nordic nutrition recommendations 2012. Part Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013 1 1 1: Summary, principles and use (p.18-21) Eco-localisation as a progressive response to North, 2010 peak oil and climate change - a sympathetic 1 1 critique The impact of urban agriculture on the Nugent, 2000 1 1 household and local economies Ohri-Vachaspati, et al., 2009 City Fresh: a local collaboration for food equity 1 1 Urban agriculture in the developing world: a Orsini, et al., 2013 1 1 review REFERENCE TITLE URB FUT SEC SOV POV SUS LOC GLO SUP JUS SOC EXC OBS PLA HEA Sustainable urban agriculture: stocktake and Pearson, et al., 2010 1 1 opportunities Toward a reconceptualization of the "urban" Pemunta & Obara, 2012 and "rural" as conceptual and analytical 1 1 categories in the social sciences Placing the food system on the urban agenda: Pothukuchi & Kaufman, 1999 the role of municipal institutions in food 1 1 systems planning The food system: a stranger to the planning Pothukuchi & Kaufman, 2000 1 1 field Cultivating citizenship, equity, and social Poulsen, 2016 inclusion? Putting civic agriculture into practice 1 1 through urban farming Combining social justice and sustainability for Power, 1999 1 1 food security Disparity despite diversity: social injustice in Reynolds, 2015 1 1 New York City's urban agriculture system Saed, 2012 Urban farming: the right to what sort of city? 1 1

Resolving differing stakeholder perceptions of urban rooftop farming in Mediterranean cities: Sanyé-Mengual, et al., 2016 1 1 promoting food production as a driver for innovative forms of urban agriculture Right to food, right to the city: household Shillington, 2013 urban agriculture, and socionatural metabolism 1 1 in Managua, Nicaragua "Food industries" (p. 58) in Going local: Shuman, 2000 creating self-reliant communities in a global 1 1 age Urban agriculture, gender and empowerment: Slater, 2001 1 1 an alternative view Urban agriculture for sustainable cities: using Smit & Nasr, 1992 wastes and idle land and water bodies as 1 1 resources Feeding the city: towards a new research and Sonnino, 2009 1 1 planning agenda The new geography of food security: exploring Sonnino, 2016 1 1 the potential of urban food strategies Urban agriculture of the future: an overview of Specht, et al., 2014 sustainability aspects of food production in and 1 1 on buildings Zero-acreage farming in the city of Berlin: an Specht, et al., 2015 aggregated stakeholder perspective on 1 1 potential benefits and challenges REFERENCE TITLE URB FUT SEC SOV POV SUS LOC GLO SUP JUS SOC EXC OBS PLA HEA Excerpts from the SSNC - Swedish Society for SSNC, 2013 1 1 Nature Conservation What are the impacts of urban agriculture Stewart, et al., 2013 programs on food security in low and middle- 1 1 income countries? Making local planning work for urban Thibert, 2012 agriculture in the North American context: a 1 1 view from the ground Urban agriculture and ecological citizenship in Travaline & Hunold, 2010 1 1 Philadelphia Eating energy: identifying possibilities for Wallgren & Höjer, 2009 reduced energy use in the future of food 1 1 supply system Food justice movements: policy, planning, and Wekerle, 2004 1 1 networks Whitford, 2009 Can farming save Detroit? 1 1 Wittman, et al., 2010 The origins & potential of food sovereignty 1 1 World Fair Trade Organization and Fairtrade Labelling Organizations A charter of fair trade principles 1 1 International, 2009 Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security: Zezza & Tasciotti, 2010 empirical evidence from a sample of 1 1 developing countries

LEGEND Urban agriculture URB Future FUT Food security SEC Food sovereignty SOV Poverty POV Sustainability SUS Local food systems LOC Global food system GLO Supply SUP Justice JUS Social values SOC Exclusion EXC Obstacles OBS Planning PLA Health HEA REFERENCE TITLE KEY WORDS Sustainable food systems for future cities: the Ackerman, et al., 2014 potential of urban agriculture Breaking the food chains: an investigation of Alkon & Norgaard, 2009 food justice activism The greening of the "barrios": urban urban agriculture, Cuba, , sustainable agriculture, food security, biological Altieri, et al., 1999 agriculture for food security in Cuba pest control Urban agriculture: long-term strategy or Angotti, 2015 impossible dream? Lessons from Prospect urban agriculture, land use policy, community development, food safety, climate change Farm in Brooklyn, New York Urban agriculture and food security, nutrition Armar-Klemesu, 2000 and health Urban cultivation in Accra: an examination of Asomani-Boateng, 2002 the nature, practices, problems, potentials and urban planning, urban agriculture, food security, urban waste urban planning implications Urban agriculture and food security: a critique Badami & Ramankutty, 2015 based on an assessment of urban land urban agriculture, food security, urban poverty, urban land use constraints Bellows, et al., 2003 Health benefits of urban agriculture Vertical farming: social work and sustainable Besthorn, 2013 urban agriculture in an age of global food vertical farming, social work, sustainable urban agriculture, global food crises crises Food sovereignty, urban food access, and food Block, et al., 2012 activism: contemplating the connections food sovereignty, food deserts, food access, food activism, community organizing through examples from Chicago Confronting racism, capitalism, and ecological African Americans, community control, community economic development, jobs crisis, Bonacich & Alimahomed-Wilson, 2011 degradation: urban farming and the struggle sustainability, urban farming for social justice in black Los Angeles

Brown & Jameton, 2000 Public health implications of urban agriculture

Potentials, problems, and policy implications environment, food security, gender, governance, livelihood strategies, policy, structural Bryld, 2003 for urban agriculture in developing countries adjustment, urban agriculture, urban planning food justice, food sovereignty, food movement, food security, alternative agri-food Cadieux & Slocum, 2015 What does it mean to do food justice? systems Researching diverse food initiatives: from Cameron & Wright, 2014 backyard and community gardens to international markets Livelihoods and the city: an overview of the Castillo, 2003 emergence of agriculture in urban spaces Havana's popular gardens: sustainable Chaplowe, 1998 prospects for urban agriculture Transitioning the food system: a strategic Cohen & Ilieva, 2015 food systems, New York City, social practice theory, transitions, urban policy practice management approach for cities Resource needs for a socially just and food justice, food system planning, New York City, technical assistance, urban Cohen & Reynolds, 2014a sustainable urban agriculture system: lessons agriculture from New York City REFERENCE TITLE KEY WORDS Urban agriculture policy making in New York's action research, food policy, new political spaces, New York City, policy making, urban Cohen & Reynolds, 2014b "new political spaces": strategizing for a agriculture, racial disparities participatory and representative system Assessing the local food supply capacity of food supply, local food systems, season extension, urban agriculture, urban Colasanti & Hamm, 2010 Detroit, Michigan sustainability The city as an "agricultural powerhouse"? Colasanti, et al., 2012 Perspectives on expanding urban agriculture from Detroit, Michigan Feeding the cities: is urban agriculture the Corbould, 2013 future of food security? Growing what you eat: developing community Corrigan, 2011 gardens in Baltimore, Maryland Food justice as interracial justice: urban Curran & González, 2011 farmers, community organizations and the role of government in Oakland, California Sustainable urban agriculture in developing urban and peri-urban agriculture, livelihoods, marketing chains, vegetables, freshness, De Bon, et al., 2010 countries. A review multi-functional De Zeeuw, et al., 2000 The integration of agriculture in urban policies The role of urban agriculture in building De Zeeuw, et al., 2011 resilient cities in developing countries Deelstra & Girardet, 2000 Urban agriculture and sustainable cities Place, work, and civic agriculture: common DeLind, 2002 community, citizenship, civic agriculture, local food and farming, place, work fields for cultivation Are local food and the local food movement DeLind, 2011 taking us where we want to go? Or are we local food movement, local food, locavores, regenerative food system, ethnography hitching our wagons to the wrong stars? Dixon, 2014 Learning to see food justice ethical perception, food justice, narrative case studies, social activism urban food and nutrition systems, health inequities, nutrition transition, social The health equity dimensions of urban food Dixon, et al., 2007 determinants of nutrition, urban agriculture and food distribution, urban nutrition systems interventions Food-sensitive planning and urban design: a conceptual framework for achieving a Donovan, et al., 2011 sustainable and healthy food system (p.5-9, 67-70, 71-73) Dynamics and sustainability of urban urban agriculture, sub-Saharan Africa, sustainability, dynamic, vegetables, wastewater Drechsel & Dongus, 2010 agriculture: examples from sub-Saharan Africa irrigation The German allotment gardens: a model for Southern Africa, Germany allotment gardens, Schrebergardens, local institutions, food Drescher, 2001 poverty alleviation and food security in security, horticulture, urban planning, private public partnership Southern African Cities Sustaining urban agriculture requires the Dubbeling & Merzthal, 2006 involvement of multiple stakeholders Dubbeling, et al., 2009 Building resilient cities REFERENCE TITLE KEY WORDS Urban agriculture: multi-dimensional tools for Duchemin, et al., 2009 social development in poor neighbourhoods Siting green infrastructure: legal and policy Dunn, 2010 solutions to alleviate urban poverty and promote healthy communities Food production, urban areas and policy Ellis & Sumberg, 1998 Africa, urban agriculture, rural-urban links, food policy responses Community gardens, ghetto pastoral, and Emmett, 2011 environmental justice People, land and sustainability: community Ferris, et al., 2001 gardens and the social dimension of people, land, community gardens, sustainability, green space, poverty, food security sustainable development Can a food justice movement improve nutrition Freudenberg, et al., 2011 and health? A case study of the emerging food food environment, social movements, food policy, New York City movement in New York City Urban health inequities and the added Friel, et al., 2011 pressure of climate change: an action-oriented urban health, health inequity, climate change, evidence research agenda Subversive and interstitial food spaces: transforming selves, societies, and society- Galt, et al., 2014 environment relations through urban agriculture and foraging Urban agriculture in London: rethinking our Garnett, 2000 food economy Community food security and environmental Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996 justice: searching for a common discourse globalization, local self-reliance, urban agriculture, urban food production, post-industrial Grewal & Grewal, 2012 Can cities become self-reliant in food? cities Urban agriculture as a solution to food Haletky, et al., 2006 insecurity: West Oakland and people's grocery Halweil & Nierenberg, 2007 Farming the cities Give peas a chance? Urban agriculture in Hamilton, et al., 2013 city, food, gardening, horticulture, low income, Third world, vegetable, wastewater developing countries. A review White spaces in black and Latino spaces: urban Hoover, 2013 food systems, race, urban agriculture agriculture and food sovereignty How sustainable agriculture can address the Horrigan, et al., 2002 environmental and human health harms of diet, environment, health, industrial agriculture, sustainability, sustainable agriculture industrial agriculture Urban agriculture: addressing practical and Hovorka, 2006 strategic gender needs Urban food growing: the experience of two UK Howe & Wheeler, 1999 cities REFERENCE TITLE KEY WORDS commmunity organization, health disparities, health promotion, qualitative research, Community perspectives on barriers and health research, Black/African American, minority health, nutrition, social capital, Hu, et al., 2013 strategies for promoting locally grown produce community assessment, program planning and evaluation, needs/assets assessment, from an urban agriculture farm behavior change Jacques-Menegaz, 2006 Film review: The future of food Comparing food security and food sovereignty Jarosz, 2014 discourse, food security, food sovereignty discourses Not just the price of food: challenges of an Kato, 2013 urban agriculture organization in engaging local residents Knowd, et al., 2006 Urban agriculture: the new frontier urban agriculture, sustainability, strategic resource, planning Edible backyards: a qualitative study of Kortright & Wakefield, 2011 household food growing and its contributions home gardening, household food production, urban agriculture, community food security to food security Diversified farming systems: an agroecology, ecological diversification, food justice, food sovereignty, industrialized Kremen, et al., 2012 agroecological, systems-based alternative to agriculture modern industrial agriculture Local food practices and growing potential: Kremer & DeLiberty, 2011 local food systems, urban food systems, GIS, remote sensing, Philadelphia mapping the case of Philadelphia La Trobe & Acott, 2000 Localising the global food system sustainability, globalisation, agriculture, organic farming, direct marketing Food policy for the 21st century: can it be both Lang, 1999 radical and reasonable? Lee, 2000 Urban agriculture An obsolete dichotomy? Rethinking the rural- Lerner & Eakin, 2011 urban interface in terms of food security and peri-urban, food security, livelihoods, urban agriculture, developing world production in the global south Learning democracy through food justice Canada, community gardens, democracy, food justice, grassroots organizations, poverty, Levkoe, 2006 movements social movements, Toronto, transformative learning The future of urban agriculture and food security, urban planning, vegetation complexity, agricultural management, gardens, Lin, et al., 2015 biodiversity-ecosystem services: challenges green space and next steps urban food planning, urban agriculture, urban gardening, food systems, public Luokkala, 2014 Food and urban gardening in planning participation, urban forms, sustainability Urban agriculture under threat: the land Lynch, et al., 2001 urban agriculture, Kano, Nigeria, land tenure, security security question in Kano, Nigeria Food in the city: urban food movements and Lyons, et al., 2013 , food politics, Melbourne, urban agriculture, urban food movements the (re)-imaging of urban spaces Working toward a just, equitable, and local Macias, 2008 food system: the social impact of community- based agriculture Cities of the future: urban agriculture in the Madaleno, 2001 third millennium Municipal food strategies and integrated Mansfield & Mendes, 2013 approaches to urban agriculture: exploring three cases from the global north Food for urban spaces: the development of Martin & Marsden, 1999 urban food production in England and Wales REFERENCE TITLE KEY WORDS The emergence of urban agriculture: Sydney, Mason & Knowd, 2010 food systems, planning, sustainability, urbanization, urban agriculture Australia Highest and best use?: access to urban land Maxwell, 1996 for semi-subsistence food production Poverty and sustainable cities in South Africa: May & Rogerson, 1995 the role of urban cultivation Why farm the city? Theorizing urban McClintock, 2010 alienation, commodification, the commons, metabolism, scale, urban farming agriculture through a lens of metabolic rift Radical, reformist, and garden-variety alternative food networks, community gardens, neoliberalism, Polanyi, urban agriculture, McClintock, 2014 neoliberal: coming to terms with urban urban farming agriculture's contradictions How does your garden grow? Environmental McIlvaine-Newsad & Porter, 2013 justice aspects of community gardens Community food security via urban agriculture: understanding people, place, community food security, community gardens, food access, food deserts, food justice, Meenar & Hoover, 2012 economy, and accessibility from a food justice GIS, Philadelphia, post-industrial cities, urban agriculture perspective Zoned out: the potential of urban agriculture Mees & Stone, 2012 community gardens, urban agriculture, zoning, public land use, open space planning to turn against its roots Growing Buffalo's capacity for local food: a Metcalf & Widener, 2011 systems framework for sustainable agriculture Mies, 2005 The subsistence perspective Everyday (in)justices and ordinary environmental justice, community gardening, ordinary environmentalisms, everyday Milbourne, 2012 environmentalisms: community gardening in spaces, urban, UK disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods Urban agriculture and poverty reduction: evaluating how food production in cities Mkwambisi, et al., 2011 Malawi, urban agriculture, food security, gender, employment, poverty contributes to food security, employment and income in Malawi Strawberry fields forever? Urban agriculture in Mok, et al., 2014 city, food, garden, high-income country, horticulture, vegetable developed countries: a review Feeding the city: the challenge of urban food Morgan, 2009 planning Nourishing the city: the rise of the urban food Morgan, 2015 food, political ecology, security, sustainability, urbanisation question in the Global North For self-reliant cities: urban food production in Mougeot, 1999 a globalizing South Urban agriculture: definition, presence, Mougeot, 2000 potentials and risks Background material for the action plan on National Food Administration, 2005 healthy dietary habits and increased physical activity Nordic nutrition recommendations 2012. Part Nordic Council of Ministers, 2013 1: Summary, principles and use (p.18-21) REFERENCE TITLE KEY WORDS Eco-localisation as a progressive response to North, 2010 peak oil and climate change - a sympathetic globalisation, localisation, , peak oil, climate change, scale critique The impact of urban agriculture on the Nugent, 2000 household and local economies Ohri-Vachaspati, et al., 2009 City Fresh: a local collaboration for food equity Urban agriculture in the developing world: a biodiversity, food and nutrition security, food city supply, agriculture and food systems, Orsini, et al., 2013 review simplified hydroponics, urban agriculture, water and waste management Sustainable urban agriculture: stocktake and Pearson, et al., 2010 economic, institutions, legal, resilience, scale, social opportunities Toward a reconceptualization of the "urban" globalization, hyphenated identities, multi-stranded field, spatio-temporal relations, Pemunta & Obara, 2012 and "rural" as conceptual and analytical urban, rural, urban-ruralism, rural-urbanism categories in the social sciences Placing the food system on the urban agenda: Pothukuchi & Kaufman, 1999 the role of municipal institutions in food food systems, municipal policy, urban planning systems planning The food system: a stranger to the planning Pothukuchi & Kaufman, 2000 field Cultivating citizenship, equity, and social Poulsen, 2016 inclusion? Putting civic agriculture into practice urban agriculture, alternative food, food citizenship, food equity through urban farming Combining social justice and sustainability for Power, 1999 food security Disparity despite diversity: social injustice in action research, alternative food movements, critical race theory, social justice, racial Reynolds, 2015 New York City's urban agriculture system justice, urban agriculture Saed, 2012 Urban farming: the right to what sort of city?

Resolving differing stakeholder perceptions of urban rooftop farming in Mediterranean cities: Sanyé-Mengual, et al., 2016 rooftop farming, rooftop , urban self-sufficiency, local production promoting food production as a driver for innovative forms of urban agriculture Right to food, right to the city: household Shillington, 2013 urban agriculture, and socionatural metabolism urban socionatural metabolism, rights to the city, urban agriculture, Managua, Nicaragua in Managua, Nicaragua "Food industries" (p. 58) in Going local: Shuman, 2000 creating self-reliant communities in a global age Urban agriculture, gender and empowerment: Slater, 2001 an alternative view Urban agriculture for sustainable cities: using Smit & Nasr, 1992 wastes and idle land and water bodies as resources Feeding the city: towards a new research and Sonnino, 2009 planning agenda REFERENCE TITLE KEY WORDS The new geography of food security: exploring Sonnino, 2016 food security, urban food strategies, local food systems, policy analysis the potential of urban food strategies Urban agriculture of the future: an overview of food system, urban innovation, multifunctional landscape, integrated building, rooftop Specht, et al., 2014 sustainability aspects of food production in and greenhouse, zero acreage, sustainability, Zfarming on buildings Zero-acreage farming in the city of Berlin: an urban agriculture, innovation, participatory approach, rooftop greenhouse, key informant Specht, et al., 2015 aggregated stakeholder perspective on interviews potential benefits and challenges Excerpts from the SSNC - Swedish Society for SSNC, 2013 Nature Conservation What are the impacts of urban agriculture Stewart, et al., 2013 programs on food security in low and middle- urban agriculture, food security, nutrition, impact, systematic review, urbanisation income countries? Making local planning work for urban Thibert, 2012 agriculture in the North American context: a land use, sustainability planning, urban agriculture view from the ground Urban agriculture and ecological citizenship in urban agriculture, ecological citizenship, inclusion, participation, social and democratic Travaline & Hunold, 2010 Philadelphia learning Eating energy: identifying possibilities for Wallgren & Höjer, 2009 reduced energy use in the future of food future food, energy, backcasting supply system Food justice movements: policy, planning, and food justice movements, Toronto Food Policy Council, foodshare, official plans, citizen Wekerle, 2004 networks planning Whitford, 2009 Can farming save Detroit? Wittman, et al., 2010 The origins & potential of food sovereignty World Fair Trade Organization and Fairtrade Labelling Organizations A charter of fair trade principles International, 2009 Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security: Zezza & Tasciotti, 2010 empirical evidence from a sample of urban agriculture, food security, poverty, nutrition, household surveys developing countries

TRITA TRITA-SEED-EX 2017:09

www.kth.se