Open Collections

UBC Undergraduate Research

Cultivating Resilience : Assessing Vancouver’s Local Food System Tung, Audrey; Ginther, Bryana; Shen, Lucy; Hinds, Taylor Apr 9, 2017

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
52966-Tung_A_et_al_Cultivating_resilience_assessing.pdf [ 6.6MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 52966-1.0347248.json
JSON-LD: 52966-1.0347248-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 52966-1.0347248-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 52966-1.0347248-rdf.json
Turtle: 52966-1.0347248-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 52966-1.0347248-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 52966-1.0347248-source.json
Full Text
52966-1.0347248-fulltext.txt
Citation
52966-1.0347248.ris

Full Text

 1           Cultivating Resilience:  Assessing Vancouver’s Local Food System  ENVR 400 Final Report In Partnership with Village Vancouver Transition Society   Audrey Tung Bryana Ginther Lucy Shen Taylor Hinds Research Advisor: Sara Harris ENVR 400 Research Project in Environmental Science    April 9, 2017                    2  Executive Summary  Current agricultural systems account for approximately 20% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (IPCC, 2014). A growing population, depleting key resources (oil and phosphorous1), loss of farm lands and the risk of changing climatic conditions highlight the need for a dramatic change to our global food network. As a response to this globalized, industrial model of agriculture, localized food systems are less fossil fuel intensive due to reduced transport and processing needs, as well as small-scale farming methods (Neff et al., 2011). Local food systems are not only ecologically sustainable, but also socially just, increasing the availability of food, creating livelihoods, and strengthening the relationship between farmers and consumers in the community.  Project Objectives: 1.  Identify a successful policy environment for small-scale urban food systems to flourish and improve farmer livelihoods  2. Assess the role of non-governmental actors in influencing policy development  3. Learn how small-scale urban farms and related stakeholders develop resilience against climate change and fossil fuel related contingencies   This project is completed in partnership with Village Vancouver Transition Society. The goal of this project is to inform further policy development to create a more resilient food system within the Village Vancouver Transition Society’s overarching timeline of 2040. This research project identifies local, sustainable food initiatives in Vancouver and evaluates the public policies that enable the initiatives’ successful implementation. Through examining policy documents and interviewing local food system actors, current laws, bylaws and strategies governing urban food systems were assessed.  Barriers to growth were identified from survey and interview responses, and are broadly categorized into economic, resource, and marketplace barriers (summarized below). Addressing these barriers, increasing awareness and continuing sustainable farming practices will allow small scale farmers to scale up their production and operations to build a more resilient local urban food system. The findings of this research lead to a plethora of recommendations to local food system actors and governmental organizations to develop resilience to climate change and oil scarcity.                                                                1	https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/phosphorus-a-looming-crisis/  3  ECONOMICS Barriers Recommendations Consumer demand for lower prices and higher quality Beneficial tax structures for small scale farmers to subsidize cost of production. Consumer demands for accessibility and variety Enable alternative food retail and distribution structures for urban-farmed products High barriers to entry into the capitalist marketplace Foster networking hubs- split costs and buy fertilizer and equipment in bulk Hard to earn profit and breakeven due to competitive pricing Implementing educational programs or other revenue generating sources High costs for operations Capital support for shared agricultural infrastructure can be provided by the government   RESOURCES Barriers Recommendations Lack of physical access to land -Stronger protection for ALR land (enforcement and updated laws) -Improve municipal zoning bylaws to incentivize urban agriculture  Lack of financial access to land Better grants for urban farmers creating stronger financial incentives  Soil contamination Increase fines and surveillance for illegal dumping on farmland Impaired access to water Lower water rates for farmers   MARKETPLACE Barriers Recommendations  Restrictive fees and regulations  Fees and regulations should be limited to encourage local food production and sales Insufficient foot traffic for small community markets Zoning bylaws should be amended to allow community markets on parkland  Insufficient profit margins Low income markets should be re-evaluated and better funded. Insufficient Farmers Market capacity Farmers markets should be expanded to include smaller-scale farmers and more markets should be established  EDUCATION Barriers Recommendations  Lack of public knowledge Intergenerational and intercultural learning initiatives  Gap in education connecting food availability and climate change  Incorporate climate change and resource consumption into current policy framework Lack of urgency  Inspire individuals to produce food necessary to feed the local population  Future Uncertainty Continued research on growing practices and climate change        4  From these findings it is concluded that further policy development is required to create a more cohesive policy environment, to improve farmers livelihoods, and develop resilience into the future. The Vancouver Food Strategy, created by the Vancouver Food Policy Council, is a comprehensive synthesis of municipal goals that showcases the investment by the municipal government in the sustainable future of Vancouver’s food system. Moving forward, it is recommended that issues of production capacity,  oil scarcity and climate change are addressed in advancements of this policy document. There is encouraging evidence of communication between non-governmental actors and the municipal government, something that is essential for local food production to thrive. These interactions should be continued as local food system actors have a valuable perspective on the effectiveness of policies and government initiatives and funding allocation.  Small-scale urban farms operate with little reliance on oil or degradation of the environment, and maintain sustainable production methods. These organizations act as role models in fostering resilience. Supporting increased production of food, and increased contribution to the food supply by small urban farms while maintaining sustainable practices will ensure Vancouver is prepared for changing environmental conditions by 2040.                                    5  Author Biographies  Audrey Tung Audrey is a 4th year UBC Environmental Sciences student with a concentration in Land, Water, and Air. Her experience with food-related issues includes working as an intern at the Richmond Food Security Society, which is a local non-profit organization, Agriculture and Agri-food Canada as a research assistant in the nematology lab, and as a volunteer research assistant at the UBC Fisheries Centre, where she co-created a presentation about the ecological basis of food security for an Ecological Society of America symposium. Her passions and interests include food sovereignty, food justice, rural livelihoods, and agroecology.  Bryana Ginther  Bryana has demonstrated her passion for agriculture through her co-op work experiences in the industry. She is a fourth-year environmental sciences student specializing in Land, Air and Water. While volunteering at the UBC Farm and UBC Horticulture greenhouse, she first became interested in the connection between farms and consumers. Her professional experience has included working in integrated pest management, agriculture technology, and microbial crop yield enhancement.  Post graduation, she is hoping to apply her knowledge in technological innovations in agriculture, or on projects focusing on increasing food security in the event of an emergency.   Lucy Shen Lucy is a fourth year Environmental Sciences and Commerce minor student at UBC, passionate about environmental sciences and business. Her experience includes partaking in a business development co-op for an engineering startup company at UBC, and volunteering for Be The Change, a non-profit organization, both involving aspects of green advocacy and reducing carbon footprints. She is particularly interested in food security in the Lower Mainland because she understands the reliance of the current food system on global trade and believes that it is unsustainable. She wants to integrate business perspectives into her science background, namely in environmental consulting or project management.   Taylor Hinds Taylor has a strong interest in the environmental, human health and social issues pertaining to food and agriculture. She has worked with the federal and provincial governments on risk management of heavy metals and land remediation of contaminated sites. She had also worked with a non-profit addressing food security in Toronto, and with the Liu Institute of Global Issues on the benefits of organic farming over conventional methods. She is currently in her 4th year finishing her environmental science degree in the land, air, water concentration at the University of British Columbia.            6  Table of Contents  1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Shifting from Global to Local Systems ............................................................................ 7 1.2 Non-governmental Actors ................................................................................................ 8 1.3 Urban Agriculture in Vancouver ...................................................................................... 8 2. Current Policy Environment ........................................................................................... 9 2.1 Vancouver Food Strategy ................................................................................................. 9 3. Methods ........................................................................................................................... 10 4. Findings ........................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 Characterization of respondents ..................................................................................... 12 4.2 Themes in the Findings .................................................................................................. 13 4.3 Vancouver’s Local Food System ................................................................................... 14 a. Social Justice, Education & Advocacy ............................................................................. 14 b. Environmental Impacts and Developing Resilience ......................................................... 15 bi. Barriers to growth ............................................................................................................... 15 a. Economy .................................................................................................................... 16 b. Access to resources .................................................................................................... 17 c. Marketplace ................................................................................................................ 18 d. Education ................................................................................................................... 19 bii. Urban Farming Methods .................................................................................................... 21 a. Farming Practices ....................................................................................................... 21 b. Season Extension ....................................................................................................... 21 c. Irrigation ..................................................................................................................... 22 d. Transport .................................................................................................................... 22 e. Compost ..................................................................................................................... 22 5. Role of Non-Governmental Actors ................................................................................ 23 6. Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 25 6.1 Stronger protection for the Agricultural Land Reserve .................................................. 25 6.2 Lower water rates for food producers ............................................................................ 25 6.3 Improved financial incentives for urban farmers ........................................................... 25 6.4 Improved zoning by-laws ............................................................................................... 25 6.5 Improved distribution channels ...................................................................................... 26 6.6 Environmental initiatives ............................................................................................... 26 6.7 Implementation of the Food Strategy ............................................................................. 26 7. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 27 8. References ........................................................................................................................ 28    7  1. Introduction  The goal of this project is to assess the potential of urban food systems to provide a substantial contribution to local food requirements in the British Columbia lower mainland (BCLM) by answering the following research questions:  1. What is an appropriate policy environment for small-scale urban food systems to flourish and improve farmer livelihoods? 2. What is the role of non-governmental actors in influencing and ensuring policies for urban food systems? 3. How do small-scale urban farms and related stakeholders develop resilience in regional and local levels against climate change and fossil fuel related contingencies?  Ann Pacey, Vice President of Village Vancouver Transition Society, is the primary stakeholder in the completion of this report. This document is an informative assessment of the potential for urban food systems to enhance resiliency with the purpose of contributing a longer-term horizon to policy development in the city of Vancouver. The goal of our project is to aid future policy development in the city to create a more resilient food system.  1.1 Shifting from Global to Local Systems  Conventional agriculture is a highly emissions-intensive industry due to its reliance on fossil fuels for transport, processing, machinery, external inputs such as pesticides and fertilizers, as well as its role as a driver of land use change. As a response to this globalized, industrial model of agriculture, the local food movement is less fossil fuel intensive due to (1) a reduction in the amount of oil used in food production (2) increased energy efficiency of our food system and renewable energy sources (3) altered public consumption patterns and (4) reduced transportation of food (Neff et al., 2011).  Urban agriculture is a key component of the transition towards resilient, localized systems. As global population grows larger and becomes ever more concentrated in urban environments, issues such as food insecurity, climate change and fossil fuel dependence grow with it. More and more, urban dwellers are seeing the need to produce environmentally sustainable, healthy and affordable food within cities, and are turning to urban agriculture to address these needs. Urban agriculture shows potential for being the backbone of a self-sufficient, resilient and environmentally sustainable food system. Many current urban farms are organic, low-energy, low-carbon, low land-use operations and are generally supportive of ecosystems. It’s decreased reliance on fossil fuels and food imports, combined with small-scale agricultural methods such as crop diversification, that insulates the system against future shocks such as climate variability and unreliable fossil fuel availability. Within the context of future unpredictability, our report assesses how small-scale stakeholders develop resilience to these stresses. Local food systems are not only ecologically sustainable, but also socially just, increasing the availability of food, creates livelihoods, and strengthening the relationship between farmers and consumers in the community. In addition to reducing carbon emissions, it creates employment and development opportunities, increases food access and security, provides healthy food options, improves general well-being (Golden, 2013). Although our project was not designed to explore the social aspect of food production, we inevitably  8 encountered important social issues during our discussions with farmers and food system actors. In our report, we outline some of the recurring social issues that surfaced during surveys and interviews, as well as recommendations for these issues. 1.2 Non-governmental Actors  The majority of a city’s transformative capacity, in terms of shifting towards a more localized and sustainable food system, lies within entities external to government. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs), universities and colleges, community groups, health agencies, charitable organizations, and the private sector lead a variety of important projects and services such as community gardens, food preparation workshops, farmer education, advocacy, food provisioning for vulnerable populations, and market channels. In recognition of their crucial role in operationalizing food policy initiatives, many municipal governments forge partnerships with these organizations, thus providing not only resources for advancing their work, but also a platform for influencing policy decisions (MacCrae & Donahue, 2013). This places them in a unique position to act as a liaison between community members and policy makers. Food policy councils (FPCs), comprised of representatives from a broad spectrum of food system stakeholders, function as key networking agents and facilitators of cross-sector policy dialogue (MacCrae & Donahue, 2013). These forums for discourse often create opportunities for collaborations between agencies and for influencing policy decisions. According to Matacena (2016), one of the major innovative features of FPCs is the prominent role that civil society plays, marking a decentralization of power in favour of more bottom-up approaches to policy. FPCs may be embedded within, operating independently of, or affiliated with, local governments. The Vancouver Food Policy Council, which developed the Vancouver Food Strategy in partnership with the City of Vancouver, operates as a volunteer citizen advisory committee whose members are approved by municipal staff. The Vancouver Food Strategy incorporated stakeholder and public input via a series of roundtable discussions, storytelling and dialogue events, toolkits and exercises, workshops and focus groups that reached over 2200 people (Vancouver Food Strategy 2013).  Individual community groups, despite their small size, may also exert some influence on policy through lobbying and establishing partnerships with municipal governments. For instance, the Richmond Food Security Society created a Food Charter document, intended to guide policy and programming decisions, which was formally endorsed by the City of Richmond (Richmond Food Security Society 2016). Given Metro Vancouver’s strong presence of non-governmental actors involved in local food initiatives, something that is widely acknowledged in Metro Vancouver’s food strategy documents, this study examines the extent to which they influence food policy, as well as the avenues through which they do so. We interacted directly with many of these stakeholders for this project.  1.3 Urban Agriculture in Vancouver  An important aspect of urban agriculture is support, and Vancouver has plenty of programs in place to support people get into urban farming. Some examples of those programs are Victory Gardens Vancouver, which helps people design and construct food gardens in their yards, Urban Stream which helps businesses, restaurants and schools compost effectively, The Vancouver Fruit Tree Project which helps homeowners harvest fruit from their fruit trees, and even the City of Vancouver which has a program to help people start a community garden in their neighbourhood (Urban Stream, 2016; City of Vancouver,  9 2016; Vancouver Fruit Tree Project Society, 2016). Further, there are food networks across the city at the neighbourhood level that bring together community members, organizations and agencies on issues pertaining to food justice and resilience.  The agriculture community in Vancouver is already on the path to environmental sustainability and resilience in the food system. It is quite possible that due to the effects of climate change and peak oil, Vancouver may have to rely predominantly on systems such as these to provide food for itself in the future. Programs like these will require support in order to expand, so determining where gaps in policy currently lie is imperative to adequately prepare for the future. 2. Current Policy Environment  The underlying objective of related policies is to strengthen local, sustainable food networks, which are often more sustainable than conventional food distribution channels due to decreased transport and processing, and the predominantly small-scale means of production. Regional food-related policies and programs have the potential to support regional farmers and food producers, preserve farmland resources, and provide a supportive environment for different forms of urban farming ventures.  At the provincial level, a major policy initiative is the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), which was intended to prevent the loss of BC farmland. The Fraser Valley has approximately 130,000 hectares of Agricultural Land Reserve, and is considered as “one of the most productive peri-urban areas in North America” (Vancouver Food Strategy, 2013). Regional or municipal grants can contribute to the development of sustainable food systems through grants such as the Greenest City Neighbourhood Grants, Canon Canada Urban Agriculture Fund and Social Responsibility Fund (Vancouver Food Strategy, 2013). The City of Vancouver and Vancouver Foundation teamed up to create the Greenest City Funds pertaining a sum of $2 million dollars, which can be redistributed into various extents; Generation Green Grants providing up to $100,000 per year to fund Vancouver youth-led groups, Greenest City Neighbourhood Small Grants up to $70,000 to fund Vancouver resident-led projects that benefit their neighbourhood, and the Greenest City Community Grants providing up to $330,000 per year to fund community-based charitable projects in Vancouver. There are also a limited number of Sustainable Food System grants available to non profit organizations that increase access to food, promote inclusion and participation and build sustainable food systems (City of Vancouver, 2017). The eligibility for these grants stem from the action goals cited in the Greenest City Action Plan.  Other smaller scale partnership opportunities involve collaboration with other levels of government such as Vancouver Coastal Health in funding Vancouver’s neighbourhood food networks.  More policy environments that can support small-scale urban food systems include enabling alternative food retail and distribution structures for urban-farmed products such as creations of community food markets, food distribution hubs and pre-approved distribution sites for Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs.  Strategies and Action Plans are for enabling knowledge transfer among local governments and identifying opportunities to collaboratively address persistent and cross-jurisdictional regional food system issues.   2.1 Vancouver Food Strategy  The City of Vancouver, in partnership with the Vancouver Food Policy Council,  10 developed the Vancouver Food Strategy in 2013, which functions as road map for guiding food system initiatives. Its five overarching goals are to support food-friendly neighbourhoods empower residents to take action; improve access to healthy, affordable, culturally diverse food for residents; make food a centrepiece of Vancouver’s green economy; and to advocate for a just and sustainable ecosystem. Although this policy document is closely aligned with transition goals, the short-term scope does not adequately acknowledge future vulnerabilities in the food system. Consequently, it is evident that a re-assessment of Vancouver’s food policy framework will be necessary to ensure local food security on a larger time frame, which is an aspect that our project will address. We will therefore use the Vancouver Food Strategy as the basis for our policy analysis. The Vancouver Food Strategy acknowledges its current scale of production through a Summary of Food Assets as of 2012, including 97 community gardens, 3900 garden plots, 17 urban farms, 18 community orchards, neighbourhood food networks engaging and benefiting 20,000 people in 2011, nine farmers markets, four community food markets operated by nonprofit groups, 103 street food vendors selling food representing ethno-culturally diverse communities and three community composting sites.   Figure 1. A word cloud of common words used in the Vancouver Food Strategy (2013).   3. Methods  We gleaned data from a combination of literature review, document analysis, and stakeholder interviews/surveys. Firstly, we conducted a comprehensive literature review to develop our knowledge base about the Vancouver food system’s status quo, as well as to draw upon the successes and failures of, or innovations in, food policy elsewhere. Metro Vancouver’s existing policy documents, namely the Vancouver Food Strategy provided a foundation on which we crafted our own policy recommendations, addressing existing gaps and accounting for future stresses on the food system. Through conducting verbal interviews with local food network stakeholders, we gauged perspectives on using a policy framework to strengthen our local food system. Potential respondents were selected based on their involvement in one or more of the following categories, which we believe adequately encompass the range of local food activities: education and advocacy, urban and small-scale food production, and food waste  11 management.  Where possible, we conducted verbal (in-person and telephone) interviews for organizations that play a significant role in influencing food policy. This was due to the fact that verbal interviews produce more elaborate responses for open-ended questions, have higher response rate compared to online surveys, and create more opportunities for clarification in the event of misinterpretation (Bowling, 2005) (Szolnoki, 2013). Verbal interviews were then transcribed using the online applications transcriber.wreally.org and Transcribe. Online surveys were created using UBC Survey, with a link included in the letter of initial contact. Our survey questions prompted respondents to identify potential policy gaps, provide policy suggestions, assess the efficacy of existing policies, and describe their opinions on issues such as food system resilience, fossil fuel dependence, and climate change. We tried to elicit specific responses via a combination of closed-ended multiple-choice questions, which are easier to answer, more consistent, more convenient for data analysis, as well as open-ended questions, which more adequately address complex issues with richer, more nuanced responses (Statistics Canada, 2011). Multiple choice answers were simply tallied on a spreadsheet and expressed as proportions. Since the responses to open-ended questions were qualitative in nature, we needed to quantify and delineate such data for analysis. To do so, we first organized transcribed responses onto a spreadsheet template, identified key common themes prevalent in responses, counted the number of responses that convey these themes, then expressed these counts as a proportion of the total number of respondents. We also used direct quotes from participants to convey opinions and ideas. We cross-referenced information obtained from our interviews with the Vancouver Food Strategy to identify policy gaps. We then drew upon stakeholder perspectives, alongside our scientific literature review, to inform our policy recommendations. According to Gregory (2000), accounting for both stakeholder values and scientific data, despite being potentially non-complementary to one another, in the policy-making process increases the quality and acceptability of policy decisions.    Participating Organizations Education & Advocacy Vancouver Food Policy Council, Village Vancouver Transition Society, UBC Farm, Grandview Woodlands Food Connection Urban and Small-Scale Food Production Sweet Digz, Frisch Farms, Urban Digs, Red Barns Plants & Produce, Easterbrook Farms Ltd., Fresh Roots, Southlands Heritage Farm Food Waste Management Hop Compost  12 different stakeholders in the local Vancouver food system were interviewed or surveyed on the values, contributions and potential of their organizations in the local urban food system. The local urban food system is a vast, all-encompassing system which includes many more crucial stakeholders outside of our realm of research. However, the respondent organizations covered a broad spectrum of organizational categories such as education and  12 advocacy, urban and small-scale food production, waste management and non-governmental actors. 4. Findings 4.1 Characterization of respondents These local stakeholders from various branches of the local urban food system are valuable in their ability to strengthen the local urban food system in cultivating resilience against climate change. After assessing several components that characterize the organizations including the mandates, organization size, and type of organization, we were able to see common features as well as areas of difference between the various participants. A word cloud of the respondent organization’s mandates as illustrated in Figure 3 depicts the words that were most frequently mentioned in the organization mandates. Top words included farm, sustainable, community, community, grow, work, support, and local. The vast majority of organizations had mandates addressing their own organizational needs or social issues rather than environmental issues. A few organizations stressed the importance of sustainable farming activities and the importance of strengthening the local food system through small-scale urban farms and production. This is in part synonymous with the focus of the Vancouver Food Strategy (2013), where the highest frequency of words that were found in the strategy plan focusing mainly on social justice issues rather than identifying environmental issues as a result of climate change. In the Vancouver Food Strategy document, the most common words mentioned were community, policy, local, urban, market, neighbourhood, sustainable, access, and support (Figure 1). Common words in both Vancouver Food Strategy and mandates word cloud included sustainable, community, support and local (Figures 1 & 2). Among the participants, there was a wide range of characteristics, with organization sizes ranging anywhere between 1 full-time employee to 30 full-time employees in addition to a number of part-time employees and volunteers. Not only were the sizes of organizations variable from one organization to the next, the number of employees and volunteers varied between seasons, particularly by growing or harvesting season. Full-time employees or farm owners were present in each organization which focused on urban and small-scale production and waste management, and 15 voting members made up of the Vancouver Food Policy Council who are all different liaisons between the Vancouver Food Policy Council and their respective stakeholder groups.  As most of these organizations are small-scale, economies of scale are not possible. As some of our respondents were self-sufficient, meaning they do not need any outside capital to operate, some small-scale urban farms are unable to amass sufficient funds to cover their costs of production and run their daily activities. Organizations who need additional capital such as the UBC Farm are able to sustain their farming practices and food production through implementing additional revenue centres such as workshops and children’s programs.   13  Figure 2. A word cloud of the mandates from surveyed and interviewed organizations.    4.2 Themes in the Findings  The following sections describe in detail the results of our research (Figure 3). Using what we uncovered, we chose to split Vancouver’s food system into two main sections collecting the perspectives of participating organizations on each. The Social section centers on education and advocacy, as well as the community building and food justice elements of the food system, which are fairly well represented in the Vancouver Food Strategy document. The interview questions were not targeted to this sector, and the findings limited. The other section of the food system is the Environmental section, where the bulk of the study was focused. The environmental impacts of farming and the idea of building local resilience as a response were investigated in depth. To develop resilience in Vancouver, the two areas identified by respondents were barriers to growth and continuing urban farming methods. These two themes were explored further and are the foundation on which our recommendations are based.     14  Figure 2. Flow Chart of the Local Food System in the context of this research project.  4.3 Vancouver’s Local Food System a. Social Justice, Education & Advocacy Although our report focuses on the environmental aspects of food production, the local food movement is as much a matter of social justice as it is one of ecological integrity. The Vancouver Food Strategy largely operates within the social, rather than environmental, sphere, with all five of its goals (Support food-friendly neighbourhoods, Empower residents to take action, Improve access to healthy, affordable, culturally diverse food for all residents, Make food a centerpiece of Vancouver’s green economy, Advocate for a just and sustainable food system with partners and at all levels of government) structured around community-building. Currently, Vancouver’s abundance of community-based infrastructure, including educational programs, gardening/food preparation workshops, and advocacy initiatives, is highly consistent with this approach. While community involvement is comprehensively addressed, the Strategy underdeveloped other aspects of food justice.   Two participants in our study criticized the narrow scope of municipal policy. An urban farmer from Frisch Farms questions the practicality of the City of Vancouver’s community-centric approach to local food, which obscures the need to scale up the local food system in substantial ways. In his opinion, municipal is “about connecting people so they offer community gardens, but actually how much impact does that make”. While the city is trying to “create community through the food whereas [he’s] thinking let's try to create a local sustainable ecosystem, let's talk about as much food as we can and put Safeway out of business”.   The director of the Grandview-Woodlands Food Connection similarly expresses anti-capitalist sentiment, criticizing the government’s attempts to work within, rather than redefining a system that he believes is fundamentally unfair to farmers. For him, local  15 farmers will be unable to compete with more affordable supermarkets - which are favoured under capitalism - until the general population earns sufficient living wages:  I think there's a lot of work we need to do to make food accessible. I think initiatives like Sole Food have been good. But they have to sell at a higher cost, they have to sell to make, but they're employing people, that's good. The province has the voucher program for farmer's markets but it's pretty negligible I think. I don't think it's helping people but there needs to be a whole other model I mean basically the whole [expletive] corporate capitalist system is just screwed, you can throw subsidies at low-income but that's just band-aid right? So you know this is requires a whole new vision, paradigm. Which is based on people having access to, the ability to earn money, to pay the farmers to grow the healthy food.  He believes that the Vancouver Food Strategy inadequately addresses food justice in terms of poverty and equity:   The Food Strategy needs to be linked to these other issues and we need to look at food security in the bigger picture as a consequence of poverty...I don't think the policies really address the poverty issues well enough and how do they address issues of land access and equitable distribution?  The Food Strategy’s focus on community-building presents a romanticized future of urban food production instead of confronting significant challenges such as production capacity, poverty, and, as discussed further within this report, the impending impacts of climate and oil scarcity. b. Environmental Impacts and Developing Resilience The health of the environment is deeply ingrained in the food system to the extent that an analysis of one, would be incomplete without the other. The structure of the food network and the choices humans make have a serious effect on the environment, and the environment in turn has a serious effect on the quantity and quality food produced. The changing climate has already introduced droughts, floods and extreme temperature events that impact farmers’ ability to the grow crops that they depend on for livelihood, and that people depend on for food. Changes in local weather patterns alter growing seasons, and may in the future alter the types of food, water availability, and pest infestations.   An effective way to develop resilience against climate change in the food system could be to increase local food production. This can be done by increasing funding from the government to expand current urban farm production, increasing awareness about climate change and the need for local food, and preparing for the changes ahead. From a total of 6 interviews and 6 online survey responses, we have compiled common barriers which urban farmers and food system actors face to growth. These key points identify changes which need to be made to strengthen our local food system in order to decrease the ecological footprint and prepare for the changes ahead.   bi. Barriers to growth   16 Scaling up local food production is essential to building a system that provides a significant contribution to local food needs. The City of Vancouver must shift away from relying heavily on imports from California and Mexico, and instead produce more food locally to be better prepared for an emergency or a sudden shortage of oil. The sooner framework and infrastructure are put in place, the stronger and more reliable they will be in the future. While Vancouver is among the world leaders in food system policy, and awareness of food related issues, at this point in time, scaling up food production in this city remains challenging. With clashes between development and conservation of land constantly occurring, it is often difficult for food advocates to further their goals; especially during a housing crisis.  Despite valiant efforts on the part of the municipal government and local food actors, there are still multiple barriers impeding the growth of urban agriculture in Vancouver that must be addressed as soon as possible. The barriers identified by food system actors in Vancouver can be broadly categorized as economic barriers, barriers to accessing resources and barriers in the marketplace.  a. Economy  The capitalist economy of Vancouver, and of North America as a whole is an overarching and profound barrier identified by local food system actors that will be extremely difficult to overcome. Consumers demand variety, quality and accessibility at the lowest price which severely disadvantages small scale farmers’ ability to compete, especially with imports. Other countries with different environmental conditions, lower labour costs and economies of scale flood the Vancouver market with inexpensive food. While this is beneficial for consumers, it makes it difficult for small scale farmers, including most urban farmers, to earn a comfortable living:   I do not think it is possible to have a balance between ‘farmers pay themselves a living wage’ and ‘provide produce at a fair market price to consumers’.   As one respondent pointed out, for smaller scale local farmers, the idea of providing cheap produce to consumers is fundamentally incompatible with financial security. Fortunately, 3 of the urban farms that were interviewed including Southlands Heritage Farm and Easterbrook Organic Farm, are able to be self-sufficient and do not require outside capital to sustain their businesses. They do however have various programs aside from produce sales that contribute to their income. Other farms, such as the UBC Farm rely on funding or additional streams of income to help with wages. Further to this, just because a farm is self-sufficient, does not mean that wages are fair, especially given the outrageously high cost of living in Vancouver:  Farmers take a hit - we expect to pay ourselves very little (in comparison to other lines of work), because we believe in the importance of local food.  This is an enormous issue for the sector, and the food system as a whole, because without a positive job outlook, fewer people will be encouraged to join the field and pursue farming as a career. Startup and maintenance costs of farming are high at the small scale; without the potential for financial success, or even stability, people will not motivated to make such investments. Larger farms have the advantage of spreading investments over more  17 products, giving them a lower per unit cost over small-scale farms. Ann Pacey of the Village Vancouver Transition Society recounted the difficulty she experienced running a small egg operation just outside of Vancouver:  I learned a lot, but you cannot make money on a small scale. The initial investment I made wasn't taking into account my time or the cost of gas, it was just the hard cost of the feed and the structures and the elements that I needed to keep the birds healthy. That's pretty typical I think. You have to compete against large-scale, large commercial operations and they just have much lower costs.  Since the capitalist economy and people’s preference for inexpensive food will likely not change in the coming years, it is important to develop solutions and address the lack of financial incentive to farm in the city given current perspectives. b. Access to resources  The barrier brought up by the local food system actors most consistently was physical and financial access to land. Land is an integral part of farming; it must be large enough, affordable, well located and properly suited to farming, which unfortunately is not often the case for much of Vancouver. Within the city, there just isn’t ample, undeveloped space to create farms. Houses with a larger footprint houses are being built on lots that traditionally had more modest house. There was typically more space dedicated for gardens, and as a result, the city is losing both green space and pollinator attraction. This space that is currently being turned into impervious surface, could potentially be used for home gardens or as land for urban farming.  Many urban farms and community gardens found in the city are temporarily created on vacant lots pending development (many of these lots are ex-service stations under remediation for leaking storage tanks). There is a risk of contamination at these sites which requires extra infrastructure and adaptations to comply with safety standards; for example some farmers use structures to bring garden beds out of the ground and into boxes filled with imported soil, so that the food has no contact with the contaminated soil. The issue of contamination is not unique to the city; there is a surprisingly large occurrence of illegal dumping of sometimes toxic construction material on farmland throughout Metro Vancouver. This type of activity limits the utility of farmland and also puts human health at risk.  The people and organizations participating in this study consistently noted that agricultural land in the peri-urban area is also very expensive which acts as a financial barrier to starting a farm or scaling up an existing one. Part of what drives up the price is that agricultural land is being misused. Land that is within the Agricultural Land Reserve should be used exclusively for farming, and thus the cost of land should reflect this. Unfortunately, people including many foreign buyers, have been purchasing large, fertile lots to build mansions; avoiding the ALR land restriction by building fantasy farms or equestrian facilities:   An amendment to the RA-1 Zoning of the Southlands ALR to reduce maximum square footage of houses, and enforcement of the bylaws governing the use of outbuildings i.e. "Tractor Sheds" that are actually 3  18 car garages or swimming pool cabanas, would contribute to encouraging farming rather than estate houses. - Southlands Heritage Farm  Land is not an unlimited resource, and losing potentially productive agricultural land to development is unacceptable. It drives up the prices for land and not only limits the amount of food that can be produced in the area, but also prevents well-intentioned people from choosing to farm.  Access to water was another barrier commonly cited by local food system actors; in particular, the ones located outside of the City of Vancouver. Within the city, farmers use municipal water for their crops, ideally in combination with an above or below ground irrigation system. While this means they must be located in an area where there is reliable, sufficient access to municipal water, many lots charge an annual flat rate for water which can help bring down costs significantly (Vancouver Urban Farming Society, 2015). In places where there is no municipal hookup, or on lots that are metered, water can become a significant expense. In the peri-urban area, farmers are all on a metered system and pay for their water by the cubic meter. Multiple organizations interviewed expressed that water rates were too high for people who are producing food, which is a crucial resource for the province. On top of the price of water, irrigation systems themselves can be quite expensive. They are a big contributor to the initial cost of starting a farm.  Restrictive municipal policies have created barriers for farmers throughout Vancouver and Metro Vancouver:  The little buildings [farmers] have are shipping containers but the city still requires they meet fire and seismic regulations, which can be quite costly for a small farm to meet those things so there needs to be some flexibility on building code. - UBC Farm  In the city, strict building codes are in place for fire and seismic safety which can be very costly to adhere to and make it difficult for farmers to go about their business:  Municipal policies routinely interfere with the ability of farmers to do their jobs. For example, when we were operating in the ALR in Burnaby, we were not allowed to burn our tomato plants at the end of the season (a standard agricultural practice). We were told that "meat is not an agricultural product" by a city license inspector and therefore could not be considered part of the 50% requirement of sales at our farm stand generated by on-farm production. We were denied a licence to slaughter our rabbits on site in spite of the fact that there was nowhere else we could send them for slaughter due to municipal bylaws.  - Urban Digs   It is possible for the city to avoid restrictive municipal policies and support local food production while still maintaining adequate health and safety standards.  c. Marketplace  The final major area local food system actors identified barriers was in the marketplace. Small scale farmers have few options when it comes to distribution, some more  19 accessible than others. The farms interviewed for this study sold their produce at farmer’s markets, farm stands, through Community Supported Agriculture (CSA), and delivered to restaurants.  Fees and restrictive policies can be present a large barrier and are associated with many of these selling options. The business permit to have an urban farm allowing the direct sale of food costs $136 per year, and can only be applied to farms on industrial, commercial or historical area zones. This means that farms in residential zoning districts cannot participate in farm gate sales, and must find other ways of reaching consumers (unless the farm is on Institutional land) (City of Vancouver, 2016).   Produce is typically not a very expensive good, so farmers are required to sell large volumes in order to cover their costs. Costs which also include fees associated with setting up a table at a farmer’s market, and ones associated with transport and refrigeration (which is usually not provided). The farmers markets themselves require a significant investment in time and energy on the part of the farmer, with no guarantee of profitability (VUFS, 2015):   It seems Farmer's Markets used to be more effective, more beneficial for the farmer. Farmer's markets now have an oversupply of farmers & food, and an under-demand from consumers who have so many options to choose from. - Urban Farmer  According to a report by the Urban Farming Society in 2015, Farmers markets are the 2nd largest marketing channel for urban farmers in Vancouver. Due potentially to oversaturation,  there are often restrictive health regulations preventing some smaller farms from participating:  CSA is a great model that works amazingly for us - we give our members our best produce and value them as our #1 market stream, that is an important value that I think should be maintained in the CSA model. It would be AMAZING to have a collective like Equiterre in Quebec that does support & marketing for CSA farms, funded by CSA membership fees. - Urban Farmer   On the other hand, Clare Cullen of the UBC Farm believes that there is room for more farmers’ markets (particularly West of Cambie); farmers could use more opportunities to earn money in different parts of the city and people appreciate having access to locally produced food.   Community markets, which are typically more receptive to small farms, have struggled finding success because their smaller scale typically attracts fewer customers (VUFS, 2015). Ian Marcuse of Grandview Woodland Food Connection explained that community markets, which often operate in underserved communities, aren’t well-located and do not maximize foot traffic. Profit margins for farmers can also be slim, as the food is intended for people with fairly limited resources. d. Education  When asked about the organization’s production in a low carbon environment, it was clear that the participating organizations were concerned about climate change and oil  20 scarcity including unpredictable weather, water resources and availability of oil for transportation. Stakeholders in the urban agriculture food system are aware of the decreased ecological footprint of urban agriculture, as well as the key role of local production in combatting climate change. In the case of two participating organizations, the alarming drought in summer 2015 and its effects on the urban agriculture sector was a wake up call to the realities of a changing climate.  For other organizations, the idea of both peak oil and climate change were more of a distant concern and that farmers would be able to adapt as the challenges arose.   There is a need for education on the urgency of climate change and peak oil scenarios in the community. Both Ian Marcuse from Grandview Woodland Food Connection and Gabriel Pliska from Frisch Farms identified the need for education on climate change and non-renewable resource consumption in the community. Youth and young adults of this generation must be engaged and inspired to become leaders in food production. Ann Pacey from Village Vancouver highlighted the need for intergenerational learning. Currently, it is middle-aged and elderly people who are experienced and actively involved in the food system. Education initiatives must be focused on intergenerational learning to help inspire young farmers. This, along with increased financial support for young farmers, will develop resilience in the local food system. As explained earlier in the Social Justice section of this document, the Vancouver Food Strategy goals and the work of urban food system actors focus greatly on community involvement, education, and advocacy on the food system. Many organizations use creative methods to educate the community on the importance of urban agriculture. For example, Gabriel Pliska from Frisch Farms creates education tutorials and music videos on YouTube to promote growing local. UBC Farm runs children’s camps, and events such as Harvest Feastival, Farm Ade, and Food, The Future, and You. Hop Compost has an active social media platform to raise awareness of sustainable composting. Independent marketing strategies could be expanded to a wider scale to reach a larger audience. For example, a farming fair should be re-incorporated into the Pacific National Exhibition (PNE) during August. In partnership with the Vancouver Food Policy Council a convention on sustainable farming practices should be hosted in Vancouver. Events such as these can benefit the City of Vancouver in terms of tourism, contributions to the Greenest City Action Plan, and further contribute to the Vancouver Food Strategy.  These initiatives are key to promoting a sustainable food system. However, an increase in education on the importance of urban agriculture in developing resilience to climate change may be beneficial. There is a lack of education on emerging issues such as oil scarcity and resource depletion in school systems and community programming.  In addition, a common theme to prepare for the challenges ahead lies within research. Continuing research on changing climate zones and resulting vegetation shifts will aid in the transition to a resilient food system. Specifically, further understanding seasonal impacts, pest distributions, energy consumption and sustainable technologies will help to understand how the local food system can adapt to prepare for such obstacles in the future.  The UBC Farm is a leading example in researching sustainable farming practices and testing of new products. Current research projects at the UBC Farm include: ● Crop-protection research and innovation for adaptation to climate change in BC  ● Sustainable Agri-Aquaculture to address the global threats of fish stock collapse, food insecurity, and environmental degradation  ● Organic Production Systems Nutrient Dynamics to Maximize crop quality and quantity while enhancing land and environmental stewardship.  21 bii. Urban Farming Methods  Community and small-scale farming methods are also an important factor in developing resilience to climate change. As regional export and import systems begin to fail it is important that the local urban food system has developed strategies to continue producing food. Participant respondents identified both practices their organizations already had in place, such as crop rotation and organic production, low carbon transportation, and on-site compost systems.   a. Farming Practices    Urban farmers are leaders in sustainable farming practices. Crop diversification is one of the main approaches to developing resilience against climate change (Lin, 2011). This is often done on small-scale farms and community and educational gardens. There are numerous benefits to growing a variety of different crops within a plot of land. Including vegetation of different structures decreases the success of herbivorous insects and therefore the destruction they cause. A changing climate will alter the distribution of pests, presumably increasing in abundance as higher temperatures increase the range and phenology of a species (Lin, 2011). Agroforestry, has similar benefits to pest suppression and climate change buffering (Lin, 2011). Another benefit of crop diversification is disease suppression, which is done with either different crops or genetically diverse crop variations, limiting massive losses. Thirdly, crop diversification allows for crop rotation of nitrogen fixing and high cover crops that lead to healthier soil and increased productivity (Lin, 2011). Crop diversification is important aspect of resilience that should be continually incorporated into urban farming as they expand and increase production.  b. Season Extension   Numerous respondents identified season extension as a key factor in developing resilience to climate change. Although Vancouver’s climate is temperate and mild, unpredictable weather events and altering seasonal patterns lead to benefits of using this technology. Simple greenhouse technology is improving to allow increased production in creative spaces. BW Global is leading in greenhouse technology based in the Lower Fraser Valley. They have developed custom greenhouses for rooftop urban farming, designed to sustain on the unique structure and create a controlled environment growing with elevated humidity levels. This technology is used to both increase crop yield and extend the growing season. Further research and demonstration projects on similar emerging technologies through funded projects, competitions or research trials are recommended to further develop these methods.   Simpler options for community gardens and small urban farms include hoop houses and small greenhouses. These structures are used on a small-scale to extend the growing season of crops. Hoop houses can be made with bent metal, wood or plastic and are covered by a layer of plastic. These structures are versatile and can be successfully made with recycled material such as pipes, rods and hoses. Traditional greenhouses can also be made with wood and recycled material. In addition, they add versatility to grow crops in creative spaces on patios, rooftops, and in sunrooms, further increasing production space in urban areas.    22 c. Irrigation  Unlike crop diversification and season extension that are already practiced by many urban farmers, respondents identified that the installation of irrigation systems would be beneficial in developing resilience against climate change. Both the UBC Farm and Grandview Woodlands Food Connection raised concern about the drought in the Lower Mainland in Summer of 2015. Stage 3 water restrictions were in effect in Vancouver, and Stage 4 water restrictions were enforced in the Lower Fraser Valley, Vancouver Island, and the Sunshine Coast.  Many urban farms do not have irrigation systems installed as they are costly. Rainwater catchment systems are a great practice, but are not sufficient in prolonged periods of drought. Numerous respondents expressed the need for urban farmers and community gardens to have access to grants and funding for proper irrigation systems to continue food production in drought scenarios.    d. Transport  In general, organizations were only slightly reliant on oil for inputs and transportation. Numerous small organizations transported their produce by bicycle, and larger organizations used minimal vehicle transport to distribute produce short distances. The UBC Farm is currently looking for a more energy efficient alternative to their Land and Food Systems Van to distribute produce to UBC Food Services. Volunteers and employees mostly ride their bicycles too and from the farm, and therefore the farm is interested in zero emission transportation to distribute produce. A common issue with transportation was the need for refrigerated compartments. This requires energy inputs, as well as adding additional weight for bicycle transportation.   e. Compost  Many urban farms and organization have on-site composting where they recycle waste and create nutrient rich soil to fertilize crops. For example, the Grandview Woodland Food Connection has used compost from school cafeteria waste to create rich compost to use in educational community gardens. There are many simple systems available such as the three-bin compost system, plastic bins, and concrete boxes. The two main problems with on-site composting are (1) perfecting the 50/50 balance of inputted green material and brown material and (2) attraction of unwanted animals. The City of Vancouver has a recent initiative to have scheduled collection of compost. This collection system has required residents to compost food scraps consisting of approximately 40% of total household waste (Environment Canada, 2013). This program results in decreased methane emissions by creating nutrient rich compost to be reused in agricultural practices. Although, in some cases this program has discouraged the participation of on-site composting for schools and other larger facilities. Instead of creating fertile soil on location, organics are transported to Richmond to the Metro Vancouver compost facility.   An alternative source of nutrients for hobby gardeners, community gardens, and urban farms is purchasing from local compost producers such as Hop Compost. Hop Compost uses odourless technology which allows for the creation of intercity compost facilities. The goal of this company is to divert food waste from landfills and convert the material into nutrient rich  23 compost to increase crop yields. The compost created is about 7 times more nutrient than standard compost and 2,000 times cleaner than organic compost, and therefore has the ability to dramatically increase production.  5. Role of Non-Governmental Actors  In assessing the influence of non-governmental agencies in terms of policy decisions, we found that there is a high degree of interaction between the public, nonprofit, and private sectors. Vancouver’s local food system is structured in a way in which non-governmental entities, such as community organizations, health agencies, research institutions, and businesses, form the vanguard of local food initiatives. As such, the City of Vancouver relies heavily on these organizations to operationalize initiatives outlined in the municipal Vancouver Food Strategy, a document that was in fact co-developed with non-governmental stakeholders. In turn, non-governmental actors rely on government funding and partnership schemes in order to sustain their operations. This co-dependency places them in a position to relay the concerns and perspectives of the communities in which they are embedded to the municipal government, which attempts to incorporate stakeholder input into policy actions, as exemplified by the Vancouver Food Strategy. A major platform for connecting non-governmental actors with the municipal government is the Vancouver Food Policy Council, a group of volunteers approved by city councils and staff that advise municipal food policy.  Many non-governmental agencies occupy their own specific niche within Vancouver’s local food system, collectively creating a comprehensive institutional landscape. According to Ann Pacey from Village Vancouver, “each one of them has a different sphere of influence” within Vancouver’s policy environment. The Grandview-Woodlands Food Connection, for instance, engages with policy from the perspective of low-income access to food, while UBC farm does so from a more research-based approach.    Figure 4. Organizations that participants considered influential on municipal food policy and the number of times they were identified.   24 Non-governmental organizations, in our study, reported collaborating or engaging in dialogue with the Metro Vancouver Agricultural Advisory Committee, Richmond Agricultural Advisory Committee, the Vancouver Parks Board via community centers, as well as government-affiliated agencies such as Vancouver Coastal Health, which is funded by the BC government, and The Vancouver School Network, which includes representatives from Vancouver Coast Health and the (now-dissolved) Vancouver School Board. Non-governmental agencies that multiple survey participants considered most influential were the Vancouver School Food Network, Society Promoting Environmental Conservation, Vancouver Coastal Health, Urban Farming Society, neighbourhood food networks and community centers, as well as universities such as UBC and Kwantlen Polytechnic (Figure 4). The large number of organizations that engage with food policy indicates that the City of Vancouver operates in a somewhat lateral manner in terms of local food issues.   Figure 5. Participant (n=7) perceptions of municipal receptiveness to stakeholder perspectives expressed as response categories.  Despite the high degree of discourse, the City of Vancouver’s degree of reception to stakeholder input, as perceived the organizations surveyed, has been mediocre. While the majority (4/7) of responses indicated that the City was moderately to extremely receptive to the perspectives and recommendations of non-governmental actors, others (3/7) considered the City to be not at all receptive (Figure 5). Based on these responses, non-governmental actors appear to have a limited role in informing food policy. However, the somewhat polarized response to municipal receptiveness could also be symptomatic of a lack of consensus among stakeholders, since municipal support of certain stakeholders may cause the alienation of others with conflicting views.     25 6. Recommendations  Because food is a necessity of life and a fundamental requirement of a resilient city, urban and peri-urban farmers must be supported so that production can be scaled up and urban farming can be a more financially viable career. Using the perspectives of the local food system actors, several recommendations for the future of Vancouver’s food system are provided here. 6.1 Stronger protection for the Agricultural Land Reserve  Vancouver needs stronger protections for its farmland. Although there are competing interests from developers and homeowners, local, fertile agricultural lands in Metro Vancouver must be protected. This could resemble updating the bylaws to reduce the maximum square footage of structures and regulate outbuildings.  Although implementation of the ALR has succeeded in slowing land conversion, the ALR is constantly threatened by urban development. Since its inception in 1973, the ALR has lost more than 5% of its original land in Southwest BC (Nixon & Newman, 2016). This loss does not reflect the many hectares also lost to hobby farms which may produce food, but make no contributions to the food system and are non-productive from an agricultural perspective. The transformation of fertile soil into impervious surfaces associated with suburban sprawl has short-term economic benefits, and long-term detrimental effects on agricultural production. There need to be harsher penalties and better enforcement of the laws and bylaws to protect against mismanaged farmland, illegal dumping and fraud.  6.2 Lower water rates for food producers  Water rates should be lowered for farmers who are growing food for sale. As one of the greatest expenses for farmers, the city should invest in the welfare of farmers by helping to lower the cost of necessary resources in an effort to improve profit margins  6.3 Improved financial incentives for urban farmers  Clare Cullen of UBC farms pointed out that there are plenty of incentives available for small business owners, but urban farmers do not have a specific department with similar resources available. Since they would be contributing to local resilience, it is in the best interest of the government to provide support. While clearly there are some grants setup for urban farmers, they don’t seem to be sufficient to help urban agriculture scale up in Vancouver. There should be more grants available from the government to help small scale farmers earn a living wage from farming in the city. Creating a department dedicated to supporting new small-scale farmers would help break down several barriers they face, and make it much easier for them to become established. This department could also be responsible for allocating funds to shared resources and infrastructure to lower start up costs for small farms.  6.4 Improved zoning by-laws   26 Zoning by-laws should be amended to improve access to farm status within city limits, and potentially to encourage urban farming activities. Gabriel Pliska of Frisch farms put forth the idea of partially rezoning of lots to allow for commercially profitable backyard gardens and tax reductions proportional to the lot’s contribution to the food supply. Restrictive municipal policies need to be re-evaluated to remove barriers for urban farmers such as potentially allowing farmgate sales for backyard gardens. They could also remove restrictions on the products farmers are allowed to sell including eggs and honey.  6.5 Improved distribution channels  The city and the Park Board, should work to improve distributions channels for urban farmers and allow food to be sold in more spaces. They should consider allowing community markets, pocket markets (small farmers markets) or farm stands on parklands and other areas with high foot traffic, such as the sea wall, to increase potential earnings and bring local food to more communities   Some farmers markets are currently over regulated resulting in extra barriers for small farmers. These regulations should be limited to encourage food growing and sales from farms of all sizes. Some farmers markets should be moved to underserved areas to alleviate the oversaturation that is seen in others.  There should also be more support for community supported agriculture (CSA), perhaps in the form of a collective. This distribution method seems to be highly beneficial for farmers and consumers alike.  The community market concept as a place for low income people to access locally grown food and a hub for intergenerational learning opportunities should be re-evaluated and better funded. 6.6 Environmental initiatives  Education initiatives regarding the effects of climate change and oil scarcity on the food system could be strengthened to ease transition into the future. Goals emphasizing sustainable food systems, increasing production and environmental stewardship should be incorporated into the next iteration of the Vancouver Food Strategy in a step toward improving local resilience. Local urban farmers are leaders in sustainable farming practices; these practices should be adhered to and proliferated as urban agriculture grows and production increases.  6.7 Implementation of the Food Strategy  Regional support for the implementation of the Vancouver Food Strategy and the Metro Vancouver Regional Food System Action Plan should be strengthened. It is important to educate the public and those in government about the importance of creating a sustainable food system and moving towards resiliency throughout the region. These policy documents are comprehensive and thorough, but they are only as strong as the degree to which they are implemented.   27 7. Conclusion  Vancouver is one of the world leaders in its support of urban agriculture, which is clearly reflected in current policies. The Vancouver Food Strategy, created by the Vancouver Food Policy Council, is a clear and concise synthesis of municipal goals that shows an investment by the municipal government in the sustainable future of Vancouver’s food system. One major area in particular that it seems to be lacking however, is in confronting issues of production capacity, oil scarcity and climate change.  There is encouraging evidence of communication between non-governmental actors and the municipal government, something that is essential to progress. There were some accounts though that suggested that receptiveness to suggestions was somewhat limited. Organizations that are a part of the local food system have a unique perspective on governing policies and present insight into effective they are in practice, and where gaps may lie.  Small-scale urban farms operate for the most part with sustainable practices at the forefront. With most operations not reliant on fossil fuels or environmental degradation for success, it is to these organizations we must be looking for lessons in fostering resilience. Supporting increased production of food, and increased contribution to the food supply by small urban farms essential to ensuring Vancouver is prepared for changing environmental conditions by 2040.  With the will to implement policy in the face of such strong opposing forces as development, capitalism and misinformation over the next 10-15 years, Vancouver will be positioned well for the future. We are far away from achieving any semblance of resilience, but with some effort on the part of the government and community, they can work together to promote the importance of urban agriculture in building local resilience through policy framework.  Additional areas of research should address the ability of agriculture in the Lower Mainland to feed the growing population.                    28 8. References  Allen, P. (2010). Realizing justice in local food systems. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 3(2), 295-308.  City of Vancouver. (2016). Urban Farming in Vancouver. Accessed from http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/urban-farming-brochure.pdf  Environment Canada (2013). Technical Document on Municipal Solid Waste Organic Processing.   Golden, S. 2013. Urban Agriculture Impacts: Social, Health, and Economic: A literature review. University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources. Accessed from http://asi.ucdavis.edu/programs/sarep/publications/food-and- society/ualitreview-2013.pdf  Gregory, R. (2000). Using stakeholder values to make smarter environmental decisions. Washington: Taylor & Francis Group. doi:10.1080/00139150009604888  Lin, B. B. (2011). Resilience in agriculture through crop diversification: adaptive management for environmental change. BioScience, 61(3), 183-193.  MacRae, R., & Donahue, K. (2013). Municipal food policy entrepreneurs: A preliminary analysis of how canadian cities and regional districts are involved in food system change. Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute.  Metro Vancouver Regional Food System Strategy. (2016) Accessed from http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/PlanningPublications/RegionalFoodSystemActionPlan.pdf  Neff, R. A., Parker, C. L., Kirschenmann, F. L., Tinch, J., & Lawrence, R. S. (2011). Peak Oil, Food Systems, and Public Health. American Journal of Public Health,101(9), 1587–1597.   Nixon, D. V., & Newman, L. (2016). The efficacy and politics of farmland preservation through land use regulation: Changes in southwest british Columbia’s agricultural land reserve. Land use Policy, 59, 227-240. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.07.004  Smith P., M. Bustamante, H. Ahammad, H. Clark, H. Dong, E.A. Elsiddig, H. Haberl, R. Harper, J. House, M. Jafari, O. Masera, C. Mbow, N.H. Ravindranath, C.W. Rice, C. Robledo Abad, A. Romanovskaya, F. Sperling, and F. Tubiello, 2014: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU). In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.  Statistics Canada. (2011). Survey methods and practices. Ottawa: Statistics Canada,  29 Social Survey Methods Division.   Szolnoki, G., & Hoffmann, D. (2013). Online, face-to- face and telephone surveys—Comparing different sampling methods in wine consumer research. Wine Economics and Policy, 2(2), 57-66. doi:10.1016/j.wep.2013.10.001  Urban Stream. 2016. Accessed from http://urbanstream.ca/about/  Vancouver Food Strategy. (2013). Accessed from http://vancouver.ca/people- programs/vancouvers-food- strategy.aspx  Vancouver Fruit Tree Project Society. 2016. Accessed from https://vancouverfruittree.com/  Vancouver Urban Farming Society. (2015). Urban Farming Practices in Metro Vancouver: A Research Report. Accessed from http://www.urbanfarmers.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/VUFS_report_25nov15_web-2.pdf  Richmond Food Security Society. (2016 July). Richmond Food Charter. Retrieved from http://www.richmondfoodsecurity.org/richmond-food- charter/      

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.52966.1-0347248/manifest

Comment

Related Items