Closing the loop by Kato Allaert

university college london faculty of the built environment bartlett school of planning Major project:

Closing the loop: How food localization contributes to the sustainability of settlements +

Kato Allaert

BSc Urban and Regional Planning

Being a Major Project in Sustainable Urbanism submitted to the faculty of The Built Environment as part of the requirements for the award of the MSc Sustainable Urbanism at University College London, I declare that this project is entirely my own work and that ideas, data and images, as well as direct quotations, drawn from elsewhere are identified and referenced.

August 30, 2013

Word count: 8586 words

Acknowledgement I would like to thank the many people that have supported me while undertaking my Major Research Project. First of all, my project supervisor Iqbal Hamiduddin, who was always available for a chat and firmly guided me throughout the process. Furthermore, my personal tutor Yvonne Rydin, my course director Catalina Turcu and my project coordinator Filipa Wunderlich: Thank you for the inspiring lectures and tutorials and the invaluable guidance throughout the year. Additionally, the continuous advice and support of my fellow students, friends and family has been very important to me during the completing of my project. Thank you all.

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

Content Acknowledgement............................................................................................................................................................ ii

4 Project.......................................................................................................................................................................... 16

Content............................................................................................................................................................................. iii

4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 16

Figures............................................................................................................................................................................... iv

4.2 Regional site analysis...................................................................................................................................... 17

Tables................................................................................................................................................................................ v

4.3 Core: Zurenborg............................................................................................................................................. 18

Abstract............................................................................................................................................................................. vi

4.3.1 Site analysis....................................................................................................................................... 18

1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................... 1

4.3.2 Implementation of toolkit................................................................................................................ 19

1.1 Unsustainable food systems............................................................................................................................ 1

4.3.3 Spatial dynamics............................................................................................................................... 20

1.2 Objectives and research questions.................................................................................................................. 1

4.3.4 Design elements............................................................................................................................... 21

1.4 Value added.......................................................................................................................................................2

4.3.5 Closing the loop................................................................................................................................ 23

1.5 Structure........................................................................................................................................................... 2

4.4 Fringe: Mortsel............................................................................................................................................... 24

1.6 Methods........................................................................................................................................................... 2

4.4.1 Site analysis....................................................................................................................................... 24

2 Literature and case study review................................................................................................................................... 3

4.4.2 Implementation of toolkit................................................................................................................ 25

2.1 Food localization.............................................................................................................................................. 3

4.4.3 Spatial dynamics............................................................................................................................... 26

2.2 Typologies of current food localization systems.............................................................................................. 3

4.4.4 Design elements............................................................................................................................... 27

2.3 Is local food best?............................................................................................................................................. 4

4.4.5 Closing the loop................................................................................................................................ 28

2.4 Benefits of food localization............................................................................................................................. 4

4.5 Periphery: Kontich.......................................................................................................................................... 29

2.5 Criteria for sustainable food localization......................................................................................................... 6

4.5.1 Site analysis....................................................................................................................................... 29

2.6 Case study analysis........................................................................................................................................... 7

4.5.2 Implementation of toolkit................................................................................................................ 30

2.6.1 Incredible Edible Todmorden (UK)..................................................................................................... 7

4.5.3 Spatial dynamics............................................................................................................................... 31

2.6.2 Skinner City Farm (US)........................................................................................................................ 8

4.5.4 Design elements............................................................................................................................... 32

2.6.3 Het Open Veld (BE)............................................................................................................................. 9

4.5.5 Closing the loop................................................................................................................................ 33

2.6.4 Stroud Community Agriculture (UK)................................................................................................ 10

4.6 Rural hinterland: Sint-Katelijne-Waver.......................................................................................................... 34

2.6.5 Georg Schmälzle (DE)....................................................................................................................... 11

4.6.1 Site analysis....................................................................................................................................... 34

2.6.6 Findings............................................................................................................................................. 12

4.6.2 Implementation of toolkit................................................................................................................ 35

3 Framework for sustainable food localization.............................................................................................................. 13

4.6.3 Spatial dynamics............................................................................................................................... 36

3.1 Gap................................................................................................................................................................. 13

4.6.4 Design elements............................................................................................................................... 37

3.2 Design principles to close the loop................................................................................................................ 14

4.6.5 Closing the loop................................................................................................................................ 38 4.7 Overview local loop interventions................................................................................................................. 39 4.8 Regional loop design...................................................................................................................................... 40 5 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................................... 42 References...................................................................................................................................................................... 44

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

iii

Figures Figure 1 Disembedded food system........................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Figure 38 Project site location.................................................................................................................................................................................. 18

Figure 2 Embedded food system................................................................................................................................................................................ 1

Figure 43 Dageraadplaats, central square in Zurenborg.......................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 3 Strong sustainability. .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Figure 40 Aerial view of Zurenborg.......................................................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 5 Disembedded food system........................................................................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 41 Road, rail and cycle infrastructure of Zurenborg..................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 4 Embedded food system................................................................................................................................................................................ 3

Figure 36 Terraced housing with gardens................................................................................................................................................................ 18

Figure 6 Criteria for sustainable food localization...................................................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 37 Three to four storeys and pitched roofs................................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 10 Campaign logo........................................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Figure 39 Current local food system in Zurenborg................................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 7 Learning points from Incredible Edible Todmorden.................................................................................................................................... 7

Figure 42 Elements of the local food system........................................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 9 Cemetery garden in Todmorden.................................................................................................................................................................. 7

Figure 44 Local food system in Zurenborg............................................................................................................................................................... 20

Figure 8 Analysis of local food system: Incredible Edible Todmorden....................................................................................................................... 7

Figure 45 Local food hub.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 21

Figure 14 Skinner City Farm logo................................................................................................................................................................................ 8

Figure 46 Growing bench with harvest flags............................................................................................................................................................ 21

Figure 11 Learning points from Skinner City Farm..................................................................................................................................................... 8

Figure 47 Food and waste carrier............................................................................................................................................................................. 21

Figure 13 Composting at Skinner City Farm............................................................................................................................................................... 8

Figure 48 Local food hub at Dageraadplaats............................................................................................................................................................ 22

Figure 12 Analysis of local food system: Skinner City Farm....................................................................................................................................... 8

Figure 49 Current local food system in Zurenborg................................................................................................................................................... 23

Figure 15 Learning points from Het Open Veld.......................................................................................................................................................... 9

Figure 50 Project site location.................................................................................................................................................................................. 24

Figure 17 Harvesting at Het Open Veld...................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Figure 57 Mortsel Stadsplein.................................................................................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 16 Analysis of local food system: Het Open Veld............................................................................................................................................ 9

Figure 51 Clearly defined public streets and private backyards.............................................................................................................................. 24

Figure 21 The farm.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Figure 54 Aerial view of Mortsel.............................................................................................................................................................................. 24

Figure 18 Learning points from Stroud Community Agriculture............................................................................................................................. 10

Figure 55 Road, rail and cycle infrastructure of Mortsel......................................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 20 Planting at the farm.................................................................................................................................................................................. 10

Figure 52 Mix of housing typologies........................................................................................................................................................................ 24

Figure 19 Analysis of local food system: Stroud Community Agriculture................................................................................................................ 10

Figure 53 Current local food system in Mortsel....................................................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 24 Logo and slogan........................................................................................................................................................................................ 11

Figure 56 Elements of the local food system........................................................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 22 Learning points from Georg Schmälzle.................................................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 58 Local food system in Mortsel. .................................................................................................................................................................. 26

Figure 23 Analysis of local food system: Georg Schmälzle....................................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 59 Public DIY bike repair station ................................................................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 25 Synthesis of results from case study analysis........................................................................................................................................... 12

Figure 62 Harvest information panel........................................................................................................................................................................ 27

Figure 26 Transformation from disembedded and current embedded food systems to sustainable embedded food system............................. 13

Figure 63 Farm route information panel.................................................................................................................................................................. 27

Figure 29 Main direction of food and waste transport............................................................................................................................................ 14

Figure 64 Local food hub at Mortsel Stadsplein....................................................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 28 Interlinking the local and regional scale................................................................................................................................................... 14

Figure 60 Wayfinding to farms and cycle routes...................................................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 30 Toolkit of design principles for the local loop.......................................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 61 Market square with stalls under the roof................................................................................................................................................ 27

Figure 31 Overview of project sites.......................................................................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 65 Current local food system in Mortsel....................................................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 32 Horticulture in Flanders............................................................................................................................................................................ 16

Figure 70 Project site location.................................................................................................................................................................................. 29

Figure 35 Existing infrastructure and types of urban form in the region around Antwerp.................................................................................... 17

Figure 73 Cycle highway and transport hub in Kontich............................................................................................................................................ 29

Figure 33 Conceptual diagram of region.................................................................................................................................................................. 17

Figure 68 Aerial view of Kontich............................................................................................................................................................................... 29

Figure 34 Overview of the four project sites............................................................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 69 Road, rail and cycle infrastructure of Kontich.......................................................................................................................................... 29

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

Tables Figure 66 Large plots................................................................................................................................................................................................ 29

Table 1 Statistics Zurenborg...................................................................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 67 Detached and semi-detached houses...................................................................................................................................................... 29

Table 2 SWOT analysis of Zurenborg........................................................................................................................................................................ 19

Figure 71 Current local food system in Kontich....................................................................................................................................................... 29

Table 3 Statistics Mortsel.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 24

Figure 72 Elements of the local food system........................................................................................................................................................... 29

Table 4 SWOT analysis of Mortsel............................................................................................................................................................................ 25

Figure 74 Local food system in Kontich. .................................................................................................................................................................. 31

Table 5 Statistics Kontich.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 29

Figure 75 Food hub as box scheme pick-up point.................................................................................................................................................... 32

Table 6 SWOT analysis of Kontich............................................................................................................................................................................. 30

Figure 76 Food hub as local food market................................................................................................................................................................. 32

Table 7 Statistics Sint-Katelijne-Waver...................................................................................................................................................................... 34

Figure 79 Food hub at Kontich station..................................................................................................................................................................... 32

Table 8 SWOT analysis of Sint-Katelijne-Waver........................................................................................................................................................ 35

Figure 77 Cargo bike loaded with food boxes.......................................................................................................................................................... 32

Table 9 Regional loop of the local food system........................................................................................................................................................ 41

Figure 78 BioVelo delivering food by bike in Karlsruhe............................................................................................................................................ 32 Figure 80 Current local food system in Kontich....................................................................................................................................................... 33 Figure 86 Project site location.................................................................................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 88 Rural landscape in Sint-Katelijne-Waver................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 83 Aerial view of Sint-Katelijne-Waver.......................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 84 Road and rail infrastructure of Sint-Katelijne-Waver............................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 81 Large front and back yards....................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 82 Detached houses...................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 87 Current local food system in Sint-Katelijne-Waver................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 85 Elements of the local food system........................................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 89 Local food system in Sint-Katelijne-Waver................................................................................................................................................ 36 Figure 90 Food hub as box scheme pick-up point.................................................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 91 Food hub as local food market................................................................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 93 Food hub at Sint-Katelijne-Waver station................................................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 92 Horticultural route.................................................................................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 94 Current local food system in Sint-Katelijne-Waver................................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 96 Distribution hierarchy............................................................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 95 Add-on of food system infrastructure to existing infrastructure networks............................................................................................. 40 Figure 97 Sustainable local food labelling................................................................................................................................................................ 40

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

Abstract Food systems currently account for 29 per cent of global carbon emissions. The majority originates in food production, but the share caused by processing, distribution and disposal is growing. To address this, food systems are examined using the approach of food localization. The research questions are: How can food localization contribute to the sustainability of settlements? How can a sustainable food system be implemented? A thorough review of academic and professional work on food systems and sustainability clarifies that benefits of local food systems go beyond reducing emissions: food localization has a positive effect on health and well-being, the local economy, the environment and connections between people and food. A case study of five local food systems uncovers distribution and disposal as weak links regarding sustainable food localization. To address this gap in research and close the loop, a toolkit of design principles is developed and applied to four projects sites, distinguished by urban form, within one region. At the core, a compact solution for a gardening shed, transformable into a workshop space, is designed. In the fringe, objects guiding people to local food are planned. In the periphery and the rural hinterland, a network of food distribution and disposal is proposed around a transport hub, in the latter combined with tourism facilities. On the regional level, existing infrastructure like railways and cycle highways is used to handle distribution and disposal of local food. The designs represent solutions for a general problem, not a site-specific one. The toolkit of design principles offers straightforward methods for implementing sustainable local food systems. By using the concept of closing the loop, a holistic perspective is secured. The implementation of food localization is an exemplar of strong sustainability as it sparks off a wide array of benefits for people and the environment.

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

1 Introduction 1.1 Unsustainable food systems

not only a huge change in people’s minds, but also in infrastructure and

1.3 Scope

Food systems, the process of producing, processing, distributing and

logistics. Therefore, growing, processing, distributing and consuming food

This project acknowledges the reality of climate change and it examines,

disposing of food, currently account for 29 per cent of global carbon

locally faces many difficulties.

within this reality, the environmental, social and economic problems linked

emissions. The majority of emissions originate in food production, with

to food systems. It covers embedded and disembedded food systems and

approximately 80 per cent, but the share of emissions caused by processing,

attempts to give an idea of the complexity of food systems as well as stressing

distribution, disposal and consumption is growing (Stringer, 2012). Food is

1.2 Objectives and research questions

a major resource, like energy and water, needed to run settlements of all

This project aims to investigate how food systems can be made more

kinds and its impact on climate change is huge.

sustainable by using the approach of food localization. To explore the

Sustainability is a contested term with probably as many definitions

challenge of sustainable local food systems, it looks at the benefits of food

as authors that have written about it. In this project, the definition of

Traditionally, cultivation and civilization have been closely integrated. Even

localization and how it can be applied in different types of settlements to

strong sustainability, a model of sustainability where economic and social

the terms that describe those processes, culture and cultivate, are derived

create sustainable food systems. Furthermore, the project aims to set up a

development is nested inside environmental development, is used (see

from the same Latin stem cultus.

system that can be implemented in and adapted to different types of existing

figure 3).

the urgency that is inherent to sustainability and food system issues.

urban form and at the same time develop a method to create awareness Man and corn- it all comes back to that. Cultivation and civilization,

with the consumer. The research questions are formulated as follows:

city and country, paradise and hell: food has always shaped our lives and it always will. Our legacy to those who inherit the earth will be determined by how we eat now - their future lies in our knives and forks and fingers. (Steel, 2009)

environment 1. How can food localization contribute to the sustainability society

of settlements? 2. How can a sustainable local food system be implemented in different types of settlements?

economy

Since the industrial revolution though, disembedded food systems (see figure 1) have been widely implemented. Industrialization of agriculture as well as globalization has led to a clear separation between town

production

processing distribution

disposal

and countryside regarding food production. Urban areas have become increasingly dependent on the rural hinterland (Steel, 2009). The global food system is disembedded to a great extent, leading to social, economic

Figure 3 Strong sustainability. Adapted from Rydin (2010).

Figure 1 Disembedded food system

and environmental externalities for communities all over the world because

Environmental systems play an essential role in supporting social and

“you can’t run a linear system on a finite planet indefinitively” (Leonard,

economic development. No compensation of social and economic

2007). Food localization, the concept of a local food system with proximity

production

between producer and consumer, is increasingly seen as a sustainable

development can really cover the services provided by environmental disposal

systems. This perspective on sustainability urges people to create synergies

alternative to our current food system and a better choice, for people and for

that benefit a number of parties. Win-win situations happen for example

the environment. In fact, food localization is nothing new. For ages, people

when a form of economic development delivers social gains or when green

relied on what was produced in their vicinity, using traditional methods and growing local species. Switching from the current disembedded system to an embedded system (see figure 2) is very challenging, since it requires

Kato Allaert

processing

distribution

Figure 2 Embedded food system

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

growth is stimulated through synergies between economic and environmental development (Rydin, 2010). The project uses this approach and looks at how different benefits of food localization contribute to sustainable development

and have a positive effect, not only on the sustainability of the food system

1.5 Structure

is difficult to generalize the research results. It can also be hard to approach

but also on the sustainability of settlements.

This introduction sets out the topic and its context, the research questions

case studies systematically (Yin, 2009). In this project, the case studies were

with objectives, the scope of the study and its contribution. Furthermore, it

analyzed according to a set of criteria conducted from the literature. This

The project is primarily concerned with how food systems interact with

describes the methods used throughout the project. A literature review of

systemic approach leads to a specific and rigorous outcome that produces

the built environment and existing infrastructure in different types of

academic and professional research is then conducted. Themes of the review

transferable results.

settlements. Regarding local food systems, the focus is on systems that

are food localization, its benefits and sustainability. A thorough analysis of

produce, process and distribute fruit and vegetables, although the general

the literature leads to the formulation of a set of criteria for sustainable food

From the case study analysis, the critical elements in applying sustainable

concept can be extended to other categories of produce. It investigates

localization that are tested on a number of representable case studies. Out

food localization were found to be concerned with distribution and disposal.

what is needed in spatial and logistical terms to set up a sustainable food

of the case study analysis and the literature findings, a framework of design

A framework of design principles for sustainable distribution and disposal

system. The implication is tested in four types of urban form, chosen

principles is formed. After a detailed site analysis, this toolkit is applied to

based on the findings from the literature and case study research was

within a European perspective: core, fringe, periphery and rural hinterland.

four project sites, leading to design proposals. The project concludes with

created to pursue the application on project sites.

Nonetheless, the conclusions and results are transferable to other locations.

an overview of the results and the conclusion of the study. Simultaneously, appropriate sites for the implementation of the design

1.4 Value added

principles were selected. A first scoping narrowed down the search to 1.6 Methods

Flanders in Belgium, because of proximity between food production and

•

Addressing gap in food localization regarding sustainable

The project applies an exploratory approach that touches upon different

different types of settlements. Through a second selection process, the

distribution and disposal

methods to investigate the research questions. This approach is a cyclical

region between Antwerp and Mechelen was chosen because of the

•

Holistic approach to food systems: concept of closing the

process that creates feedback loops between the different elements of the

presence of the four types of urban form (core, fringe, periphery and rural

project, leading to reflection and multifaceted results.

hinterland). Four project sites, each in a different type of urban form were

loop

distilled according to variables like accessibility and population. Fieldwork This project contributes to the growing body of work about sustainable food

After the initial scoping and reading, the problem was defined and research

was carried out to gather a better understanding of the local conditions,

systems and food localization. Academic and professional work has assessed

questions were formulated. This was followed by literature and case study

the urban form and existing food systems. Design proposals were created

the sustainability of global and local food systems and investigated the pros

research. A thorough analysis of the academic and professional literature

according to what is needed on the site to support a sustainable local food

and cons. The contribution of this project is unique in the way it integrates

was performed and findings were distilled in a set of criteria for sustainable

system. Finally, the main findings were combined in a conclusion on the

the existing knowledge and creates a holistic approach to food localization.

food localization. Five contrasting cases were selected after an initial

research and design results.

The project looks at the complete food system, from production to disposal,

scoping guided by several variables (scale, location, urban form, etc.). Case

while the majority of research has focused on a certain aspect of the food

study research is suitable in this type of project because it poses “how”

system. The research carried out for this project leads to the discovery of

questions and focuses on a contemporary phenomenon within a real-life

a gap in the existing body of work regarding sustainable distribution and

context (Yin, 2009). Documentation is the only type of source used. This

disposal within a local food system. By addressing these aspects in detail

approach might seem one-sided: the use of multiple sources would have

as well as keeping a holistic perspective throughout with the concept of

improved the quality of the research. Therefore, a range of data from

closing the loop of the food system, the project is a unique contribution to

different documentation sources was used, from articles, to websites and

the existing work in the field of sustainable urbanism and food systems.

films, giving depth to the study. Case studies are often critiqued because it

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2 Literature and case study review 2.1 Food localization

2.2 Typologies of current food localization systems

A food system is the chain of activities and processes related to production,

Food localization is an integrated system where every element is addressed

processing, distribution, disposal and eating of food (Raja et al., 2008). The

(see figure 4). Regarding production, local food that goes to the local

concept of a local food system is ambiguous. It can be seen as a geographical

community is often produced on a small scale: vacant plots or beds in

concept that describes the proximity between producers and consumers,

public space, in private gardens, allotments, (organic) farms and community

even though the distance is interpreted differently depending on contextual

supported farms. Due to the nature of production and proximity to the

factors like population density and climate. In the US, food produced within a

consumer, local food is barely processed (Norberg-Hodge et al., 2002).

160 km radius is often considered local, while local food in the UK commonly

Different channels for distribution are characteristic. Food can be sold

is expected to be grown within a 50 to 80 km radius from the consumer.

at farm shops, farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; markets, harvested by members at a community

Some define food as local when produced within the countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s boundaries,

supported farm, delivered to homes and offices through box schemes or

others state local food should be from the same county or region. Local

picked up at a local pickup point (Soil Association, 2013a; Soil Association,

processing

food can also be defined by certain characteristics that consumers associate

2013b). Also more and more supermarket chains have started distributing

with the concept. People choose local food because of freshness, taste and

local food (Budgens, 2013; Waitrose, 2013). Disposal is rarely integrated

environmental concerns and associate it with certain production, processing

in the local food system. One type of solution is implemented at Skinner

100% fresh

and distribution methods, like social embeddedness, ethics of the grower,

City Farm (case study 2, see page 8). Organic waste is picked up from local

organic farming and short food supply chains (Edwards-Jones et al.; 2008,

restaurants by cargo bike. At the farm, it is composted and reused as fertilizer

Martinez et al., 2010).

(Skinner City Farm, 2013).

production

disposal

plots adapted to location

compost

distribution

minimum processing

proximity Figure 4 Embedded food system

A local food system is geographically embedded, in contrast to the global food system that is disembedded from any local context (see figure 5). Increased yields, low food prices as well as low production and transaction costs contribute to the attractiveness of conventional agriculture and the negative externalities

global food system. This system exists of vertically integrated monopolies and relies on a high degree of industrialization and technology regarding seeds,

vertically integrated monopolies

fertilizers, etc. Furthermore, production and consumption are spatially as well as culturally independent. This is made possible by conservation techniques and worldwide transport infrastructure that overcome time and spatial constraints. Negative externalities arising in this type of food system are manifested through social and environmental costs. Pollution through over-fertilization, the creation of pest-resistant crops, the loss of civic involvement and a growing dependence on the market for survival

expert advice

industry

production

are some examples that shape these externalities. Globalisation has led

no time or spatial constraints processing

spatially and culturally independent distribution

waste disposal Figure 5 Disembedded food system

to a disconnection of the food system from its physical, social and ethical embedding (Landman, 2011; Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Hara and Stagle, 2001).

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.3 Is local food best?

of the Incredible Edible campaign in Todmorden (case study 1, see page

farms and schools, senior homes and other public institutions not only

Local food and food miles are powerful terms in the discourse around

7), actions like “propaganda gardening” in prominent sites like towpaths,

supports awareness and education but also contributes to the overall well-

sustainable agriculture and alternative food systems. There is a tendency

cemeteries, front gardens etc. and the “Incredible Edible Greenroute”

being of the community (Raja et al., 2008).

to see local food as a way to reduce emissions from food miles. Coley

contribute to educating people about food production, seasonality, making

et.al. (2011) argue that the debate about the climate benefits of local food

them aware of local food traditions and their impact on the environment

Furthermore, food localisation has a potential beneficial impact on people’s

lacks a holistic view. The food system influences not only fossil fuel use, it

(Warhurst, 2012).

health. First of all, locally produced food often comes from organic farms or keeps its naturalness and freshness because of proximity to the consumer.

also causes for example water pollution and influences rural economics and landscape amenities. Therefore, the use of the food miles concept is

Food localization also has a positive influence on individual well-being.

Therefore, local food is often attributed a higher nutritional value than food

misleading. Studies show that the mode of transport is as important as the

Preserving land and creating space for food production enhances the

from conventional agriculture (Raja et al., 2008; Edwards-Jones et al., 2008;

distance. So might the use of waterborne transport to import food result

livability of places because of the increased amount of green space (Raja

Grewal and Grewal, 2012; Norberg- Hodge et al., 2002). Food localisation’s

in lower carbon emissions than buying from a local farmer. But not only

et al., 2008; Sonnino, 2009). The transformation of urban wastelands into

positive impact on food security leads to increased access to healthy food

distribution affects the sustainability of a food system, the characteristics of

productive gardens establishes local character and sense of place (Sonnino,

(Raja et al., 2008) and stimulates change towards a healthier diet (Sonnino,

the whole food chain influence the amount of emissions caused (Edwards-

2009). Proximity to agricultural land also gives people the opportunity for

2009; Grewal and Grewal, 2012).

Jones et al., 2008). The concept of food miles distracts us from more urging

recreation. Recreational routes through the Baix Llobregat Agricultural

social, economic and environmental changes that are needed in order to

Park in Barcelona are an example of this (Diputacio Barcelona, 2013).

support sustainable development (Coley et.al., 2011). An integrated, holistic

Furthermore, participating in food production at for example a community

Besides benefitting health and well-being, food localization

perspective, looking further than emissions caused by distribution, is needed

supported farm is a form of leisure activity (Kulak et al., 2013). Many studies

also has a positive impact on the environment. In local

to assess the value of local food systems for sustainability.

also stress the importance of local food for food security. A local food

food systems, organic farming is a conventional production

system “facilitates residents’ access to healthful, affordable and culturally

method. Therefore, there is no risk of damaging the

appropriate foods at all times” (Raja et al., 2008). It also reduces the risk

environment with chemical pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers etc. (Norberg-

2.4 Benefits of food localization

of misdistribution of food and leads to the possibility of people relying on

Hodge et al., 2002) and fossil fuel use is reduced (Norberg-Hodge et al.,

An increasing amount of literature looks at local food systems and its

their own or nearby food production (Norberg-Hodge et al., 2002). Food

2002; Grewal and Grewal, 2012). Although this sounds very positive for

benefits. These benefits can be divided into four categories: health and

strategies that create sustainable links between the fast growing urban

lowering emissions, the use of fossil fuels can also increase due to food

well-being, reduced human impact on the environment, local economy and

areas and their surrounding regions are crucial in achieving food security

localization. Many individual car trips to pick up the harvest share at the

connections.

(Sonnino, 2009).

farm is far less efficient than home delivery by van or walking and biking to

Reduced impact on the environment

the farm (Coley et al., 2009). At Stroud Community Agriculture (case study Health and well-being

Regarding community well-being, food localisation is seen as way to

4, see page 10), they try to minimize car trips by encouraging people to

A considerable amount of literature has looked at the

promote community empowerment, sense of community (Grewal and

collect each others’ shares and setting up pick up points at more central

effect of food localization on health and well-being. These

Grewal, 2012) and social justice (Raja et al., 2008), it catalyses interaction

locations. Still, the majority prefer to pick up the food at the farm by car

studies show a positive impact on several aspects. First of

between people (CITIES, 2011) and creates links between producers and

(Weir et al., n.d.).

all, food localization raises awareness and educates. In the

consumers (Norberg-Hodge et al., 2002). Furthermore, establishing local

Baix Llobregat Agricultural Park on the outskirts of Barcelona, “vegetable

food systems leads to regeneration of neglected sites, when these are

Local food production is a way of maintaining a thriving green belt (Facilitating

tourism” has attracted thousands of visitors to recreate and learn about

turned into attractive, productive spaces (Kulak et al., 2013; CITIES, 2011)

Alternative Agro-food networks, 2010). Especially in urban areas, the

food production in the agricultural park (Paül and McKenzie, 2013). As part

and contributes to the overall livability of places. Cooperation between

creation or conservation of green areas for food production can contribute

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

to a reduced urban heat island effect and storm water management (Grewal

more integrated approach with less technology. Thanks to better integration

producing, processing and distributing locally also leads to less identical

and Grewal, 2012). By allowing a range of non-food species to co-exist,

and reuse, there is less waste, reduced waste collection and processing

products being imported and exported simultaneously (Norberg-Hodge et

habitats for plants and animals are fostered and biodiversity is stimulated.

costs. Also, a reduced use of chemicals leads to cost savings. A greener

al., 2002).

The complex ecological system that is created makes the land more resilient

environment diminishes the urban heat island effect and reduces costs

and protects against pests and blights. Local food systems require methods

related to the cooling of buildings (Grewal and Grewal, 2012). Furthermore,

Why is food localization not happening yet?

and crops adapted to the local climate, which leads to diversity (Norberg-

food localisation can also have an effect on property value. When the local

After having analyzed the benefits of food localization, one

Hodge et al., 2002). By promoting an integrated system, there is less waste

food system leads to urban regeneration, property value can increase when

can wonder why local food systems are not implemented to

and more synergies are created. An example from Rennes, France, is a

for example vacant plots are transformed into attractive allotments (Raja et

a greater extent. “Local food” comes often from small-scale,

complex system that produces wood, cider, eggs and butter for the city on

al., 2008).

organic farms. It is currently more expensive than food produced using conventional methods and therefore less attractive to the

the same piece of land (Facilitating Alternative Agro-food networks, 2010). This integrated polyculture is in high contrast with conventional agriculture

Connections

majority. Local food is though not necessarily more expensive, the price depends on many factors. When adding negative

where monoculture production is preferred (Norberg-Hodge et al., 2002). Food is all about networks; things that when connected together

externalities of the global food system, the price of conventional

add up to more than the sum of their parts. Whether or not we

food would also increase. Furthermore, local food is dependent

Food localization benefits the local economy on two levels:

care about food, the consequences of the way we eat are all

on seasons and other local conditions. Some people might find

it leads to improved economic conditions and reduced

around us. The global food system is a network in which we are all

the supply rather unsatisfying during certain times of the year,

expenditure. The first arises out of the reduced economic

complicit. (Steel, 2009)

when they can buy fresh food year round at the supermarket.

Local economy

leakage (Grewal and Grewal, 2012) as well as support for

local farmers (Norberg-Hodge et al., 2002; Edwards-Jones et al., 2008).

A main strength of local food systems is their embeddedness

Every country has a limited amount of farmland and can produce

Food localisation creates new market opportunities for farmers, through

and the positive connections this creates. According to

according to local conditions. These local conditions obviously

box schemes, farmers’ markets, pick-your-own schemes etc. (Raja et al.,

Sonnino (2009) “food becomes an important prism to

constrain food production, so food localization is not a matter of

2008). The Bioland farm of Georg Schmälzle (case study 5, see page 11) is

understand the complex web of connections that tie cities to

“local food is best”, but of accepting the limitations of the local

a good example of this. With a farm shop, stalls at different markets in the

wider relations, places and processes”. This relational view shows that local

food system while using it to obtain benefits for community,

region, home delivery of 1200 boxes per week and an online shop offering

food systems support an interrelated city-countryside system (Facilitating

environment and economy, without necessarily striving for self-

produce from their own farm and other farms in the vicinity as well as a wide

Alternative Agro-food networks, 2010) that relinks urban with rural and

sufficiency. In doing so, food localization can certainly have a

range of eco products, Schmälzle takes advantages of new ways to boost

people with nature (Paül and McKenzie, 2013). A local food system allows for

positive impact on the sustainability of settlements.

his business while supporting other local producers (Gärtnerei Schmälzle,

decentralized sale and direct contact between farmer and consumer by for

2013). New opportunities for establishing food systems locally also leads

example farmer’s markets or farm shops. This creates a lower dependency

to the creation of jobs (Facilitating Alternative Agro-food networks, 2010)

on distribution centres and supermarkets and contributes to a certain

while the farms that are part of the local food system are of a job sustaining

degree of selfsufficiency (Norberg-Hodge et al., 2002). Het Open Veld, a

nature because food production is labour intensive (Norberg-Hodge et al.,

community supported farm (case study 3, see page 9), is situated close to

2002). Potentially, food localization can lead to cheaper food, because there

its members and offers them a weekly harvest share of seasonable fruit

are less externalities and subsidies that need to be taken into account (Weir

and vegetables. By harvesting their share and participating in events at the

et al., n.d.; Norberg-Hodge et al., 2002). Reduced expenditures are due to a

farm, the members learn about food production and nature. Furthermore,

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.5 Criteria for sustainable food localization According to the literature, food localization has a positive impact on environmental, social and economic sustainability. In order to create a sustainable local food system, the benefits found in the literature review were distilled into seven criteria. These criteria cover the whole food system,

POLYCULTURE organic production - resilient agriculture - healthy soil - biodiversity production in transition to organic conventional production

from production to processing, distribution and disposal and are tested on several case studies to assess how sustainable the local food system in question is.

RECYCLING 100% closed loop - reduced waste handling costs (transport, disposal,...) - reduced impact on environment partially closed loop but still waste produced a lot of waste produced

PRODUCTIVITY self-sustaining (1700 m2 pp for 2300 cal*) - support local farmers and local economy - food security

substantial part of diet (1700 m2 pp < x < 850 m2 pp) only supplement to import (x < 850 m2 pp)

production

disposal

GROWING CONDITIONS seasonable and local species - biodiversity and resilience - healthy soil - low degree of machinery and fossil fuel use mix of local and non-local species non-local species

SUSTAINABLE FOod localization

processing FRESHNESS 100% fresh to consumer - naturalness - high nutritional value - reduced fossil fuel use for cooling, storage less than 5 days after harvest to consumer more than 5 days after harvest to consumer

Kato Allaert

TRANSPORT carbon neutral (walking, biking) - reduced fossil fuel use

organised home delivery by van individual car trips COMMUNITY farmer meets consumer - awareness and education - sense of place, local distinction

How to read figure 6 CRITERIA best option - benefits of this options - ... - ... in-between option worst option

distribution

farmer meets some consumers farmer doesn’t meet consumer biggest impact on either - health & well-being - environment - local economy - connections

Figure 6 Criteria for sustainable food localization * productivity: to produce a diet including fruit, vegetables and grains (2300 calories per person), an area of 1700 m2 is needed (One Block Off The Grid, 2011)

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.6 Case study analysis 2.6.1 Incredible Edible Todmorden (UK)

POLYCULTURE organic production

This case is located in a town centre, where a non-profit organisation stimulates propaganda gardening in prominent public sites, to make RECYCLING partially closed loop

local food accessible to all. It exemplifies how a local food system works in an urban context and how people are made aware of food localization. (Warhurst, 2012; Incredible Edible Network, 2013; Rangaswami, 2011; Incredible Edible Todmorden, 2013)

PRODUCTIVITY only supplement to import (x < 850 m2 pp) Productivity is not a goal in itself, although people are encouraged to buy more locally produced food. It is rather an awareness than a production orientated initiative.

A reusable “picking bag”, made locally, is provided.

production

disposal

GROWING CONDITIONS seasonable and local species

Figure 10 Campaign logo

SUSTAINABLE FOod localization ?

Figure 9 Cemetery garden in Todmorden (Incredible Edible Todmorden, 2013)

Learning points • Bringing food close to the consumer through “pick your own” method and events

•

processing FRESHNESS 100% fresh to consumer When ripe, the fruit and vegetables are available for everyone to pick in public space locations.

distribution

TRANSPORT carbon neutral (walking, biking) The produce is grown in prominent sites, passers-by can pick whatever they want when they walk or cycle by.

COMMUNITY farmer meets consumer

Awareness and education campaign

Co-operations with schools and senior homes, community growing and cooking activities, vegetable tourism, agriculture and market garden courses at high school,... Figure 7 Learning points from Incredible Edible Todmorden

Kato Allaert

Figure 8 Analysis of local food system: Incredible Edible Todmorden

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.6.2 Skinner City Farm (US) Skinner City Farm is a community garden project in the city centre of Eugene

POLYCULTURE organic production

(Oregon). The case is special because it is one of the few that addresses disposal as an integral part of the food system. Furthermore, its focus on RECYCLING 100% closed loop

community empowerment and justice clearly has benefits for the wellbeing of the local community. (Skinner City Farm, 2013a; Skinner City Farm, PRODUCTIVITY only supplement to import (x < 850 m2 pp)

2013b)

Productivity is not a goal in itself for this non-profit, the main focus is on community empowerment.

Organic waste is picked up from a couple of local restaurants and transported to the farm by cargo bike. At the farm, the waste is composted and reused. production

disposal

GROWING CONDITIONS seasonable and local species SUSTAINABLE FOod localization?

Figure 14 Skinner City Farm Figure 13 Composting at Skinner City Farm logo (Skinner City Farm, 2013b) (Skinner City Farm, 2013a)

processing

Learning points â&#x20AC;˘ Organic waste pick up from restaurants

â&#x20AC;˘

FRESHNESS 100% fresh to consumer Allotment holders and other people from the local community harvest the food they produce.

TRANSPORT carbon neutral (walking, biking) The farm is located in the city centre of Eugene (Oregon) and therefore easily accessible by foot or bike.

COMMUNITY farmer meets consumer Different kinds of workshops and programmes give the community the chance to participate. A focus on justice and equal rights leads to the aim of reaching out to people of different backgrounds.

Focus on community empowerment and participation

Figure 11 Learning points from Skinner City Farm

Kato Allaert

distribution

Figure 12 Analysis of local food system: Skinner City Farm

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.6.3 Het Open Veld (BE) Het Open Veld is a community supported farm, situated in the fringe of the city of Leuven and has 320 members. The case is representable for smallscale CSA farms in fringe and peripheral locations and exemplifies how local

POLYCULTURE in transition to organic production This transition takes up to 3 or 4 years. RECYCLING a lot of waste produced

residents can reconnect with food and nature. (Het Open Veld, 2013; Een, 2012) PRODUCTIVITY only supplement to import (x < 850 m2 pp) The farm is small (1,5 ha), which means only a supplemental share of the members diet is produced at the farm.

Disposal of waste is not specifically addressed.

production

disposal

GROWING CONDITIONS seasonable and local species SUSTAINABLE FOod localization ? Figure 17 Harvesting at Het Open Veld (Een, 2012)

processing

Learning points â&#x20AC;˘ Farm on walking or biking distance from members

â&#x20AC;˘

FRESHNESS 100% fresh to consumer Members of the CSA scheme pay for a weekly harvest share that they pick themselves on the field.

distribution

TRANSPORT carbon neutral (walking, biking) Members are local residents who live within walking or biking distance from the farm.

COMMUNITY farmer meets consumer

Low productivity

Besides harvesting their own share, members are invited to participate through events and an online community where e.g. recipes are shared. Figure 15 Learning points from Het Open Veld

Kato Allaert

Figure 16 Analysis of local food system: Het Open Veld

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.6.4 Stroud Community Agriculture (UK) Stroud Community Agriculture is a community supported farm with 270 members, located in the rural landscape nearby the town Stroud. It consists of two farms where vegetables, fruit, flowers and meat are produced. The

POLYCULTURE organic production Organic and biodynamic farm. RECYCLING partially closed but still waste produced A gift box where members can leave produce they don’t want so someone else can take it, reusable cloth bags made by members and livestock manure reduce waste.

case was selected because it is a well established farm with high productivity. Its rural location makes it interesting to see how they deal with distribution. (Stroud Community Agriculture, 2013; Weir et al., n.d.)

PRODUCTIVITY substantial part of diet (1700 m2 pp < x < 850 m2 pp) With two farms of together 20 ha, approximately half of the members’ diet is produced at the farm.

Figure 21 The farm

Figure 20 Planting at the farm (Stroud Community Agriculture, 2013)

production

GROWING CONDITIONS mix of local and non-local species During winter, supplemental fruit and vegetables are provided through the local wholesaler. Thanks to a cooperation with a Spanish CSA farm, Mediterranean produce is imported once a year.

SUSTAINABLE FOod localization ?

processing

Learning points • Medium high productivity provides members with a substantial part of their diet

•

disposal

FRESHNESS 100% fresh to consumer Members of the CSA scheme assist in harvesting on collection days so members can pick up 100 per cent fresh produce at the farm.

High share of round trips by car to farm undermines sustainable distribution

distribution

TRANSPORT individual car trips Besides having two pick up points in the town centre, the majority of the members drives a round trip to the farm to collect their share. COMMUNITY farmer meets consumer Through workshops, voluntary work at the farm and events like farm days, the local people are very much involved in the production.

Figure 18 Learning points from Stroud Community Agriculture

Kato Allaert

Figure 19 Analysis of local food system: Stroud Community Agriculture

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.6.5 Georg Schmälzle (DE) Georg Schmälzle is a Bioland labelled commercial farm in Sinzheim. The farm has 26 ha farmland and 3 ha greenhouses. The farm features an online shop where besides produce from the farm, customers can order regionally

POLYCULTURE organic production Organic and biodynamic farm. RECYCLING a lot of waste produced

produced food and a range of other eco products. The case was selected because of its bike delivery scheme BioVelo, operated by people with disabilities. (BioVelo, 2013; Gärtnerei Schmälzle, 2013)

PRODUCTIVITY only supplement to import (x < 850 m2 pp) The farm is large (29 ha) but distributes around 1200 boxes weekly. This means that only a small part of people’s diet is grown at the farm.

Figure 24 Logo and slogan (Gärtnerei Schmälzle, 2013)

Disposal is not addressed.

production

GROWING CONDITIONS mix of local and non-local species Seasonable and local species grown at the farm are complemented by a huge online shop that offers regional produce and all kinds of eco products.

SUSTAINABLE FOod localization ?

processing

Learning points • Innovative cargo bike delivery scheme

•

FRESHNESS less than 5 days after harvest to consumer The food is delivered to the consumer one day after harvesting.

distribution

TRANSPORT organised home delivery by van A majority of the customers is served through a box scheme, delivered to your home by van or cargo bike (in certain parts of Karlsruhe). Furthermore, there is a shop at the farm. COMMUNITY farmer meets some consumers The box scheme doesn’t give much opportunity for interaction between the producer and the consumer. Consumers can meet the farmers at weekly markets or at the farm shop.

Less interaction between producer and consumer due to large scale

Figure 22 Learning points from Georg Schmälzle

Kato Allaert

disposal

Figure 23 Analysis of local food system: Georg Schmälzle

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

2.6.6 Findings In the case study analysis, the strengths and weaknesses of food localization become evident. Regarding food production, the methods and growing

POLYCULTURE

conditions are very sustainable, leading to environmental benefits, but the productivity of the case studies is low, because they are mostly operating on a small scale. Regarding processing, the food reaches the consumer completely fresh maximum one day after harvest, this implies naturalness

RECYCLING PRODUCTIVITY

and high nutritional values as well as reduced fossil fuel use for storage and cooling. Furthermore, the case studies score high in engaging with local people through events and participation and other types of community empowerment.

GROWING CONDITIONS production

disposal

Nevertheless, two aspects that have proven to be critical for a sustainable local food system are distribution and disposal. Many alternatives for SUSTAINABLE FOod localization ?

distributing local food are at hand, the case studies show some excellent sustainable solutions like cargobike deliveries and direct sales at markets and farm shops. Nonetheless, a proportion of the distribution methods are leading to increased travel distances and individual car use, which undermines the concept of a sustainable local food system. The majority of the cases did not address disposal at all, only one project had solved this question. Furthermore, there are some initiatives that encourage reusable

processing

distribution

FRESHNESS TRANSPORT

bags for carrying food but there is definitively scope for improvement in this area.

COMMUNITY

Figure 25 Synthesis of results from case study analysis

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

3 Framework for sustainable food localization 3.1 Gap From a thorough literature and case study analysis, a gap in the current approach to food localization regarding distribution and

disembedded food system

CUrrent embedded food system

disposal becomes evident. The main focus of the existing literature and cases is on food production and processing, not on distribution and

production

processing distribution

disposal

production

disposal

disposal. The case studies are excellent in producing healthy and fresh local food but they fail in making distribution and disposal sustainable. Another weak element of local food systems is productivity. Local food systems often processing

only manage to supply a small part of peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s diet. When implementing local food systems widely, the supply of local food increases and the productivity is automatically addressed.

distribution

design principles + increased implementation design principles

CLOSING THE LOOP

SUStainable food localization

To create an integrated and sustainable local food system, it is crucial to develop sustainable strategies and design principles

production

for distribution and disposal, as well as for production and

disposal

processing. By addressing every part of the food chain, a closed loop system will be created. processing production

disposal sustainable food localization

processing

Kato Allaert

distribution

Figure 26 Transformation from disembedded and current embedded food systems to sustainable embedded food system

distribution

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

3.2 Design principles to close the loop Regional loop toolkit A toolkit of design principles for production, processing, distribution and

Depending on the urban form, there will be more or less food produced,

Therefore, links have to be created between different settlements on a

disposal that can be implemented in and adapted to four types of urban

processed, distributed and more or less organic waste that has to be

regional scale, to make sure that distribution of local food and disposal of

form (core, fringe, periphery and rural hinterland) is set up, to guide

managed. For example, food production is concentrated in rural rather than

organic waste is taken care of in a sustainable way. On the regional level,

implementation of sustainable food localization. Even when concentrating

urban areas and due to higher population densities, certain areas create

links between settlements and the food system are created by facilitating

on distribution and disposal, the two elements most critical to the

more waste than others.

distribution of food and pickup of organic waste along existing infrastructure systems.

sustainability of the local food system, the appropriate production and processing elements need to be in place. Furthermore, the toolkit needs to be adapted to two scales: the regional level (see figure 28 and 29) and the

region

local level (figure 30). Only then can the entire food system be addressed and a closed loop established.

core fringe core

fringe

periphery

rural

DISTRIBUTION

periphery rural

DISPOSAL Figure 29 Main direction of food and waste transport

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

Figure 28 Interlinking the local and regional scale

CORE

beds in public space

seed swap

FRINGE

small farm

community participation

RURAL

seed reuse

compost from farm + local residents

farmer + members

CORE

FRINGE

PERIPHERY

RURAL

bin

large farm

small-medium farm

seed reuse

+ + compost from local residents

PERIPHERY

seed reuse

compost from farm + region

farmer + machinery

compost from farm

in garden composting

organic waste pickup

bring back to farm when picking up food

organic waste pickup at hub

organic waste pickup

+ region

farmer + machinery

PRODUCTION

DISPOSAL

DISTRIBUTION

PROCESSING CORE

FRINGE

pick your own in public space members harvest at farm

PERIPHERY

RURAL

farmer harvest at farm

Local loop toolkit

CORE

FRINGE

PERIPHERY

RURAL

carrier

l loca d o fo

pick your own in public space

collect at farm

collect at hub

market

cargo bike delivery

farm shop

Production happens close to the consumer, on the scale appropriate for the amount of land available in the type of urban form. Processing is kept to a minimum, due to harvesting right before consumption or by being kept in storage for less than five days. For collecting food, a convenient carrier, used when picking food or collecting it from a hub, is provided. Markets, food

cargo bike delivery

hubs and bike delivery schemes bring the local food close to the consumer. For the disposal of organic waste, a convenient bin is provided to allow you

Figure 30 Toolkit of design principles for the local loop

to bring the waste to a compost point, a farm or pickup point. The waste is then composted to be reused as organic matter that creates healthy soils. Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4 Project 4.1 Introduction

The area of project sites starts in the centre of Antwerp and continues

core Zurenborg

approximately 25 km southwards, in the direction of the city Mechelen. The four sites are situated along this stretch. The area is well known for its food production, mostly vegetables. The food auction where 40 per cent of Belgian horticultural production is sold, is situated close to the fourth project site in Sint-Katelijne-Waver. A large share of the food sold at the auction is produced in the region, but is not available to the local consumer before it arrives in one of the chain supermarkets. The area is comprised of different types of urban form, from the city centre of Antwerp to the rural

fringe Mortsel

village of Sint-Katelijne-Waver. Due to the proximity to food production and the variety of urban form, the area is well suited for the implementation of the toolkit for sustainable food localization. Horticulture in Flanders, Belgium, 2011 euro standard output per ha

Vegetables - outdoors

periphery Kontich

project sites

Vegetables - greenhouse

NL BELGIUM FR

rural Sint-Katelijne-Waver Figure 31 Overview of project sites

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

project sites Figure 32 Horticulture in Flanders. Adapted from Platteau et.al. (2012)

4.2 Regional site analysis

project site CORE

Food production is more intense in the rural hinterland and more waste is produced in the core due to higher population density (see figure 33 and 34). Different types of urban form need different food system solutions but closing the loop on the regional scale will contribute to the overall

increase in food production

core fringe

sustainability of the local food system.

periphery rural hinterland

The core of Antwerp is the starting point for many infrastructure links. They create a pattern starting in the city centre, radiating out to the surrounding

use existing infrastructure for links?

cities. Urbanization around Antwerp spreads (south) eastwards. Agricultural land is situated close to the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s western fringe where the river Schelde forms a natural barrier for urbanization. Transport infrastructure like

project site FRINGE

Figure 33 Conceptual diagram of region

railways, cycle highways, rivers and canals, intersect the different zones of urban form (see figure 35) and can facilitate food distribution and disposal links. project site PERIPHERY

Turnhout

Antwerp river railway

Sint Niklaas

canal cycle highway project sites core

Mechelen

fringe

project site RURAL

periphery rural hinterland Figure 35 Existing infrastructure and types of urban form in the region around Antwerp

Kato Allaert

existing food production sites Figure 34 Overview of the four project sites

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.3 Core: Zurenborg

4.3.1 Site analysis Population density Antwerp in 2012: 2458 inhabitants/km2

(Belgian Federal Government, 2012)

Population Zurenborg in 2013: 5552 inhabitants

Urban form

Food system

Zurenborg is a mixed use innercity neighbourhood of Antwerp, located in

Currently, no food is produced or processed in the area, except in some

between Antwerpâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s central station and Berchem station. The cycle highway

private gardens. The area is well served by regular and organic food

that connects Antwerp and Mechelen runs along the railway that borders

stores. Every Thursday, there is a market on the square Dageraadplaats.

the area.

Zurenborg is well connected by public transport (tram, bus, train) and cycle infrastructure. Organic waste disposal is taken care of by the city with weekly

(Stad Antwerpen, 2013)

curbside collections.

Station Berchem: 9594 commuters/day

number of commuters that board a train per day (NMBS, 2009)

Cycle highway: 4000 cyclist/day

(Provincie Antwerpen, 2011)

Figure 38 Project site location

Table 1 Statistics Zurenborg

n bo

Figure 40 Aerial view of Zurenborg

production processing distribution (store/transport) disposal

railway street major road cycle highway Figure 41 Road, rail and cycle infrastructure of Zurenborg Frequent street intersections create small and large squares throughout the neighnourhood.

production

municipal waste collection

local food system processing super market

Figure 43 Dageraadplaats, central square in Zurenborg

Figure 42 Elements of the local food system

waste bin

organic stores market

non existing part of the local food system Figure 36 Terraced housing with gardens

Kato Allaert

Figure 37 Three to four storeys and pitched roofs

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

regional food system

production processing

food auction sale

Figure 39 Current local food system in Zurenborg

CORE

4.3.2 Implementation of toolkit SWOT STRENGHTS

WEAKNESSES

Production

Distribution

The many small and larger squares are

People use a convenient basket to carry

excellent food production locations. The • market tradition • organic food stores present • well connected by public transport and cycle infrastructure • attractive public space

• no proximity to agriculture • no food production nor processing • organic waste collected but unclear how it is reused

PRODUCTION

the picked food. Harvest signs, put up by

area’s two schools provide the opportunity

community members that adopt a bed,

for a schoolyard community garden. A

alert passers-by that the food is ready

local food hub at Dageraadplaats is the

beds in public space

for picking. At Dageraadplaats, a weekly

focal point for all food activities, organized

market brings in farmers and their produce

by community volunteers.

from outside the city. seed swap

OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

• expand market with local food • local food hub stimulating community based activities • links with region by cycle and rail infrastructure • greening public space for liveable neighbourhood

• disconnection of people and local food • neglected public space

DISTRIBUTION

carrier

pick your own in public space

compost from local residents

market

community participation

Table 2 SWOT analysis of Zurenborg

Processing

Disposal

The food is available for passers-by to harvest when ripe. The food arrives 100%

PROCESSING

To close the loop of the food system, organic waste is collected at the hub

fresh at the consumer and no machinery

on Dageraadplaats and either used for

has to be used for harvesting or processing.

local food production or transported to pick your own in public space

a regional farm. The waste is taken by

DISPOSAL

carrier

bike to the nearby station, where it is

put on the train for transport to a station in the fringe, periphery or rural areas.

in garden composting

Furthermore, people are also encouraged to compost their organic waste at home, for use in private gardens or public food beds.

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

organic waste pickup

4.3.3 Spatial dynamics

CORE

local food hub potential food production sites location for weekly market food from farm (by train+bike) to neighbourhood organic waste from households/restaurants to hub organic waste from hub to farm (by train+bike) cycle highway N

railway train station

1:2000

school

sch

1 km to train station (4 min by bike) Figure 44 Local food system in Zurenborg. (Basemap: Agentschap voor Geografische Informatie Vlaanderen, 2013)

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

CORE

4.3.4 Design elements Local food hub

Food carrier

Growing bench and harvest flags The local food hub is a centre for community

Food can either be grown directly in the

A convenient basket is needed when picking

activities around food. It is a box containing

soil or in raised beds. The raised beds are

food. The foldable basket is easy to carry

gardening tools that can be borrowed to

wooden boxes, that can be covered with

and a net can be stretched over, to keep

maintain the production beds. It has an

a lid whenever not in use, so the object

the food in place when walking or biking.

expandable roof that covers a small outdoor

can be used as a bench. Colorful flags are

A similar basket, slightly bigger and with

workshop space for hosting community

placed in the beds when the food is ripe, so

a tight lid, is provided to collect and carry

events. Furthermore, the surface of the

passersby know they can pick it.

organic waste. When the waste is disposed of in the compost bin at the hub, the food

box is used as diary, announcing events like

basket fits into the waste basket and they can be carried simultaneously

seed swaps or growing activities.

when picking food. The carrier can be bought through the municipality.

harvest flags carrier local food hub

1 food carrier

1 gardening shed

net to keep content in place

foldable

raised bed for food production

2 waste carrier 2 announcement board food carrier fits into waste carrier

public space furniture Figure 46 Growing bench with harvest flags

Figure 47 Food and waste carrier

3 workshop space Figure 45 Local food hub

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

CORE

Figure 48 Local food hub at Dageraadplaats

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.3.5 Closing the loop

CORE organic waste pickup raised bed for food production train to local station

+ composting at farm

compost from local residents hub with tool shed

sowing compost from local residents

organic waste carrier

+ composting in garden

recycling

maintaining composting workshop

farm

local residents adopt a bed cooking at home

consumption

community cooking

local food workshop

+ harvesting

harvest flags

distributing

pick your own in public space

raised bed turned into bench

train to local station

community event announcements food carrier

municipal waste collection production

delivery to hub

waste bin local food system

processing

market

regional food system

market supermarket organic food stores

production

processing food auction sale

Figure 49 Current local food system in Zurenborg

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.4 Fringe: Mortsel

4.4.1 Site analysis Population density Mortsel in 2012: 3230 inhabitants/km2

(Belgian Federal Government, 2012)

Population in 2013: 25 143 inhabitants

Urban form

Local food systems

The square â&#x20AC;&#x153;Stadspleinâ&#x20AC;? is in a mixed use area where the high street

No food is currently produced or processed in the area, except in private

intersects with the railway. It is a transport hub of train, tram, bus and cycle

gardens. There are several food stores on the high street. The area is very

highway. There is a bike rental docking station adjacent to the train station,

well connected by public transport and cycle paths. Every Wednesday,

as well as a huge bike storage and a repair service.

there is a market at Stadsplein. Organic waste is picked up weekly by the municipality.

(Belgian Federal Government, 2012)

Station Mortsel: 614 commuters/day

number of commuters that board a train per day (NMBS, 2009)

Cycle highway: 4000 cyclist/day

(Provincie Antwerpen, 2011)

Figure 50 Project site location

Table 3 Statistics Mortsel

Figure 54 Aerial view of Mortsel

production processing distribution (store/transport) disposal

railway street major road cycle highway Figure 55 Road, rail and cycle infrastructure of Mortsel

production

Figure 56 Elements of the local food system

municipal waste collection

local food system

waste bin

regional food system

processing super market

Figure 57 Mortsel Stadsplein

non existing part of the local food system Figure 51 Clearly defined public streets and private backyards

Kato Allaert

Figure 52 Mix of housing typologies

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

market

production processing

food auction sale

Figure 53 Current local food system in Mortsel

fringe

4.4.2 Implementation of toolkit Production

SWOT

In the fringe of the city, the built up STRENGHTS

WEAKNESSES

• relative proximity to farmland • well-connected by public transport and cycle infrastructure • market tradition • high population density

• no obvious connection to rural hinterland • presence of conventional food stores make them a convenient choice

• strong community base for community supported agriculture • expand market with local food • easy accessible farms through expansion of cycle infrastructure

• urbanisation takes over farmland: proximity between community and farmland lost

and

biking

infrastructure,

the rural landscape. The majority of

people to easily get from the cycle

the people only live a short bike ride

small farm

highway to the farm to collect food.

away from farmland. Food for the

Panels with harvest information are

neighbourhood is produced on small to

found along the route, for example

local community, from labour to organic waste for compost. In return, residents

seed reuse

called “community supported farms”

THREATS

Walking

provided by the municipality, allows

medium scale farms. Many farms are so

OPPORTUNITIES

Distribution

landscape starts blending in with

(CSA), they get essential input from the

Table 4 SWOT analysis of Mortsel

PRODUCTION

Stadsplein.

Throughout

the

neighborhood, colorful signs point

people in the right direction to the farms

compost from farm + local residents

and the cycle highway. Furthermore,

local food, from within the fringe or

can buy a fresh and seasonable harvest

from the wider region, is sold at the

share.

Stadsplein market.

DISTRIBUTION

carrier

collect at farm

market

farmer + members

Processing At the community supported farms, local

PROCESSING

Disposal People are also encouraged to compost

residents harvest their own share of the

waste at home, if at all possible. When

produce. No machinery is needed and

collecting food at the farm, people can

the food arrives fresh at the consumer’s.

members harvest at farm

drop off organic waste for composting at

DISPOSAL

carrier

the farm.

+ in garden composting

bring back to farm when picking up food

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.4.3 Spatial dynamics

fringe 2 km to farm(s) (10 min by bike)

cycle highway railway train station local food hub location for weekly market food from farm (by train) to neighbourhood food from farm (by bike) to neighbourhood organic waste from hub to farm (by train) organic waste from households/restaurants to farm N 1:2000

2 km to farm(s) (10 min by bike)

Figure 58 Local food system in Mortsel. (Basemap: Agentschap voor Geografische Informatie Vlaanderen, 2013)

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

fringe

4.4.4 Design elements Market

Wayfinding

Hub At the market square, which the cycle

To make the farms more accessible

Stadsplein hosts a weekly market with

highway passes, a set of objects forms the

to everyone, a wayfinding system of

fresh local food. Markets stand holders

local food hub. A do-it-yourself bike repair

colorful signs placed along cycling routes

can have a simple equipment of tables to

station is provided as well as information

is provided. Each color directs you to a

expose their produce because the square

panels. There are two types of information

different farm or back to the cycle highway.

is covered by a roof.

panels, one with information about how to get to the local farms by bike from the cycle highway and one that shows which produce is ready to harvest. Here, the farms can announce what they are growing and when it is ready to pick. Figure 60 Wayfinding to farms and cycle routes Figure 61 Market square with stalls under the roof

Figure 59 Public DIY bike repair station (Bike Fixation, 2013)

HARVEST INFORMATION â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;t Hoeveke

De Melkerij

De Doederij

Grondsmaak

Figure 62 Harvest information panel

De Doederij 8 min

Grondsmaak 5 min

De Melkerij 15 min

you are here

Mechelen

Antwerpen 8 min

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;t Hoeveke

Figure 63 Farm route information panel

Kato Allaert

Figure 64 Local food hub at Mortsel Stadsplein

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.4.5 Closing the loop

fringe

+ composting at farm

seed reuse

small farm

compost from local residents

sowing

organic waste carrier

compost from farm and local residents

recycling

maintaining

bring waste back to farm when picking up food

farm

in garden composting

consumption

cooking at home

carrier

harvesting

members harvest at farm

production

distributing market

municipal waste collection

local food system

train to local station

waste bin

collect at farm Regional food system

delivery to hub production De Doederij

HARVEST INFORMATION â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;t Hoeveke

8 min

De Melkerij

Grondsmaak 5 min

De Melkerij 15 min

you are here

processing

market super market

De Doederij

Grondsmaak

Mechelen

Antwerpen 8 min

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;t Hoeveke

food auction sale

cycle facilities: information + repair

Figure 65 Current local food system in Mortsel

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.5 Periphery: Kontich

4.5.1 Site analysis Population density Kontich in 2012: 876 inhabitants/km2

(Belgian Federal Government, 2012)

Population in 2013: 20 739 inhabitants

Urban form

Local food system

The project site is a residential area at a train and bus station, where the

The farmland in the area is mainly used for conventional food production,

cycle highway from Antwerp currently ends. The area is surrounded by

but there is one community supported farm, Grondsmaak (Grondsmaak,

farmland. The housing typologies are mainly semi-detached and detached

2013), a 10 minutesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; bike ride from the station. There are no food stores

houses, mixed with some small apartment blocks.

or other distribution systems in place around the station. Organic waste is collected weekly by the municipality.

(Belgian Federal Government, 2012)

Station Kontich: 1057 commuters/day

number of commuters that board a train per day (NMBS, 2009)

Cycle highway: 4000 cyclist/day

(Provincie Antwerpen, 2011)

Figure 70 Project site location

Table 5 Statistics Kontich

production processing distribution (store/transport) disposal

Figure 68 Aerial view of Kontich

railway road cycle highway

Figure 72 Elements of the local food system

municipal waste collection

Figure 69 Road, rail and cycle infrastructure of Kontich

waste bin production local food system

Regional food system

super market

processing Figure 73 Cycle highway and transport hub in Kontich

food auction sale non existing part of the local food system Figure 66 Large plots with front and back gardens

Kato Allaert

Figure 67 Detached and semi-detached houses with semi-private space along the pavement

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

Figure 71 Current local food system in Kontich

4.5.2 Implementation of toolkit

PERIPHERY Distribution

Production

SWOT

An integrated farm system of medium to STRENGHTS

WEAKNESSES

• presence of food production • well connected location • frequently used railway station

• locally produced food not directly to local consumer • no food distribution channels

PRODUCTION

large scale farms reuses the seeds from

Short distances of a couple of kilometers make it possible to distribute the food

previous harvests and uses compost as a

by bike, to the local food hub or to

fertilizer. Due to the size of the farm, the

consumers’ homes. The local food hub medium farm

farmer has to use machinery to work the

consists of several market stands that can be configured according to changings

land.

needs.

+ OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

• connecting local food with local consumers • station area as local food hub • bike transport possible due to short distances between farm and consumer

• disconnection of people and local food

Table 6 SWOT analysis of Kontich

carrier l loca d o fo

collect at hub

seed reuse

DISTRIBUTION

+ home delivery delivery to hub

compost from farm + region

farmer + machinery

Disposal

Processing The produce is harvested at the farm by the farmer and laborers and arrives within

PROCESSING

When food is delivered to people’s home, organic waste can be returned with last

maximum one day at the consumer. Labor

week’s box. The bike rider then takes the

input from the community is welcomed:

waste back to the hub, from where it is

the local residents learn about their food

farmer harvest at farm

transported to a farm, composted and

and get some exercise while the farmer

used to create healthy soil. Waste can also

needs to rely less on machinery, like at a community supported farm.

be dropped off at the hub when collecting food.

DISPOSAL

carrier

+ in garden composting

organic waste pickup at hub

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.5.3 Spatial dynamics

PERIPHERY

local food hub food production sites food from local farm/regional farm/ local hub to neighbourhood organic waste to local farm/regional farm/ local hub from local hub/region/neighbourhood cycle highway railway train station

N 1:2000

Figure 74 Local food system in Kontich. (Basemap: Agentschap voor Geografische Informatie Vlaanderen, 2013)

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.5.4 Design elements

PERIPHERY Cargo bike

Hub A local food hub is located at the square in

Cargo bikes are used for transport

front of the train and bus station. The hub

between farm, hub and home. The

can be used as individual markets stands,

cargo trailer is waterproof and isolated,

where the farmsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; market vendors sell

protecting the produce from outside

produce from local farms or the market

influences, with a load capacity of up to

stalls can be put together and form one

200 kg. Food boxes can easily be piled up

food box pickup point, managed by paid

inside. The trailers are registered with a

staff.

regional trailer pool and can be used by staff members when available. The trailers are moved around a lot, in the local area, but also in the region, so sharing the use is an efficient solution.

local food box

x 20

200 kg load capacity Figure 77 Cargo bike loaded with food boxes

Figure 78 BioVelo delivering food by bike in Karlsruhe (BioVelo, 2013)

Food pick up point

+ farm delivers food boxes

scheme member picks up box

Figure 75 Food hub as box scheme pick-up point

Food market farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s market vendor sells local produce

+ local residents buy food

Figure 76 Food hub as local food market

Kato Allaert

Figure 79 Food hub at Kontich station

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.5.5 Closing the loop

PERIPHERY

composting at farm

seed reuse

medium farm

compost from farm + local residents

sowing

organic waste pickup

recycling

organic waste carrier

maintaining

farmer + machinery

+ composting in garden consumption

core fringe

cooking at home

market

farmer harvest at farm

harvesting

distributing

l loca d foo

collect at hub

carrier municipal waste collection waste bin production local food system

Regional food system

super market

delivery to hub train to local station

processing food auction sale

Figure 80 Current local food system in Kontich

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.6 Rural hinterland: Sint-Katelijne-Waver

Population density Sint-Katelijne-Waver in 2012: 563 inhabitants/km2

4.6.1 Site analysis Urban form

Local food system

The village of Sint-Katelijne-Waver is an excellent example of ribbon

Sint-Katelijne-Waver is at the heart of Belgian horticultural production.

development. Along the ribbons, detached houses with gardens are mixed

Local produce is sold at Belorta, the local food auction, which is the largest

with farms and agricultural land.

in Europe. 40 per cent of fruit and vegetables produced in Belgium is sold here to supermarket chains amongst others (Belorta, 2013). There is a horticultural bike route and a vegetable museum, celebrating the local

(Belgian Federal Government, 2012)

heritage (Toerisme Sint-Katelijne-Waver, 2013). The area is well connected

Population in 2013: 20 349 inhabitants

by train. The municipality collects organic waste weekly although many local

(Belgian Federal Government, 2012)

residents compost organic waste in their garden.

Station Sint-Katelijne-Waver: 908 commuters/day number of commuters that board a train per day (NMBS, 2009)

Figure 86 Project site location

Table 7 Statistics Sint-Katelijne-Waver Figure 83 Aerial view of Sint-Katelijne-Waver

production processing distribution (store/transport) disposal

Figure 85 Elements of the local food system

railway road

municipal waste collection

Figure 84 Road and rail infrastructure of Sint-Katelijne-Waver

waste bin production local food system

super market

processing

Figure 88 Rural landscape in Sint-Katelijne-Waver

non existing part of the local food system Figure 81 Large front and back yards

Kato Allaert

Regional food system

Figure 82 Detached houses

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

food auction sale

Figure 87 Current local food system in Sint-Katelijne-Waver

RURAL HINTERLAND

4.6.2 Implementation of toolkit SWOT STRENGHTS

WEAKNESSES

• frequently used railway station • presence of food production • planned extension of cycle highway • horticultural heritage

• locally produced food not directly to local consumer • auto-dependency because of dispersed urban form • train only public transport connection available

Production

Distribution

Sint-Katelijne-Waver is located at the

Local food hubs are within easy reach of PRODUCTION

heart of Belgian fruit and vegetable

several farms because of the dispersed

production. On medium to large farms,

urban form. Food is distributed by bike

local and seasonable vegetables are

between farms and local food hubs. One

produced almost year round, outdoors

of the food hubs is located adjacent to

large farm

the train station in Sint-Katelijne-Waver.

and in greenhouses.

The future extension of the cycle highway

+ OPPORTUNITIES

THREATS

• proximity allows for bike transport • station as local food hub • raise awareness and educate with horticultural tourism

• growing distance between producer and consumer • car-based distribution of local food

will pass here, it is a convenient location

seed reuse

DISTRIBUTION

carrier l loca d o fo

collect at hub

for commuters to pick up their fruit and

compost from farm + region

vegetables on their way to or from work. Furthermore, food boxes can be delivered at home by bike for those who don’t pass

farm shop

by a local food hub or for e.g. people with reduced mobility. To attract visitors, a farmer + machinery

horticultural walking and biking route that

home delivery

passes by farms and allows people to learn about local food, is further developed. Along the route, information about Table 8 SWOT analysis of Sint-Katelijne-Waver

what is produced is given and several farms have farm shops where passersby can taste and buy the local produce. Processing Harvest happens almost year round and the produce is aimed to be kept in storage

PROCESSING

Disposal Local residents predominantly live in

DISPOSAL

detached houses with garden and have

at the farm no longer than one day.

the opportunity to compost organic farmer harvest at farm

waste. Otherwise, organic waste is either

carrier

picked up when a food box is delivered or

dropped off at the local food hub. in garden composting

organic waste pickup

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.6.3 Spatial dynamics

RURAL HINTERLAND

local food hub food production sites food from local farm/regional farm/local hub to neighbourhood organic waste to local farm/ local hub from local hub/neighbourhood horticultural route railway N

train station 1:2000 Figure 89 Local food system in Sint-Katelijne-Waver. (Basemap: Agentschap voor Geografische Informatie Vlaanderen, 2013)

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.6.4 Design elements

RURAL HINTERLAND

Local food hub

Horticultural route The local food hub is located at the square

The horticultural route takes visitors past

in front of the station entrance. It can

farms, farm shops and production land.

facilitate market stalls or can be used as

Along the route, visitors can buy and

a food pick up point. It is also the starting

learn about local produce. Information is

point for the horticultural tourism in the

provided on panels about what is growing

area.

on the land and how it will reach the local

farm c train station with bike rental farm d

farm b

consumer. Bikes can be rented from a docking station at the stationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s food hub.

farm e

Monday to Friday option

farm a

+ farm delivers food boxes

scheme member picks up box farm shop Figure 92 Horticultural route

Figure 90 Food hub as box scheme pick-up point

Weekend option farmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s market vendor sells local produce

local residents and tourists buy food

Figure 91 Food hub as local food market

Kato Allaert

Figure 93 Food hub at Sint-Katelijne-Waver station

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.6.5 Closing the loop

RURAL HINTERLAND

+ composting at farm

seed reuse

large farm

organic waste carrier compost from farm ++ region

sowing

+ organic waste pickup

recycling

organic waste pickup

maintaining

farmer + machinery

+ composting in garden

core fringe

consumption

cooking at home

food carrier

harvesting

distributing

l loca d o fo

farmer harvest at farm

delivery to hub or home

farm shop

municipal waste collection waste bin

train to local station

production local food system

collect at hub

Regional food system

super market

processing food auction sale

horticultural tourism Figure 94 Current local food system in Sint-Katelijne-Waver

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.7 Overview local loop interventions scale

design

how

Core The local food hub takes the form of a box: a compact solution for a gardening shed, combined with a workshop space, a compost point, a community

• whole system:

BOX

by network of volunteers from community

announcement panel, ...

• production & processing:

Fringe

by farmer in cooperation with

The local food hub is not one object, but several objects spread out in the area. To support the existing cycling infrastructure to reach local farms, it focuses on facilities around cycling such as bike repair and route information.

OBJECTS

residents (members and farmer share risk) • distribution & disposal: by members of harvest scheme

• production & processing:

Periphery The local food hub is located at a transport hub and is the pivot point in a local network for local food distribution and disposal.

SMALL NETWORK

by farmer and seasonal paid workforce • distribution & disposal: by paid workforce at food hubs

Rural hinterland • production & processing:

The rural hinterland is where the majority of food is produced. Therefore, the local food hubs are focal points in a growing network of farms and distribution points. Its importance for food tourism is significant. A large network linking local food hubs with the agricultural landscape is set up.

large network

by farmer and seasonal paid workforce • distribution & disposal: by paid workforce at food hubs

benefits of sustainable food localization

Kato Allaert

£ £

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

4.8 Regional loop design

REGION

Infrastructure

Labelling

Existing infrastructure is the backbone of the local food system and

A sustainability label informs the consumer about the conditions in which

contributes to a closed regional loop. Existing regional transport infrastructure allows for simple add-ons supporting the local food system. Regarding rail infrastructure, passenger trains calling at all stations along the

the food was produced, processed and distributed. The label is based on the criteria for sustainable food localization and signals its message with simple traffic light coding to the consumer.

routes can be used for transport of food and waste. Likewise, waterborne transport along existing canals is an option. Small harbors adjacent to towns and villages along canals and rivers are excellent locations for local food hubs that handle transshipment. With the extension of the network of cycle highways, expected to happen in the near future, this infrastructure can be used by cargo bikes to distribute local food throughout the region. main distribution link

local food hub local distribution link Figure 96 Distribution hierarchy

Kato Allaert

transport of food and waste by train Trains have a cargo compartment that is used mainly for bike storage. During off-peak hours, fresh food or organic waste can be placed in this compartment. At the station, the food cargo is loaded onto the train by simply sliding the bike trailer into the cargo compartment via a wheelchair ramp. At the destination, the food is unloaded and attached to a cargo bike for home delivery or it is sold at the hub. Figure 95 Add-on of food system infrastructure to existing infrastructure networks

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

Polyculture productivity growing conditions production

processing FRESHNESS

RECYCLING disposal

distribution TRANSPORT COMMUNITY

Figure 97 Example of sustainable local food labelling

REGION

Example of regional loop 6am Station Sint-Katelijne-Waver (rural hinterland)

6.25 am Station Antwerpen Berchem + (core)

7 am Food Hub Antwerpen Berchem (core)

10 am Zurenborg Market + (core)

6 pm Food Hub Antwerpen Berchem + (core)

l loca d o fo

Jan arrives at the station with a cargo trailer behind his bike, full of fresh fruit and vegetables harvested the day before at his father’s farm. The first train to Antwerp arrives at the station on time and Jan slides the cargo bike trailer via a wheelchair ramp into the food compartment. The food compartment is also used for bike storage, but at this early hour, it is still empty.

Train manager Bert unloads the trailer with food onto the platform. There, it is picked up by Ann, who is working at the local food hub outside the station today. She uses the lift to get down to ground level and then pushes the trailer to the hub.

10 pm Station Antwerpen Berchem (core)

10.25 pm Station Sint-Katelijne-Waver (rural hinterland)

Train manager Jef slides the trailer with organic waste into the food compartment before checking if the platform is empty.

Jan’s dad is waiting at the station for his trailer to arrive. When the train calls at the station, Jan’s dad climbs into the food compartment to pull out the ramp and unload the trailer. On the platform, he attaches it to his bike and cycles back with organic waste that will be composted and used as fertilizer on his land.

l loca d o fo

Ann is busy organizing the food boxes at the hub while the first customers arrive: a secretary picking up a fruit box for her office, a doctor collecting his weekly vegetables on his way home after a night shift,… Mark arrives with his bike and attaches the trailer with food destined for the market at Dageraadplaats in Zurenborg, 5 minutes away from the station.

The food that was loaded onto the train this morning in SintKatelijne-Waver is now almost gone: it is all sold to local residents at the weekly market. Mark loads the trailer with organic waste that is collected at the hub in Zurenborg and cycles back to the food hub at the train station.

Ann is working the evening shift, helping people that collect their boxes and preparing the trailer that Mark brought back to her for transport to the farm. She adds some boxes with organic waste to what’s already in the trailer and then brings it to the right platform.

Table 9 Regional loop of the local food system

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

5 Conclusion The impact of food systems on the climate is huge: food systems currently

guiding people to local food, are designed. In the periphery, a network of

integrated system of regional distribution. Benefits from food localization

account for 29 per cent of global carbon emissions. The project addressed this

food distribution and disposal is designed around a transport hub. The rural

on the local scale contribute to creating a closed loop food system on the

challenge by investigating how food systems can be made more sustainable

hinterland has a similar network solution, but is distinguished by its tourism

regional scale as well.

using the approach of food localization. It looked at how food localization

facilities. On the regional level, existing infrastructure like railways and cycle

can contribute to the sustainability of settlements and how a sustainable

highways are used to handle distribution and disposal of local food.

The project proves that implementation of food localization is straightforward.

food system can be implemented. It applied an holistic approach, including

A clear set of criteria points out the most crucial elements that have to be

food production, processing, distribution and disposal, and addressed the

present to create a sustainable local food system. The criteria can be used Contribution and transferability

when planning a sustainable local food system or can be used as a tool for

By creating a closed loop concept for sustainable food localization, the

creating awareness about the food system with consumers. Furthermore,

A thorough literature review has showed that local food systems benefit

project contributes to the existing body of work on local food systems

the toolkit of design principles builds on extending the use of existing

communities’ and individuals’ health and well-being, raise awareness and

and sustainability. It offers an holistic and dynamic perspective, since all

infrastructure. By simply adding functions like food transport on passenger

educate, reduce human impact on the environment and support local

elements of the food systems are addressed, not as single components but

trains or by introducing adaptable solutions, for example local food hubs,

economies. The embeddedness also strengthens connections between

as a system where every ingredient influences the whole.

the urban form and infrastructure do not have to be altered to achieve

gaps in current research with the concept of closing the loop.

successful and sustainable food localization.

urban and rural and brings people and food closer together. At the moment, food localization only happens to a small extent. It is important to acknowledge that every country has an amount of farmland and can

The toolkit and the design solutions offer straightforward methods for

production

produce according to local conditions. These local conditions constrain food

disposal sustainable food localization

production, so food localization is not a matter of “local food is best”, but of accepting the limitations of the local food system while using it to obtain benefits for community, environment and economy, without necessarily

processing

striving for self-sufficiency.

implementing sustainable local food systems and can be used by the public as well as private sector for the planning and designing of sustainable strategies for food systems. Moreover, the concept of closing the loop

distribution

reinforces the cycle thinking that is inherent to the field of sustainability. An important issue to look at in further studies is how people’s lifestyle and behaviour affects the local food system. Is there a need for a critical mass

A case study analysis confirmed the beneficial impact of food localization but also uncovered a gap in the current approach. Productivity is generally

In the project, sustainable food localization is implemented in four types

to make food localization successful? Some elements of the food system

low and disposal and distribution are undermining the sustainability of the

of urban form. The implementation is derived from a toolkit of design

might be harder to nudge in the direction of sustainability than others.

local food system. To create a sustainable local food system, it is crucial to

principles, specific to urban form and scale variables, but not to a site. Off

The part of the food system before it reaches the consumers (production,

develop sustainable strategies on local and regional levels for distribution

course, site specific conditions have to be acknowledged so the toolkit can

processing and distribution) might be easier to alter towards sustainable

and disposal, as well as for production and processing. By addressing every

be implemented in the most ideal way. Nevertheless, the design solutions

food localization than the stage of disposal, that to a greater extent depends

part of the food system, a closed loop will be created.

developed for the project sites are based on the toolkit and therefore widely

on the behaviour of individuals.

applicable, since they represent solutions for a general problem, not a siteThe design principles were tested on four project sites in Flanders, Belgium,

specific one.

that represent different types of settlements and together form a region. In the core, the design is a compact solution for a gardening shed that

Since a location is always positioned within a wider region, it is wise to

can be transformed into a workshop space. In the fringe, several objects,

use the resources that are produced throughout the region and create an

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

Final thoughts If you eat, you are in. (Warhurst, 2012) Food is a resource, vital for survival. In other words, everyone is affected by some kind of food system. Every country has an amount of farmland and produces food according to local conditions. The project uncovers both the benefits of food localization for environmental, social and economic sustainability as well as a gap regarding distribution and disposal. It offers the closed loop concept as a new perspective on how to implement food localization to obtain maximum benefits for the local community and environment. Hence, the implementation of food localization becomes an exemplar of strong sustainability since it sparks off a wide array of benefits for people and the environment. Ultimately, it creates a closed loop system in which there is a reconnection of people with food, urban with rural and culture with cultivation.

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

References Agentschap voor Geografische Informatie Vlaanderen 2013. Grootschalig referentiebestand. (Online) Available at:http://geo-vlaanderen.agiv.be/gdiviewer/?simple=true Accessed on: 23.08.2013.

KULAK, M., GRAVES, A. & CHATTERTON, J. 2013. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions with urban agriculture: A Life Cycle Assessment perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 111, 68-78.

BELGIAN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 2013. Bevolkning en bevolkingsdichtheid per gemeente. (Online) Available at: http://www4.vlaanderen.be/dar/svr/cijfers/Exceltabellen/demografie/1_Bevolking/4_Gemeenten/1_Bevolking_en_ bevolkingsdichtheid_gemeente.xls (Accessed on 21.08.2013).

LANDMAN, A. P. 2011. Growing sustainable food systems: A study of local food distribution initiatives in Stellenbosch. MPhil Sustainable development management and planning, University of Stellenbosch.

BELORTA 2013. De grootste coöperatieve veiling (groenten, fruit en bio) van Europa. (online) Available at: http:// belorta.be/nl/over-belorta/cooperatieve-veiling/ (Accessed on 28.08.2013). Bike Fixation 2013. Public Work Stand. (Online) Available at: http://www.bikefixtation.com/products/public-workstand Accessed on: 23.08.2013. BIOVELO 2013. BioVelo. Available at: http://www.biovelo.de/ (Accessed on 13.08.2013). BUDGENS 2013. Meet our farmers. (Online) Available at: http://www.budgens.co.uk/who-we-are/meet-ourfarmers (Accessed on 21.07.2013). CITIES 2011. Farming the city. An overview of the Local Food System. (Online) Available at: http://farmingthecity.net/ wp-content/uploads/2013/07/FTC_localfoodsystem.pdf (Accessed on 29.08.2013). COLEY, D., HOWARD, M. & WINTER, M. 2009. Local food, food miles and carbon emissions: A comparison of farm shop and mass distribution approaches. Food Policy, 34, 150-155. DIPUTACIO BARCELONA 2013. El Baix Llobregat Agrarian Park. (online) Available at: http://www.diba.cat/parcsn/ parcs/plana.asp?parc=9&m=297&o=1 (Accessed on 28.08.2013). EDWARDS-JONES , G., CANALS, L. M. I., HOUNSOME, N., TRUNINGER, M., KOERBER, G., HOUNSOME, B., CROSS , P., YOR K, E. H., HOSPIDO, A., PLASSMANN, K., HARRIS, I. M., EDWARDS, R. T., DAY , G. A. S., TOMOS , A. D., COWELL, S. J. & JONES, D. L. 2008. Testing the assertion that ‘local food is best’: the challenges of an evidence-based approach. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 19. EEN 2012. Biologische eettuin. (Online) Available at: http://www.een.be/programmas/dagelijkse-kost/biologischeoogsttuin (Accessed on 13.08.2013). FACILITATING ALTERNATIVE AGRO -FOOD NETWORKS 2010. Local food systems in Europe. Graz: IFZ. GREWAL, S. S. & GREWAL, P. S. 2012. Can cities become self-reliant in food? Cities, 29, 1-11.

LEONARD, A. 2007. The story of stuff. (Video online) Available at: http://www.storyofstuff.org/movies-all/story-ofstuff/ (Accessed on 28.08.2013). MARTINE Z, S., HAND, M., PRA, M. D., POLLAC K, S., RALSTON , K., SMITH, T., VOGEL , S., CLARK, S., LOHR , L., LOW, S. & NEWMAN, C. 2010. Local Food Systems. Concepts, Impacts, and Issues. Economic Research Report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. NMBS 2009. Reizigerstellingen. (Online) Available at: http://www.treintrambus.be/actueel/blog/1216-opstapcijfers. html (Accessed on 21.08.2013). NORBERG-HODGE, H., MERRIFIELD, T. & GORELICK, S. 2002. Bringing the Food Economy Home: Local Alternatives to Global Agribusiness. London, Zed Books. O’HARA, S. & STAGLE, S. 2001. Global Food Markets and Their Local Alternatives: A Socio-Ecological Economic Perspective. Population and Environment, 22, 533-554. PAÜL, V. & MCKENZIE, F. H. 2013. Peri-urban farmland conservation and development of alternative food networks: Insights from a case-study area in metropolitan Barcelona (Catalonia, Spain). Land Use Policy 30, 94-105. Platteau J., Van Gijseghem D., Van Bogaert T. & Maertens E. (reds.) (2012), Landbouwrapport 2012. Departement Landbouw en Visserij, Brussel. RAJA, S., BORN, B. & RUSSELL, J. K. 2008. A Planners Guide to Community and Regional Food Planning: Transforming Food Environments, Facilitating Healthy Eating. American Planning Association (ed.) Planning Advisory Service. Chicago. RANGASWAMI, J. 2011. Opensource edible landscapes: The Todmorden story. (Online) Available at: http:// confusedofcalcutta.com/2011/11/27/opensource-edible-landscapes-the-todmorden-story/ (Accessed on 13.08.2013). RYDIN, Y. 2010. Governing for sustainable urban development. London, Earthscan.

GRONDSMAAK 2013. CSA Zelfoogstboerderij Grondsmaak. (online) Available at: http://www.grondsmaak.be/ (Accessed on 28.08.2013).

SKINNER CITY FARM 2013. Organic Waste Collection From Local Restaurants. (online) Available at: http:// skinnercityfarm.wordpress.com/vermiculturecomposting/organic-waste-collection-from-local-restaurants/ (Accessed on 21.07.2013).

GÄRTNEREI SCHMÄLZLE 2013. Gärtnerei Schmälzle. (Online) Available at: http://www.schmaelzle.com/ (Accessed on 13.08.2013).

SKINNER CITY FARM 2013a. Skinner City Farm. (Online) Available at: http://skinnercityfarm.com/ (Accessed on 13.08.2013).

HET OPEN VELD 2013. Het Open Veld. (Online) Available at: http://www.hetopenveld.be/ (Accessed on 13.08.2013).

SKINNER CITY FARM 2013b. Organic Waste Collection From Local Restaurants. (online) Available at: http:// skinnercityfarm.wordpress.com/vermiculturecomposting/organic-waste-collection-from-local-restaurants/ (Accessed on 21.07.2013).

INCREDIBLE EDIBLE NETWORK 2013. Beyond business as usual: Pam Warhurst at the TEDx Exeter. (Video online) Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KmKoj4RSZw (Accessed on 20.07.2013). INCREDIBLE EDIBLE TODMORDEN 2013. Incredible Edible Todmorden. (Online) Available at: http://www.incredibleedible-todmorden.co.uk/ (Accessed on 13.08.2013).

Kato Allaert

SOIL ASSOCIATION 2013a. Community Supported Agriculture. (Online) Available at: http://www.soilassociation.org/ farmersgrowers/market/routestomarket/communitysupportedagriculture (Accessed on 21.07.2013).

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project

SOIL ASSOCIATION 2013b. Local food. (Online) Available at: http://www.soilassociation.org/farmersgrowers/market/ routestomarket/localfood (Accessed on 21.07.2013). SONNINO, R. 2009. Feeding the City: Towards a New Research and Planning Agenda. International Planning Studies, 14:4, 425-435. Stad Antwerpen 2013. Stad Antwerpen in cijfers. (Online) Available at: http://www.antwerpen.buurtmonitor.be/ Accessed on: 29.08.2013. STEEL, C. 2009. Hungry City. How food shapes our lives. London, Vintage STRINGER, L. 2012. Food production contributes 29% of global carbon emissions. (online) Available at: http://www. edie.net/news/6/Food-production-contributes-29-of-global-carbon-emissions/23492/ (Accessed on 29.07.13). STROUD COMMUNITY AGRICULTURE 2013. Stroud Community Agriculture. Available at: http://www. stroudcommunityagriculture.org/ (Accessed on 13.08.2013). TOERISME SINT-KATELIJNE-WAVER 2013. Mechelse groentestreek. (online) Available at: http://www.toerismeskw.be/ nl/mechelse_groentestreek (Accessed on 28.08.2013). WAITROSE 2013. Weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re backing British. (Online) Available at: http://www.waitrose.com/home/inspiration/about_ waitrose/the_waitrose_way/the_origin_of_our_food.html (Accessed on 21.07.2013). WARHURST, P. 2012. How we can eat our landscapes. (Video online) Available at: http://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=4KmKoj4RSZw (Accessed on 20.07.2013). WEIR, N., PILLEY, G. & HARRISON, M. n.d. The story of Community Supported Agriculture in Stroud. (online) Available at: http://www.soilassociation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=mSmdQJt8d7U%3D&tabid=224 (Accessed on 14.08.2013). YIN, R. 2009. Case study research : design and methods. London, Sage.

Kato Allaert

MSc Sustainable Urbanism - Major Research Project