Integrating urban and peri-urban agriculture into urban planning

and policy making

Ir. Marielle Dubbeling m.dubbeling@ruaf.org

Director RUAF Foundation

www.ruaf.org

RUAF Foundation: A global centre of expertise on Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture and City Regional Food Systems (since 1998; not for profit)

Main fields of activity: A. Research (policy and action oriented) B. Policy advice; multi-stakeholder planning C. Project design, implementation and evaluation D. Capacity development

Different types of urban and peri-urban agriculture! -Different scales -Different objectives -Different planning instruments

1. Lower-investment small/medium scale production for home consumption and supplementary marketing

-front / back yards -open spaces in the city -rooftops; low-space growing containers

2. Small and medium social enterprises/ value chains for income and job creation -open private and public spaces -peri-urban areas -areas for input supply, processing and sales

3. Multi-functional (ecological) agriculture promoting next to food production other functions such as recreation, education, land scape management -green open spaces (intra-urban, peri- urban)

4. Agro-clusters with a number of mutually complimentary (indoor) agricultural enterprises (poultry, pigs, mushrooms, greenhouse vegetables, aquaculture), for high production and closing cycles (CO2, heat, re-use of waste-products) -located close to processing and transport companies in harbours and industrial areas -located close to energy/ waste industries

Need for a zoning of urban agriculture: what type of UPAF to promote where and

for what purposes

Need for a matching planning approach

Need for appropriate planning instruments:

Building codes, plot design, land use zoning, land use plans

Zoning of urban and peri-urban agriculture City zone: A = Inner city; B= Sub urban (less densely built up); C:= Peri-urban (mainly open spaces)

City zone Type of UPAF Mitigation benefits Adaptation

benefits

Trade offs

A Promotion of backyard and

community gardening Reduction of waste

volumes due to on the

spot composting

Diversification food

and income sources

Consumer transport

distances for buying

food.

A

Promotion of green

productive rooftops Lese energy sued for

heating and cooling

Potential effect on

biodiversity (niche

species; birds)

Choice of production

technologies and

inputs required

(energy costs)

A-B Promoting food and

biomass production (agro-

forestry) in flood zones and

other urban open spaces

Carbon storage and

sequestration

Enhanced water

retention capacity

and reduced run off

Seasonality of

production

Production

technologies used

B-C Promoting forestry and

agro-forestry Reduced urban heat

island

Less incidence of

land slides

Degree of

combination with

food production

Choice of species

B-C Protecting and promoting

agriculture in city

fringes/peri-urban areas

Less

energy/emissions in

food transport/storage

Enhanced

resilience/ less

dependent on food

imports

Production

technologies used

Degree of

waste/energy re-

use

Casablanca, Morocco

Beijing, China

• Strips of urban forests along

all major roads to reduce

urban heat, dust, CO2 and

winds

• Promotion of various types of

multi-functional agriculture

(enterprise and community

based)

• Strict protection of agricultural

land within city region /

Increased investment in sub-

& peri-urban agriculture

•

•

Intra urban: green spaces/parks, agro-

exhibitions, allotment gardens

Sub-urban: sightseeing, agro-parks,

eco-education, landscape management

Plains: intensive high tech agriculture

and livestock keeping

Mountainous areas: village based

agro-tourism, ecological protection,

cultural heritage

Matching urban planning approach -Double track planning: physical and green infrastructure are designed in parallel; agriculture integral part of urban planning -City region focus in urban development planning -Leading image: Several compact built up areas intertwined with multi-functional productive landscapes (green wedges, corridors, greenbelts, protected watersheds, etcetera)

Building codes (USA: rooftop

gardens; Bangalore: rainwater harvesting; Kampala: growing on walls)

Plot design (Amman) Temporal user right agreements

(Amsterdam) Integration in slum

upgrading/social housing programmes (Antananarivo, Colombo)

Fiscal and tax incentives (Governador Valadares)

Land identification and land bank (Rosario)

Appropriate planning instruments

Zoning/ preservation (Beijing,

Freetown) Integration in master and urban

development plans (Sana’a : greenbelt; Amman: Master Plan; Toronto: parks plan)

Creating the legal, operational and financial framework for coordinated actions re. food and agriculture (Bulawayo, Toronto)

Appropriate planning instruments

• Further inclusion of UPAF in city climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction plans • Linking land security to financing (loan guarantees; community land trusts) • Raising land (m2) / space (m3) rent of agricultural production • Supporting research on appropriate technologies for UPA, while reducing health risks • Enhancing participatory planning and design

Challenges

Joint ICLEI / RUAF initiative; launched at the Resilient Urban Food Systems Forum, Bonn June 2013 CITYFOOD intends to establish: -CityHub: Cities presenting their UPA and food policies/ programmes and the results thereof –Community of Practice: Practitioners share experiences; mutual assistance and review -On line Compendium: fact sheets, business models, guidelines and tools, on line library -Training and technical support services -City-to-City exchanges -International awareness raising and lobbying

Contact: m.dubbeling@ruaf.org; alice.balbo@iclei.org http://resilient-cities.iclei.org/fileadmin/sites/resilient-cities/files/Frontend_user/RUFS_2013_CITYFOOD_12pages_FINAL_hq.pdf

CITYFOOD: linking cities on urban agriculture and food systems

www.ruaf.org

THANK YOU