Document sans nom

In Latin America and the Caribbean as elsewhere, low-income and marginalized communities have seen their vulnerability exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic. They are experiencing greater food insecurity and are suffering more from the cascading impacts of natural hazards and climate change. Yet every day, they produce informal, bottom-up solutions to these problems, transforming public space, housing and urban conditions at the margins of authorities’ influence and plans. These bottom-up solutions are still not fully understood by academics and practitioners. Besides, little is still known about how conditions of urban informality—where infrastructure and services are scarce, land tenure is disputed, governance structures are fragile, and housing conditions are poor—influence the emergence of alternative (that is, local, healthy, equitable, inclusive and culturally-relevant) food systems (AFS).

[+] Our Mission

This project seeks to explore: (a) how bottom-up informal solutions interact with food systems and contribute to make them more resilient to shocks such as climate change impacts and pandemics; (b) how urban systems in contexts of informality influence the resilience and vulnerability of AFS and, by doing so, how they influence people’ capacity to deal with climate change impacts; and (c) what are the conditions for scaling impact, transferring results, and overcoming implementation barriers towards resilient AFS in Latin America and the Caribbean. The aim is to use such knowledge to (1) support on-the-ground, locally-specific efforts to strengthen AFS; and (2) generate and practice lessons related to the food system to reduce vulnerabilities and build resilience. It will do so by means of research, training, and implementation activities in four countries (Ecuador, Colombia, Chile, Cuba) and by means of networking and sharing activities among them and other countries in Central America. It will produce new knowledge and yield policy changes through innovative explorations that combine empirical research, action research and design. These activities will help enhance local capacity and interaction among community leaders, public officials, and academic partners and better equip communities and institutions to address challenges of food insecurity and natural hazards in the coming years.

[+] The objective

The ultimate goal of this project is to facilitate the emergence, consolidation, and stability of culturally relevant AFS in informal urban settings. To do so, the project addresses the new geographies of risk and foodscapes in informal settings through approaches in architecture, urban design, engineering, sociology, and geography, to devise scalable solutions to reinforce AFS, and in this way, facilitate residents’ production, distribution, and access to local, nutritious, and culturally relevant food. It has four specific objectives: (a) To explore how bottom-up informal solutions (particularly those initiated by women) interact with food systems and contribute to make them more resilient to shocks such as climate change impacts and pandemics. (b) To examine how immediate urban systems (roads, sewage, drainage, water, electricity, etc.) and larger urban systems (such as housing, environmental and DRR policy, housing programs, cooperative systems, etc.) influence the resilience and vulnerability of AFS in contexts of informality and, by doing so, how they influence people’ capacity to deal with climate change impacts. (c) To identify and analyse the conditions for scaling impact, transferring results, and overcoming implementation barriers towards resilient AFS in Latin America and the Caribbean. This includes efforts to align policy objectives and direct them towards efficient urban planning and projects. (d) To develop capacity among stakeholders in general, and local leaders in particular, to overcome barriers and reduce challenges that inhibit the emergence, consolidation, and stability of culturally relevant AFS in informal urban settings in the selected locations

[+] The Methodology

Climate resilience in AFS must be the result of partnered action with local institutions, including community groups, food network associations, universities, schools, churches, and other stakeholders that support healthy food distribution, risk reduction, and environmental protection. See in attachment 4 the list of stakeholders that participate in this project and their roles. We call our general method “conversación disciplinada” (disciplined dialogue). It consists of engaged, sustained, and constructive dialogue between stakeholders. Here, conversation is not only used to transmit information, but to co-create knowledge, develop shared understandings, bridge gaps between objectives, distil key narratives, create trust, establish legitimacy, disrupt power imbalances, show respect towards local knowledge, redefine problems, and create spaces for mutual learning. By involving municipal actors, and representatives of NGOs and government in several stages of the project (including meetings, workshops, seminars and focus groups), we will facilitate that best principles are adopted at the right governance level.

[+] Detailed case studies

We will conduct six longitudinal detailed case studies in: Valdivia (case 1), Usme (case 2), Siloé (case 3), Cienfuegos (case 4), Concepción (case 5), and Quito (case 6). We will map actors involved in food systems, and will conduct an in-depth analysis of contextual characteristics, action plans in DRR, and responses to food insecurity. The case studies entail ethnographic work, policy analysis and narrative analysis. Primary data sources include interviews with residents, decision-makers, and officers; group conversations; focus groups; detailed observations; project visits; narratives (notably by women agents of change); on-site drawings, and photographic reports. We will also analyze data from secondary sources such as policy documents, contractual documents, press clips, vulnerability maps and assessments, and project/program/strategy reports. Data will be analyzed through network analysis methods, Geographic Information Systems, and mapping techniques. We will rely on four levels of triangulation as identified by Love et al. (2002): (a) data triangulation, or the comparison of sources of information, (b) interdisciplinary triangulation, where we compare perspectives coming from architecture, construction management, engineering, geography, sociology, anthropology, and urban planning, (c) methodological triangulation, where multiple methods of data collection and analysis are used, and (d) investigator triangulation, by having first different researchers (co-authors) independently analyzing data on the same phenomenon and later validating the results. Finally, we will identify patterns within each case study by revealing constant relationships.