Urban food security, urban resilience and climate change - weADAPT

comprehensive description of the capacity for food production in Australian cities. Thismight be difficult to attain given the grass roots level action, the dispersed and informalnature food production and distribution and the variety of activities, organisations andnetworks that constitute Australian urban agriculture.6. What are the impacts of urban agriculture, in Australian cities orelsewhere?Just as there are relatively few comprehensive surveys of the extent of urbanagriculture in Australian cities, so too is there a paucity of studies of its effects andimpacts. There are, however, numerous descriptive accounts of various urbanagricultural practices in various cities around the world that provide something of afoundation.For example, de Zeeuw (2004) cites a study of Hanoi in which 80% of freshvegetables, 50% of pork, poultry and fresh water fish, and 40% of eggs originate fromwithin the city itself and its peri-urban hinterland. In Shanghai, 60% of the city’svegetables, 100% of its milk, 90% of eggs consumed and 50% of pork and poultrymeat is supplied by its urban and peri-urban farms and small scale plots. While in bothcases these patterns of local food supply reflect farming traditions that have not yetbeen subsumed by large scale commercial agri-business, they also show the potentialfor cities that are very large by Australian standards to achieve comparatively highlevels of local food supply and hence bolster their food security.Studies of cities in Africa, also cited in de Zeeuw, have estimated that urban vegetablefarmers can achieve returns of between two and five times the average wage rates ofhired labourers, while in the Republic of Congo incomes from market gardening are twoto five times the estimated subsistence income. A study commissioned by the WorldBank found some significant differences in the income levels of urban food producersand others in cities of the developing world, suggesting a clear benefit to them as wellas the systematic benefits of supplying locally grown food.More studies rely on general perceptions of the benefits of urban agriculture. Lovell(2010) for example studied community gardens in US cities and concluded that ‘…thesocial value of urban green space is not negligible.’ and claimed that communitygardens can ‘…improve psychological well-being and social relations [and] facilitatehealing’ (p. 22). This may be true but very few studies are designed to measure withany degree of empirical precision these claims, which often remain as statements ofthe possible.Some more empirical impact studies are emerging in Australia. Ghosh (2011) hasestimated the potential contribution of suburban home garden food production andsuggests they could produce between 800-1100kg of produce per annum; enough tomeet a typical household’s requirements for fresh vegetables and produce a smallsurplus of fruit. In a similar vein, Francis (quoted in Ghosh, p. 2) claims that:The lawn space of the suburbs, if put into intensive food production has thepotential to out-produce the yields of commercial agriculture previously practicedon that land and provide most of our fresh food needs.Edwards (2011) reports not only the growth of urban agriculture in Melbourne, Victoria,but also some of the impacts, particularly in relation to community building, thepromotion of healthy diets and the creation of new spaces for people with mental healthproblems and disabilities. These positive impacts extend beyond those of food securityand highlight the many advantages, of urban agriculture, including building greaterresilience among urban populations. Shelton and Frieser (2009) study identifies thepositive impacts of urban agriculture on the Sunshine Coast in Queensland,Urban food security, urban resilience and climate change 93