From Endings to Beginnings   

You are reading the last article of CITIES4CSR; the first URBACT Action Planning Network (APN) that has focused on Corporate Social Responsibility(link is external) as means to solve urban problems. After three long years, severally disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic and the recent War of Russia against Ukraine, our project officially comes to an end. Time to reflect on journey, achievements and transformations. I would like to particularly reflect here on noteworthy emerging practices and new understandings across our ten project partner cities. My hope is that by demonstrating the added value URBACT-methodology and support have created locally, other cities will be inspired to join one of the new networks of the next APN round in the quest for better urban and societal outcomes across our continent. 

Rise of Good Practices 

Some of our project partners joined CITIES4CSR with already well-established good practices in place. Three examples shall illustrate this point. Budaörs (Hungary) had enshrined the principle of Public Social Responsibility in local governmental practice; an interesting concept that calls for local and regional governments to ensure public service delivery in the name of common good and community values. Nantes (France), empowered and supported by their existing CSR-platform, had established state-of-the-art equal gender practices such as employment negotiation training schemes that have benefited thousands of women over recent years. And Molina de Segura (Spain) had created a strong stakeholder-inclusive local engagement culture. This advantage has been instrumental for immediate and intense URBACT Local Group action during URBACT Phase 1.

Yet, numerous new and emerging practices and activities have been added locally during three URBACT years. Those pursuing environmental and climate-saving goals have become a network favourite. In Vratsa (Bulgaria), for example, emerging ‘green’ practices in the areas of waste collection and urban transport have the potential for broader nation-wide impact.  URBACT project efforts helped to accelerate the creation, diffusion, communication and management of these practices. A demonstrable local impact can also be noted for Budaörs (Hungary) where CSR-mediated communal tree-planting has been publicly communicated via a brand-new municipal ‘green’ Facebook page. Sofia, finally, created a new ‘green’ awards model including jury assessment details that will foster more environmentally sound urban and business practice for Bulgaria’s Capital in the future.     

Not less invigorating for public-private-community partnering has been the urgent need to confront social inequality and deprivation. Rijeka (Croatia) has introduced and practiced the CSR-tool of local participatory hospitality events – for example hands-on cooking classes.  Beneficiaries, often passive receivers of donations only, can become active, involved and learning participants in the process. Our Lead Partner Milan (Italy), attempting to improve the attractiveness of municipal primary schools in disadvantaged neighbourhoods, mobilised CSR-actions for youth job orientation, science and technology skills promotion and digital upgrading. Molina de Segura brought together three separate social intervention strands - urban planning, socio-education and health/sanitation - in form of an integrated and innovative neighbourhood-centred project that holds the promise of informing city-wide CSR strategy development.    

URBACT is centrally about local stakeholder engagement for the good of people and place. So, which promising new engagement practices have arisen under CITIES4CSR? Three examples. First, Kekava (Latvia) came up with the Hackathon model of shared brainstorming as an innovative technology-based addition to the suite of voluntary local mobilisation and prioritisation practices. Second, Milan showcased during our final Transnational Meeting a much-applauded relational engagement model in form of Networking Drinks. Simply a synthesis of traditional dinner with extensive mingling opportunities, it has convinced me and many network partners as effective means to meet and greet people without missing out on quality food. Third, Sofia (Bulgaria) utilised the power of organising in-person events for a comprehensive Stakeholder Roundtable during the Lead Expert/Lead Partner visit in URBACT phase 1. The inclusive invitation list and the open, dialogue-oriented format facilitated useful early project discussions that set the right tone for further action-and initiative planning.    

New Mechanisms for Exchange and Collaboration

One of the modern mechanisms for effective engagement under digital conditions are platforms. In CITIES4CSR, platform development has been an important topic right from the beginning. In fact, the local project teams of Molina de Segura and Guimarães (Portugal) got very inspired by Nantes’ platform history, and consequently developed their own versions. In Molina de Segura the platform has become an open digital tool for CSR-community building while in Guimarães it has been about creating a foundation for CSR-mediated resource exchange between economic and social actors. Meanwhile the URBACT Local Group in Nantes worked diligently to further develop their already successful model. Their concern has been with measuring firm behaviours in order to assess progress and remaining gaps towards achieving the Global Sustainable Development Goals(link is external).

Why are platforms such hotly debated topics these days? In sum, as digitally mediated social and institutional enablers of transformations they not only create space for shared identity construction but are also promising capacity-building mechanisms for good practice development and exchange. Moreover, as problem-solving tools they help to respond efficiently to public and private needs and aspirations. Central remains the question of how to translate the technological possibilities of platform infrastructures into valuable local social collaboration!

Our network philosophy essentially builds on the notion that cities are better off if Municipalities successfully mobilise local CSR-ecosystems; in order to complement public services and good provision and/or by shifting business practice towards better social and environmental outcomes. However, this vision often crucially relies on a linking mechanism in the middle, a broker of exchange. It is therefore no surprise that Milan has thought hard about reconfiguring their municipal interface with business and non-profits. In Bratislava, intermediation has been an incentive to introduce a municipal business liaison officer position that has been coordinating the successful 10,000 trees planting campaign. Interestingly, this investment could be the first step toward an effective CSR-donation reception infrastructure for Slovakia’s Capital. In Rijeka, the pre-existing Association for the Homeless and Socially Vulnerable Persons (Oaza) has moved more centre stage as social gatekeeper and mediator under URBACT.

On reflection, intermediaries in CSR-ecosystems are connectors, bridge builders and exchange accelerators; especially in respect to linking up Municipalities and CSR-stakeholders. For CITIES4CSR, this functional link has been imagined as taking the shape of existing or new organisations, fit-for-purpose entities such as one-stop-shops, new organisational positions or informal exchange mechanisms. Success, at the end of the day, will depend on how effectively we can overcome institutional inertia, constituency politics and cultural resistance that holds back innovation.

Emerging Understandings and Awareness

URBACT Action Planning Networks, in particular those that confront the ‘how’ of societal change, have traditionally performed best in the areas of thematic knowledge boosting, growing understandings and raising awareness. CITIES4CSR has been no exception. For local actors and citizens in Vratsa, for example, the theme of environmental protection has been promoted for the first time in a more systematic manner. Guimarães has learned valuable lessons about the ‘do’s’ and ‘dont’s’ of local procurement and the underlying legal constraints. Milan’s chief knowledge gain I would compare to a big mirror that reflects without distortion the current state of the interface between Municipality and CSR-community. Without doubt, awareness has grown across all cities about the capacities of municipal administrative systems to partner with business and other stakeholders to respond to local need and opportunity.

Collectively, we have learned a great deal about Corporate Social Responsibility in an urban context. Our four CITIES4CSR Masterclasses in 2021 highlighted different aspects of CSR-led local impulses; as activator of ‘helping your neighbour’ social changes, as kick-starter of ‘saving the earth’ environmental practices, as organising frame for strategic public procurement and as ingredient of shared urban value creation. What stood out for me was the fact that CSR nowadays incorporates not just larger businesses but entrepreneurs, public providers, non-profit organisations, citizen associations and many volunteers as well. In fact, CSR may not be the best term to describe this type of contemporary voluntary local alliances for improving the status-quo. So critically revisiting CSR-definitions and concepts may be a rewarding task for academics and researchers. What is clear, nevertheless, is the central role of Municipalities in activating, guiding, supporting and nurturing this collaborating ecosystem of local actors.

Final Outlook

Admittedly, we all felt a bit emotional at our last network outreach event several weeks ago in Brussels about the fact that three shared URBACT years are coming to an end. It is quite unlikely that we will work together again in an international project. Moments of farewell not seldom raise the question of legacy. Examining local progress and potential I suggest that there are grounds for optimism on this matter. After successful intra-network co-learning local implementation roadmaps and longer-term governance models are relatively robust, and in some cases already linked to sustainable finance. Also, there will be plenty of new opportunities for follow-up resourcing that will surely reach all cities and regions during the next EU-investment rounds. And concerning motivation and preferred topics for another URBACT network participation the local Budaörs team already indicated strong interest for a platform-building topic. One thing is sure, the first URBACT network on Corporate Social Responsibility will surely not stop having a measurable local impact after the official project ends in August 2022. I am absolutely convinced it will continue to make a positive difference in multiple and creative ways in the future. 

Approximately 20% of all food produced in the EU is wasted, leading to annual emissions of 186 million CO², writes Antonio Zafra, Lead Expert of the URBACT FOOD CORRIDORS network, in a recent article, drawing on figures from the European Environment Agency. So, with more than 50% of that food waste coming from households – on average, 47 million tonnes a year – what actions can local authorities take to help us limit and prevent this waste? And how is URBACT supporting them? URBACT Programme Expert Marcelline Bonneau investigates…

Globally, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that a third of all food produced for human consumption each year is lost or wasted. This corresponds to 1.3 billion tonnes of food wasted every year in the world, worth a total of 750 billion dollars – equivalent to the GDP of Switzerland. At the European level, this accounts for 89 million tonnes of food annually, corresponding to approximately 179 kg per capita per year (throughout the whole supply chain).

Although getting precise data is extremely difficult, we do have some figures. In the Region of Brussels-Capital (BE), for example, it is estimated that households waste an average of 15 kg of food per person per year, the equivalent of three meals a day for 30 000 people over the course of one year.

Why do we waste so much at home?

The reasons for wasting food are strongly connected with all daily activities: shopping, cooking, eating, sorting out waste, but also working, having hobbies and leisure activities, or moving around in the city, as presented in the image below:

Activities related to wasting food

These can also be explained as follows:

• We are dependent upon production and consumption systems:
  • Available information (e.g. expiration dates, promotions…);
  • Food culture (e.g. providing large quantities of food to guests, understanding of food safety and aesthetics, “cheap” food…);
  • Available products (e.g. types of products, packaging…);
• Daily habits:
  • Personal meaning (e.g. culinary traditions, not eating the same thing twice);
  • Knowledge and competences (e.g. being able to cook, improvise, knowing the content of the fridge and cupboards, anticipating…);
  • Appliances (e.g. for storage, transformation...);
• Personal influences:
  • Capacities (e.g. professional framework, frequency of shopping…);
  • Life experiences (e.g. available time, family, tiredness…);
  • Values (e.g. enjoying eating outside, feeling guilty…).

Six tips for cities fighting food waste

Against this background, certain URBACT cities have sought to carry out a range of activities and initiatives to support households in reducing their food waste. Drawing on their experience, here are six solutions to inspire any town or city to do the same:

1. Know the food waste facts

First and foremost, it is vital to measure food waste in households in order to design adequate policy actions and instruments (see solution 2, below). But it can be extremely difficult to design adequate methodologies to ensure household food waste is monitored regularly, to collect comparable data, etc. Yet, some URBACT cities have managed to develop useful frameworks. Bristol, UK partner in the URBACT network Sustainable Food in Urban Communities, developed an approach based on food-waste hierarchy principles, underpinned by Bristol City Council’s 'Towards a zero waste Bristol’ strategy in 2016, leading to measurable successes in food-waste reduction.

Ghent (BE) also conducted a food-waste benchmarking study to track goals, and all waste diverted through the Foodsavers Ghent programme, as well as calculating GHG emissions averted. As a member of the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact (MUFPP), Ghent is also seeking to incorporate the MUFPP Monitoring framework into its assessment strategy in order to ensure greater accuracy in measuring the impacts of its food policies. Another Belgian city, Bruges, member of Eurocities, also used a self-declaration survey for citizens to measure the impact of recipes and tips shared by the city for reducing food waste at the household level. And, still relevant eight years after its launch at national level, another very interesting study was carried out in France by ADEME (the French Environment and Energy Management Agency) to have households measure their own food waste.

2. Design an enabling food-policy framework

As we saw above and in the article by Antonio Zafra, Lead Expert of URBACT FOOD CORRIDORS network, food waste covers a range of topics. To ensure that it is addressed in a holistic way, some cities have designed dedicated policies, not only on sustainable food, but also, more specifically on food waste. This is the case of Milan (IT), labelled URBACT Good Practice for its Food Policy, coordinator of the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact and Lead Partner of the URBACT NextAgri network. Indeed, as part of its Rethinking Milan’s approach to food waste framework, the main goal is to achieve a 50% reduction in food waste by 2030. Five main focus areas have been identified:

• Inform and educate citizens and local stakeholders on reducing food losses and waste;
• Recover and redistribute food waste;
• Create local partnerships, such as among charities food banks, supermarkets and municipal
  agencies;
• Improve and reduce food packaging;
• Strive for a circular economy in food system management.

Related actions and initial measurements have already been made by the city of Milan. For example, a campaign encouraging the separation of organic from non-organic waste also achieved a source separation of 56% in three years, up from 36% in 2012. A first step to raising awareness about the quantity of food wasted in households.

3. Raise awareness and provide concrete tips

Before citizens can actually start reducing their food waste, they need to consider it as an issue. As such, regions such as Wallonia (BE) with “Moins de déchets” and countries such as France with “Ça suffit le gâchis”, Germany with “Too good for the bin”, and the UK with “Love Food, Hate Waste” have developed dedicated information campaigns presenting the key issues at stake. More importantly, they also share concrete tips for daily life, and activities.

‘Love Food, Hate Waste’ platform

In particular, since 2007, the aim of the ‘Love Food, Hate Waste’ campaign in the UK, implemented by the non-profit organisation WRAP, has been to reach out to consumers and cooperate extensively with companies, including supermarkets. They run poster campaigns, radio and newspaper announcements as well as bus-back adverts, using social media, cooking workshops and London-wide events. The ‘Love Food, Hate Waste’ website also provides tips and tools for proper storage, left-over recipes, understanding expiry dates, and measuring food-waste amounts, as well as promoting the benefits of home composting.

A ‘Money-Saving App’ also includes a portion and meal planner along with many recipes, and allows customers to keep track of the items they already bought and those they plan to buy. Avoidable food waste was reduced by an estimated 14% thanks to the campaign, with some households that actively focused on food-waste prevention reducing their avoidable food waste by 43%. Importantly, resources from these campaigns are designed for one-way communication and require minimal staff time to implement.

4. Challenge citizens

‘FoodWasteWatchers’ tool in action

Cities should provide dedicated tools to support households with their daily fight against food waste, as well as support intermediary organisations such as NGOs or schools. For example, in Alameda County, California, the ‘Stop Waste’ public agency designed signage, including an ‘Eat This First’ sign for the fridge to encourage households and businesses to designate a fridge area for foods that need to be eaten soon.

Engaging households in activities directly has been key to ensure they are empowered to reduce their own food waste. As part of its ‘Good Food Strategy’, a direct outcome of the URBACT Sustainable Food in Urban Communities network that it led, the Region of Brussels-Capital supported the design of ‘FoodWasteWatchers’. This is an individual and targeted programme for households to identify what, how much they waste and why, as well as to design their own strategy in order to reduce it.

Also, in 2019, the city of Oslo (NO) organised a challenge and training programme to help families halve food waste. During this four-week project, 30 families weighed their food waste, participating in a short workshop, with tools (e.g. kitchen diary and labelling) and information on how to reduce their food waste. The ‘winning’ family cut its food waste by 95%!

5. Train citizens as relays

Fridge Masters in action

Who is better placed to talk to citizens and households than citizens themselves? Following the success of its experience on the topics of gardening and composting, the Region of Brussels-Capital supported the training and set-up of a network of ‘Fridge Masters’: over the course of nine modules, citizens exchanged experiences and were trained on various tips and tricks to reduce food waste, from improved organisation, cooking habits, and food preservation methods to shopping in different types of shops. They were also trained in facilitating events for the general public – which they did successfully with a series of tools they designed themselves. These included social media challenges and interaction, tasters on the site, and images representing ‘fake fridges’.

6. Support solidarity

Last but not least, combating food waste by sharing what would otherwise be thrown away can be a way of connecting with other people, creating new relationships and opportunities, as well as providing food to those in need. Solidarity fridges are an implementation of such a concept.

Tartu’s ‘Food Share Cabinet’

One example is the ‘Food Share Cabinet’ in Estonia’s second largest city Tartu. As a way to raise awareness, make food available for people who need it, and redistribute what would have been wasted, a temporary ‘food share’ cabinet was installed on Tartu’s ‘Car Freedom Avenue’ event as a Small Scale Action, with the support of the URBACT Zero Carbon Cities network. Shelves and a refrigerator enabled caterers from the event and neighbouring cafes to share their leftovers. This action is now part of the Tartu City Government reflexion with the food-share community to reduce food waste in the city, working with local food businesses.
 

What will your city do next to reduce food waste?

This listicle has shown a range of frameworks, instruments and activities used by cities to reduce food waste in households. But this is only one part of the equation. Food waste needs to be tackled along the whole supply chain.

Check our Food Knowledge Hub page for further insights, as well as the Glasgow Food Declaration resources.
Last but not least, look out for the upcoming activities of five current Horizon 2020 projects which will test further actions:

• Food Trails: https://foodtrails.milanurbanfoodpolicypact.org/
• FOODSHIFT2030: https://foodshift2030.eu
• Cities2030: https://cities2030.eu
• FUSILLI: https://fusilli-project.eu
• FoodE: https://foode.eu/

What can you do to cut waste in your town? Let us know – we’ll be curious to read about your experiences – reach out to us via Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn!

Facts and figures

• Bruxelles environnement (2020) Le gaspillage alimentaire
• EU barometer survey (2015) Flash Eurobarometer 425: Food waste and date marking
  Bonneau M. (2021) Changer les modes de gouvernance en appliquant de nouveaux cadres analytiques : le cas du gaspillage alimentaire à Bruxelles
• FAO (2013) Food wastage footprint - Impacts on natural resources
• Fusion (2016) Estimates of European food waste levels
• Zafra A. (2022) A FOOD WASTE URBAN APPROACH - To reduce the depletion of natural resources, limit environmental impacts, and make the food system more circular

Resilient communities can be defined as those where the effort of reacting to rapid changes is a collaborative exercise: in a few words, where collaboration among people contributes to finding solutions to the challenges of the cities we live in.

‘Resilient Communities’ is also the title of the Italian Pavilion at the 17^th International Architecture Exhibition at the Venice Biennale. The pavilion proposes an interesting reflection on the role of cities, and architecture in general, to respond to the ambitious question featured in the title of this year’s Exhibition: “How will we live together?”.

The relevance of the URBACT methodology as part of a wider reflection on future models of inhabiting urban spaces is particularly tangible in Italy. Not only considering the high number of cities involved in URBACT networks, but also due to the role that the programme is playing in the national urban debate and in fostering connections among local decision-makers, stakeholders, architects and practitioners.

These aspects pushed the curator of the Italian Pavilion, Alessandro Melis, to invite the representative of the National URBACT Point for Italy to be part of the Pavilion’s Advisor Board. The objective was to include the experiences of the Italian and European cities of URBACT in the wider picture composed by different visions on the contemporary city.

URBACT and the collaborative mapping of community resilience

The Italian Pavillon, a true cultural laboratory for rethinking the role of architects and cities on how we live together, is showcasing the complexity of relations among urban spaces, nature and people, with a dense programme of activities and events from 22 May to 21 November 2021.

The action of collaborative mapping, available online or accessible through a QR code at the Italian Pavilion, was based on a selection of some of the most interesting solutions developed in diverse URBACT networks. These include a participatory scheme for the creation of new green spaces in Potenza, shared in the Resilient Europe Action Planning Network, and the opening of new public parks and infrastructure in Casoria, co-designed with support from the Sub>Urban network.

The mapping also explores practices adapted and transferred in URBACT Transfer Networks, such as the tools to tackle urban poverty implemented by Bari in the framework of Com.Unity.Lab or the models of urban co-governance transferred by Naples to other EU cities in the Civic eState network.

Activities developed under the Urban Innovative Actions (UIA) programme and then transferred with the UIA-URBACT Transfer Mechanism are also featured. Examples include Turin’s re-use of public spaces and underused structures developed with Co-City, and transferred to other cities in the CO4CITIES network, as well as Milan’s model promoting the agri-urban economy, which is being transferred to NEXT AGRI network partners.

All these stories emerging from URBACT networks, narrated by the civic officials and elected representatives who implemented them at local level, have been making an important contribution to reflexions on the future of cities promoted by the Italian Pavillon. These practical experiences are presented alongside the principles of community resilience that were being studied by academics and experts well before Covid-19 raised the urgency of consolidating innovative urban solutions.

Events at the Italian Pavillon

While the first meeting was mostly focused on an Italian perspective, the second enlarged the reflection to include the curators of the Slovenian Pavilion, National URBACT Points (Spain and Slovenia) and the cities of Madrid (ES) and Cluj Napoca (RO), which are testing similar methodologies of civic imagination and active involvement of residents and stakeholders on topics such as urban security or the future of work.

The diversity of the experiences presented in Venice makes clear how different models of community resilience are shaping the future of public spaces, city services and urban infrastructures to respond to hardships and unexpected events.

The Peccioli Charter and the legacy of the debate on community resilience

This approach was also shared by the Peccioli Charter, the document signed by all the members of the Italian Pavilion’s Steering Committee, which aims to be “a Constitution of the nation of the Italian resilient communities”. The document was officially launched in November 2019 in Peccioli, an Italian village which turned a wasteland site into a cultural and artwork space for all the community, a tangible example of resilient community. Meant as a legacy of the Pavilion, it defines the commitments that resilient communities need to put in practice in the medium and long terms. Among these, promoting knowledge and innovation, re-imagining cities and sharing urban spaces, being smart and anti-fragile.

These are the sorts of actions being implemented by the cities and communities that are using the URBACT methodology to increase resilience, in the sense of “being brave communities, able to put in practice a permanent revolution, to adapt to rapid changes and to offer endless opportunities for reaching the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals,” as stated in the conclusions of the Peccioli Charter.

Find out more

• Mapping of resilient communities
• Resilient Communities, Italian Pavilion at Venice Biennale 17^th International Architecture Exhibition
• URBACT page on Climate Action

Photos by Simone d’Antonio

To tackle the climate emergency, we must urgently transform the conventional ways we produce, transport, eat and dispose of food worldwide. Cities are crucial drivers for this cultural, social and economic change: their residents consume 70% of the world’s food, and the policies they design and implement impact millions of people. URBACT cities and networks have understood this and are seeking to make their own contribution to the global challenge.

At the recent 7th Milan Urban Food Policy Pact (MUFPP) Global Forum in Barcelona, a team from URBACT, including the Spanish National URBACT Point, showcased examples of EU cities already making real, positive change.

Focusing on the topic of ‘Growing Resilience: Sustainable Food to Tackle the Climate Emergency,’ this event was an opportunity to (re)connect, exchange experiences, challenges, knowledge, and best practices, to inspire and get inspired with the shared goal of fixing urban food systems, while addressing the climate emergency.

In the URBACT-led session on ‘Integrated local food ecosystems to tackle climate change: URBACT’s lessons and actions’, diverse towns and cities presented their achievements in designing local food: Mollet Del Vallès (ES), partner in the URBACT networks Diet for a Green Planet and Agri-Urban; Mouans-Sartoux (FR) partner in Agri-Urban, BioCanteens #1 and #2; Milan (IT), labelled URBACT Good Practice and lead city in NEXT AGRI; and Nourish Scotland, co-coordinator of the Glasgow Food Declaration, together with IPES-Food.

The Milan Urban Food Policy Pact

Each year now (except for 2020 because of the pandemic), a global forum organised in a signatory city is a chance for cities to exchange knowledge, build partnerships and celebrate progress in implementing improved food policies through the Milan Pact Awards. Dialogue and technical exchange among signatories are enriched by the participation of relevant international organisations and institutions.

Food on the menu

Soil erosion © Europan seed

Current food systems have strong negative impacts on climate. Production, distribution, loss and waste of food account for around 30% of global Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. This in turn leads to biodiversity loss, extinction of species, deforestation, soil erosion, freshwater scarcity… At the same time, climate impacts all affect food systems: for producers affected by the lack of predictability of yields and food prices, incomes are increasingly volatile.

The distribution chain is becoming less and less reliable with strong concerns about city autonomy. All these affect rural areas’ survival. And problems have been exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic. Socio-economic and health inequalities are booming, with threats to food quality and food safety, with malnutrition as a key risk factor for hunger and disease.

An integrated food ecosystems approach

An ecosystem approach is key to ensuring that food provides access to healthy diets and nutrition for all, agroecology and regenerative agriculture, circular economy and the provisioning of just livelihoods. Such an approach involves understanding the range of stakeholders and complexity of their interactions; it is a crucial framework to identify, analyse and address synergies and trade-offs between various climate change responses.

Food systems © IPES-FOOD

Integration is another key competent of any transformation toward a sustainable local food system, and is vital in tackling multiple challenges such as technical gaps, behavioural changes and market failures. Integration is also embedded in the URBACT method, as follows:

• Transversality: food is linked to agriculture, trade and industry, health, labour, environment, international cooperation… All these should be taken into consideration simultaneously when improving food systems.

• Multi-actor: relevant departments from cities, regions and states covering the above-mentioned policies need to work together, as well as with stakeholders from the private, civil society and academic sectors.

• Multi-level governance mechanisms: innovations take place at the local and regional levels. They should be supported and incentivised by international and national governments.

• Territoriality: food ecosystems should be linked to each other with a strong focus on urban and peri-urban linkages. Rural areas should be further interconnected with cities of different sizes.

• Infrastructure and social innovation: combining investments in tools, products, building with experimentation and people involvement and interaction is crucial to ensure a smooth transition of all to a sustainable food system.

Several entry points for a local integrated ecosystem

Many URBACT cities are frontrunners, inspiring others to act locally for more sustainable food systems. Their actions also provide insights into various possible entry points for cities to start developing their own sustainable local food ecosystem. For example:

• Mollet Del Vallès (ES) is putting justice and health at the heart of integrated local food policies;
• Mouans-Sartoux (FR) is using school canteens to develop a resilient territory – a solution they showcased at the recent COP26; and
• Milan (IT) has developed a systemic approach for local food policies.

The message I will be taking to COP 26 this morning during the presentation of the Glasgow Declaration at the Glasgow City Chambers
Cities and citizens in action, the only chance of success in the fight against global warming! @URBACT @mufpp @fdnc_fr @IPESfood @nourishscotland pic.twitter.com/l6CGqIIYNB

— Gilles PEROLE (@gperole) November 6, 2021

Crucially at this moment, the Glasgow Food and Climate Declaration is also demonstrating that not only do we need integrated food systems to fight climate change, but also that local governments are key in this, and that this should be acknowledged by higher governance levels. There is still time for local authorities to sign!

COP26: a boost for sustainable food

URBACT cities are showing that much can be done to adjust local food ecosystems to fight climate change, based on each city’s priority, whether it’s canteens, health, governance... In addition to the three cities presented in Barcelona, the URBACT Food Knowledge Hub showcases many other inspiring initiatives for all interested cities!

Held just before the COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021, the 7th MUFPP Global Forum was strategic in raising cities’ voices on the food-climate nexus. It launched the Barcelona Challenge on Good Food and Climate: a call for cities to engage in the transformation of food systems to tackle the climate emergency, drawing on the C40 Good Food Cities Declaration and the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact Framework for Action. With URBACT represented at COP26 by various cities, including nearly all partners in the Urb-En Pact network, commitment to sustainable, integrated city solutions looks set to grow.

Cover photo © BioCanteens

Last week, on the 9 March, URBACT's Monitoring Committee have approved five pilot networks to transfer innovative solutions. In 2020, the UIA first call projects came to a close and a proposal was made to test a new URBACT tool which aimed to support the transfer of innovation. The UIA Transfer Mechanism experiment will support a group of EU cities to understand, adapt and prepare to re-use the UIA practice through the co-creation of an investment plan. The 18-month journey of these networks builds on the success of the URBACT Transfer Networks model.

Following a competitive call, 7 pilot projects were submitted for approval. When considering all the 28 potential city partners, 6 candidates were URBACT newcomer cities from 5 different countries, while 16 cities were also newcomers to UIA. This shows what a unique opportunity this networks represented for cities discovering the universe of EU cooperation! As foreseen by the Terms of Reference, eligible proposals have been assessed by a two assesors from URBACT and UIA. Scroll down to find out more about the five newly approved networks.  

The URBACT Programme acknowledges and thanks every city that has submitted proposals and used the URBACT Marketplace for this call. URBACT also warmly welcomes the new UIA Transfer Mechanism partners, who will take their first steps in the kick-off meeting on 23 March.

*Bold letters used for UIA cities who will act as Lead Partner

-

Interested in the findings of the URBACT Transfer Networks?
Check all related activities here!

Cities have shown how agile they can be in addressing increased needs of their local population in terms of access to (healthy) food. As the economic crisis unfolds and hits the most vulnerable first, it is important to think about what cities can do to sustain and transfer such good practices and what support they need at national and European levels.

“The idea behind all initiatives is not to leave anybody behind during the Covid-19 crisis.”
Josep Monras i Galindo, Mayor, Mollet de Vallès (Spain)

Assessing the Covid impact

For many of the most vulnerable people, Covid-19 has not only meant immediate health risks and threats to their income, but a significant worsening of their access to good-quality food. This has put them at increased risk of hunger and malnutrition.

At the same time, we have heard some positive impacts of the crisis on other aspects of the mainstream food system, for example with the development of healthier eating habits, more cooking at home and shorter food supply chains. Citizen solidarity has also been visible in many local areas to meet food needs of the most vulnerable.

In this article, I therefore ask: how have cities supported emerging citizen-led initiatives for food provision to those in need during the lockdown? How have they re-organised food aid systems, such as subsidised meals in canteens or charity-run food distribution schemes?

And as the lockdown measures are lifted across Europe, what lessons can be learnt from the responses to the crisis for building resilient food systems and local food policies for everyone? How can such learning continue to ‘feed us’ and provide us with a roadmap for action post Covid?

New types of food aid distribution

Associations and charities have faced a number of challenges during the lockdown. On the one hand, they lost the critical support of their senior volunteer workforce at risk of catching the virus. On the other hand, they faced increased demand with more people than ever in need of assistance, beyond their usual list of ‘beneficiaries’.

This required significant outreach efforts. Some structures re-adjusted their model by recruiting new volunteers, adapting to new health and safety measures, or even changing their food provision and distribution patterns, whilst others simply had to temporarily close down.

In some cases, the government assumed more responsibilities for distributing food aid, often leading to positive effects – for example, more cross-departmental cooperation and social innovation within city administration, more promotion of short food supply chains and organic food.

The Italian large city of Milan (1.3 million), which is an URBACT Good Practice for its Food Policy, set up a new food distribution system (“Dispositivo aiuto alimentare”) to offset the impact of the closures of several associations and charities and therefore centralised the entire supply chain until the end of the crisis. Food hubs were created at 10 locations across the city to prepare food aid packages for vulnerable families and fragile persons identified as being in need by Milan’s Social Services and non-profit operators.

Milan’s Dispositivo aiuto alimentare (@Milan Food Policy)

Around 180 people and many stakeholders have been involved, including retailers, volunteers, municipality employees, drivers and others active in the food donation system. In the first two weeks, since 16 March, the Dispositivo Aiuto alimentare reached almost 1 900 families and after 15 weeks, the food aid system reached more than 6 000 families, a total of 20 744 people. The municipality opened within the municipal grocery market – ‘Foody’ – a specific food hub where fresh fruits and vegetables were collected and distributed to the food hubs and ultimately added to the food aid packages. Therefore, this action has not only improved access, but also quality of the food aid.

Milan’s Municipal grocery market (@Milan Food Policy)

Municipalities supporting citizen-led initiatives

Whilst the senior volunteer workforce has been impacted, many other groups have found themselves with more time on their hands and more reasons to engage in mutual aid. The result has been that many URBACT cities have seen a surge of volunteerism during Covid-19.

The small town of Athienou in Cyprus (6 500 inhabitants) has a long history of supporting volunteering. Recognised as an URBACT good practice, Athienou is now leading the URBACT network Volunteering Cities. As Kyriacos Kareklas, Mayor of Athienou, likes saying, “The spirit of help and volunteerism is something that gives extra power to people in charge, who want to help people in need.”

The municipality reacted quickly to the crisis by calling upon volunteers to help the elderly and people with disabilities with their grocery shopping. They also supported the engagement of various actors in the food supply chain through the Social Welfare Program and Volunteering Council.

The urgency and logistical challenges of providing access to food led in many cases to federated efforts at the neighbourdhood level. For some cities, this represented a unique opportunity to strengthen territorial cooperation. Authorities played a crucial role as facilitators, for example, by making connections, setting up platforms, making spaces and resources available, or helping with communication.

This was the case, for instance, in the bigger and more densely populated city of Naples, the Lead Partner of the CivicEstate Network, which is exploring new forms of collective governance of shared urban spaces (unused building, parks, squares etc.) through an ‘urban common’ approach. This approach helped a wide network of associations, cooperatives, soup kitchens, community centres and other urban commons in Naples to rapidly organise food solidarity.

As Gregorio Turolla wrote in this article, “The extraordinary situation faced by cities like Naples during the pandemic has highlighted the essential role of self-managed or co-managed spaces of aggregation and mutualism. This confirms the important role of urban commons as social infrastructures, producing public services of social impact through solidarity, creative, collaborative, digital and circular economy initiatives.”  

Meeting the needs of vulnerable children

Lola Gallego, manager of health and social services at Mollet de Vallès, stressed that “the health issue is a priority, but now the social crisis is beginning, and the basic social services provided by the municipalities must be the cornerstone of the forthcoming policies, plans and actions. To provide money is not enough. What is crucial is to accompany people in need.”

As one important example of this potential social crisis, a major risk factor for many vulnerable children, up to 320 million children worldwide, has been the disappearance of their only daily meal from school.

As part of a wider regional programme between the Catalan Government and La Caixa Bank, the Spanish medium-size city of Mollet de Vallès (52 000), partner of the URBACT Agri-Urban network, has contributed to a scheme providing credit cards for each child eligible for publicly funded school lunches (1 087 cards in Mollet). This scheme is supported jointly by the government and the city. Families were asked only to use the cards to buy food in the city where they live.

Mollet de Vallès’s Benefit card (©Mollet de Vallès)

Food policies and food sovereignty for all

Andrea Magarini, Milan Food Policy Coordinator, is adamant that having “an effective local food policy has helped overcoming situations of crisis like the one we all are facing since the end of February.” In the case of Milan, their existing work “on issues such as food waste and school canteens has helped in the identification of successful actions to ensure access to food for many vulnerable groups during the lockdown,” points out Andrea Magarini.

In the small French city of Mouans-Sartoux (10 000), partner of Agri-Urban and Lead Partner of the BioCanteens network, their URBACT-awarded ‘good practice’ is rooted into a territorial eco-system with strong food sovereignty. In that context, the crisis has only further entrenched their long-lasting efforts to guarantee food sovereignty on their territory.

Mollet de Vallès’s Food sovereignty project by 2045 (©BioCanteens)

Mouans-Sartoux plans to continue the activities initiated during the lockdown, such as the a newly set-up NGO helping homeless people. They will also launch new initiatives to support self-production and redistribution to those most in need, education on sustainable food for everyone, improvement of the quality of the food being delivered at home, and strengthening citizen participation in the food policy.

Mouans-Sartoux’s municipal farm (©Mouans-Sartoux)

The ‘food lever’ – how to scale up action from the bottom up?

So, what cities can do to sustain such good practices and what support do they need at national and European levels?

As Gilles Pérole, Vice Mayor for education in Mouans-Sartoux said, “it is at local level that we need to act now. State centralism does not provide us with the quick and efficient answers we need. Within these first two months of crisis, the administrative burden has disappeared as we had to quickly react and adjust ourselves. The Covid-19 crisis has showed us what could happen as a result of the climate crisis and there won’t be any vaccines to save us from it…”

As part of the Farm to fork strategy which was published in the midst of the crisis, the European Commission is focusing, amongst others, on “Mak[ing] sure Europeans get healthy, affordable and sustainable food”. Yet, it puts little emphasis on the role of cities except in the conclusion stating that “the transition to sustainable food systems (also) requires a collective approach involving public authorities at all levels of governance (including cities, rural and coastal communities), private-sector actors across the food value chain, non-governmental organisations, social partners, academics and citizens.”  

As such, URBACT (and its partners) have a strong role to play in providing grounded evidence and cases from cities, offering additional and counterbalanced views to those of mainstream lobbies, further continuing to facilitate exchange of learning and accelerating change towards more food solidarity at local, national and European levels.