Download - DiDomenica slides (4-12-15)
Food Policy: Urban Farmingas a Supplemental Food Source
PhD Dissertation Oral Defenseby
Bessie DiDomenica, MBASchool of Public Policy and Administration
Walden University April 17, 2015, 8am (EST)
Acknowledgements
Committee Chair: Dr. Mark Gordon
Second Committee Member: Dr. Anthony Leisner
URR: Dr. Linda Day
Program Director: Dr. George R. Larkin
04/18/233
Fruit Stall in a Market in Barcelona, Spain
Source: www.commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fruit_Stall_in_Barcelona_Market.jpg
04/18/234
Agenda
1. Problem & Purpose 7. Limits of the Study
2. Research Question 8. Recommendations
3. Literature Review 9. Implications 4. Data Collection 10. Social
Change5. Data Analysis (2) 11.
Conclusions6. Findings (5) 12. Q & A
04/18/235
Problem and Purpose Problem: Food systems in many cities are
complex and without a plan for a secondary food
supply(UNFAO, 2011). Population growth and
limited space increase the potential for a food
deficit.
Purpose: To explore food policies that influence urban farms as a secondary food
source.
04/18/236
Research Question
What are the public policy limits and opportunities that support urban farming as a
supplemental food source?
04/18/237
Literature Review Literature review themes:
• “Macro food policy” of food production, distribution, and consumption (Angelo et al.,2011).
• Urban agriculture and local food production (Lutz et al., 2010; Taylor Lovell, 2010).
• Urbanization and land use barriers (Lang, 2010; Morgan, 2009).
04/18/238
Data Collection Methodology: Case study approach
Sample size (20):
• Food and land policy officials (6)• Nonprofit managers and staff (7)• Commercial farmers, social enterprise
(3)• Students and administrators (4)
04/18/239
Data Analysis
Code transcripts, organize data into themes and patterns
Pattern matching for internal reliability,
explanation building, comparison
04/18/2310
Data Analysis Coding: Iterative using HyperResearch software
and manual coding
1st Round: Cursory and extensive list of codes
2nd Round: Categories: Policy & Planning, Agricultural Activities, Outliers
3rd Round: Themes and patterns 4th Round: Three major themes
04/18/2311
Overall Findings
General agreement with literature:
• Alternative food systems, creative partnerships
• New zoning policies for agricultural use of public land
• Political will and community support
04/18/2312
Overall Findings Discrepancies from literature:
• Urban farms were micro farms (¼ acre) not recreational farms (100 acres)
• Organic practices, but not certified organic
• Participants did not use the word “permaculture”
04/18/2313
Findings: Local Food and Land Policy
Public: Design and implement local policy
Nonprofit: Networks and community presence
Private: Active in city’s urban agriculture policies
Academic: Design curriculum and student-run food projects
04/18/2314
Findings: Food Production
Public: Selective funding of urban agriculture projects
Nonprofit: Urban farming was a secondary program
Private: On the ground and above ground agriculture
Academic: Different resources and opportunities to grow food
04/18/2315
Findings: Procurement
Public: Buy from different food producers
Nonprofit: Source food for self and others in social service programs
Private: Source local and nonlocal food
Academic: Procurement partner for large food suppliers
04/18/2316
Limits of the Study Case study approach and small sample size:
• Limited views on the topic • Purposeful sampling
Transferability of the findings:• Depends on community assets• Communities active in urban agriculture
04/18/2317
Recommendations
Ideas for future studies:
1. Design a database of best practices
2. Create a pilot project for an urban farm start up
3. Explore a network of specialized urban farms
04/18/2318
Implications Organizational: Support collaborationsMentor and share ideas between different
types of farmers
Theoretical: Food policies for different urban agriculture practicesFood policies based on the unique qualities ofurban agriculture
04/18/2319
Implications for Social Change Describes the influence of food policies on an urban food system, and the challenges and opportunities in urban agriculture.
Creates an awareness that urban farms may already exist as a secondary food source.
04/18/2320
Conclusions Key conclusions:
• Urban farms are evolving, need a centralized infrastructure
• Policy solutions in permitting, crop specialties
• Stakeholders are passionate and frustrated
• Local foods cannot feed large urban populations
04/18/2321
ReferencesAngelo, M. J., Timbers, A., Walker, M. J., Donabedia, J. B., & Van Noble, D. (2011). Small,
slow, and local: Essays on building a more sustainable and local food system: small, slow, and local. Vermont Journal of Environmental Law, 12(2), 353-378.
Lutz, A. E., Swisher, M. E., & Brennan, M. A. (2010). Defining community food security. University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Retrieved from http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/WC/WC06400.pdf
Morgan, K. (2009). Feeding the city: The challenge of urban food planning. International Planning Studies, 14(4), 341-348. doi:10.1080/13563471003642852
Taylor Lovell, S. (2010). Multifunctional urban agriculture for sustainable land use planning in the United States. Sustainability, 2(8), 2499-2522. doi:10.3390/su2082499
United Nations Food & Agriculture. (2011). 2011 The state of food insecurity in the world: How does international price volatility affect domestic economies and food security? (FAO Corporate Document Repository No. 978-92-5-106927-1 ISBN) (p. 55). Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/i2330e/i2330e00.htmWikimedia Commons. (2012).
Wikimedia Commons. (2012). Retrieved from http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fruit,Vegetables_and_Grain_NCI_Visuals_Online.jpg
04/18/2322
THANK YOU!
Source:www.google.com/imgres
04/18/2323
Questions and
Answers