Strategies (beyond food charters) for developing meaningful food policy: Experiences from Waterloo...

Strategies (beyond food charters) for developing meaningful food policy: Experiences from Waterloo Region

Steffanie Scott, Ellen Desjardins, Krista Long

Bring Food Home conference Windsor w Nov 2013

Food Systems Thinking: “…to shift system dynamics to promote a wide range

of improvements…” (MacRae & Donahue, 2013, Municipal food policy entrepreneurs: a preliminary analysis of how

Canadian cities and regional districts are involved in food system change)

Key characteris,c: Citizen engagement & participation in policy making

1.   Collabora)on: “a full range of actors to design interven2ons and leverage resources…”

2.   Adap)ve governance: “linking actors to broader levels of government to tackle complex issues…”

Outline

1.  Collabora)on !  2007: Roundtable established

2.  Adap)ve governance -‐ Municipal policies in Waterloo Region that support a healthier food system: !  2009: Regional Official Plan (2010,11 – Waterloo & Cambridge plans) !  2013: Food Charter

3.  Ac)ons on food policy !  Gap analysis, unearthing suppor)ve and unsuppor)ve policies !  Planning for policy changes at municipal level

4.  Conclusion & discussion: The on-‐going importance of “food systems thinking” to ensure progress

1. Food Systems Thinking in Waterloo Region

citizen engagement & participation in policy making

•  collaboration

•  adaptive governance

Food system stakeholders in Waterloo Region (focus groups in 2006)

feeders/producers

processors distributors retailers eaters/consumers

small and large scale

CSAs

advocacy groups, food programs

Public Health (community capacity building, inspection,

education)

Elmira produce auction

urban agriculture

farmers markets & neighbourhood markets (smaller)

emergency food distribution

Planners (zoning, bylaws, regulation)

institutional purchasers

advocates, academics, media, marketing boards, brokers, promoters (e.g. Foodlink)


farmers and farm orgs



Desjardins & ScoO 2007

Waterloo Region Food System Roundtable: 2007

www.wrfoodsystem.ca

2. Food Systems Thinking in Waterloo Region

citizen engagement & participation in policy making

•  collaboration

•  adaptive governance o  Regional official plan

o  Food charter

(a) Waterloo Regional Official Plan (ROP) www.region.waterloo.on.ca/newrop

Unprecedented food-related policies

White = urban Brown line = Countryside line (still contested)

Yellow = rural Green = Protected Countryside

ROP policies supporting a healthy food system:

www.smartgrowthwaterloo.ca

Food-‐‑related land use planning: rural

Food-‐‑related land use planning: urban

Jon’s produce and bakery

(b) Waterloo Region Food Charter 2013

Because we believe in fair, environmentally sustainable, livable, and economically profitable rural and urban communi,es: …we support connec,ng people to our local food system …we support community economic development …we support access to healthy food …we support ecological health …we support integrated food policies at all levels of government

-‐ Officially endorsed by Waterloo Regional Council in April 2013

Poli,cians supported the Charter (adap2ve governance) because of links with key community stakeholders (collabora2on): a.  The Food System Roundtable had consulted extensively with the

community, incorpora,ng feedback and input into the draP Charter

b.  The Charter emphasized an enhanced local food economy

c.  The Waterloo Federa,on of Agriculture (WFA) indicated their support

d.  A local poli,cian (council chair) consequently championed the Charter at the municipal government level

Waterloo Region Food Charter 2013

3 . Food Systems Thinking in Waterloo Region

Ac)ons on food policy First step:

!  Policy gap analysis: unearthing suppor)ve and unsuppor)ve

policies

Next steps:

Building more community engagement

around the food charter

Improving the municipal policy base

Waterloo Region: 3 cities 4 rural townships

(a) “Suppor,ng Advocacy on Municipal Official Plans” Report #1 by Krista Long, Waterloo Region 2012

Gap Analysis: Regional + 7 Municipal Official Plan Policies

•  Access to affordable healthy food

& local food infrastructure •  Urban agriculture •  Several other health-‐related areas -‐ e.g., walkability

See http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/phreports

Gap Analysis of ROP + 7 Municipal Official Plan Policies

1.  Access to affordable healthy food & local food infrastructure

Action areas ROP (Regional Official Plan)

City & Township municipalities (7)

Ensure affordable and nutri,ous food for all residents (food retail)

Strong support

2 strong 3 weak

Land use designa,ons for small-‐scale food processing facili)es and distribu,on centres for locally produced food

none none

Support small-‐scale food-‐based home industries (food processing)

none none

Gap Analysis of ROP + 3 Municipal Official Plan Policies

2. Urban agriculture

Action areas ROP (Regional Official Plan)

Cities (3)

Permit community gardens in all land use designa,ons

Strong support

Waterloo, Cambridge strong,

Kitchener weak Iden)fy lands close to residen,al and community use areas for community gardens

none None

Provide infrastructure support for community gardens

Strong City of Waterloo only

Include urban agriculture in city’s managed open space strategy

Strong Waterloo & Kitchener strong, Cambridge weak

Permit urban beekeeping, hens None Cambridge (weak)

(b) “Planning Food Friendly Municipalities” Report #2 by Krista Long, Waterloo Region 2012

Focus on 2 strategies that have potential for effective change:

Food Friendly Cities

Community Gardens

Temporary Farmers Markets

“Friendly” for both eaters and retailers

See http://www.wrfoodsystem.ca/phreports

Types of Municipal Policies and Supports

Food Friendly Cities

Community Gardens


Land Use Policies

Zoning By-‐‑laws

Community Garden Policy, Action Plans, Strategies

Licensing Incentives Business Supports

e.g., Temporary Farmers Markets

The Directive: Regional Official Plan (Land Use Policies)

•  The region directs area municipali4es to ensure development

facilitates residents’ access to locally grown and other healthy foods in neighbourhoods. [2.D.1 (g)]

•  The region directs area municipali4es to permit temporary farmers’ markets, in exis,ng and newly planned neighbourhoods [3.F.2]


The Reality: By-laws variations by municipality

•  Kitchener permits markets in Commercial, Downtown, Commercial

Residen,al, Industrial and Ins,tu,onal zones

•  Waterloo permits markets in General Business, Neighbourhood Commercial and Commercial Zones

•  Cambridge permits markets (“food stands”) in most commercial zones

•  Wilmot permits markets (“food stands”) in all commercial zones

•  North Dumfries does not permit temporary markets at all

Variation in Municipal Code (Licensing) for temporary markets

Municipality Licence Fee

Kitchener Farm Vendor License Temporary Retail Market License

$148 $496 (3 days)

Waterloo Outdoor Vending License $250 + business license ($300)

Cambridge Outdoor Vendor Permit $60 + business license ($60)

Woolwich Business Licensing By-‐‑law N/A

Wellesley N/A

Wilmot N/A

North Dumfries Vendor By-‐‑law No fee

Next steps: Advocating for Food Friendly Municipalities

•  Stronger, more consistent supports for temporary farmers’ markets "  PermiYed in all land use zones

"  Promoted as a Local Economic Development ini)a)ve

"  Supported as an accessory use with convenience stores

"  Licensing fees standardized and simplified across the Region

•  Stronger, more consistent supports for community gardens "  PermiYed in all land use zones, with resource support

"  Pro-‐ac)vely encouraged by iden)fying lands where gardens could be developed

"  Normalized as public spaces for health, inclusion and learning

Next steps

Create a Regional Food Strategy that illustrates feasible steps to opera,onalize the Food Charter, in collabora,on with all relevant stakeholders

•  e.g., Develop guidelines for markets and other small local food retailers and processors to create businesses that are profitable and accepted in the community, and contribute to healthy, walkable food access in all neighbourhoods

•  e.g., Develop a toolkit for naviga)ng the licensing bureaucracies to facilitate successful small-‐scale food entrepreneurs

What we see: The proximal food environment

What we don’t see: Food-‐‑related municipal by-‐‑laws, licensing rules,

land use policies, institutional policies

What we see: Protected superstores, food deserts, fast food outlets, packaged food of unknown origin, lack of entrepreneurial opportunities

What we don’t see: Food-‐‑related municipal by-‐‑laws, licensing rules,

land use and institutional policies

Must be

exposed as

the

foundation

of

current urb

an

food

environment

# Municipal governance driven by corporate interests #

What we should see: Widely accessible small to mid-‐‑size food retail, direct-‐‑marketing venues,

focus on local seasonal food.

What we can collectively develop: Food-‐‑related municipal by-‐‑laws, licensing rules, land use and institutional policies that nourish

a healthy food environment

# Municipal governance influenced by citizen engagement #

Conclusion:

Enacting food systems transformation requires:

Citizen engagement and participation in policy making through:

1.  Collaboration ...different sectors working and planning together

2.  Adaptive governance

…ac)ve, on-‐going advocacy at the municipal government level using data, success stories and awareness building

Strategies (beyond food charters) for developing meaningful food policy: Experiences from Waterloo...

Business

Transcript of Strategies (beyond food charters) for developing meaningful food policy: Experiences from Waterloo...