We opened our doors to 60 international conference delegates, including a wide range of landscape architects, students, policy makers, clients, and those from other disciplines and allied areas of practice. We also welcomed a glass box full of bees! Morning tea consisted of fresh and organic locally-sourced food, fresh bread and – thanks to local collective ‘Bee One Third’ – honey from hives placed on a rooftop across the street from our office.

We are passionate about urban food and particularly the compelling co-benefits not only for food security, but also for health and well-being, community participation and future economic diversity.

The title of the event was chosen carefully. The infrastructure reference captures the value of understanding a bigger picture and connected systems. ‘Small bites’ represent the many small-scale changes and evolutionary steps already being taken all over the place – to make clear the collaborative nature of urban food. ‘Big places’ remind us of the potential, and of the transformative potential of big picture thinking. We were interested in scale and particularly the scale-ability of collaborative urban food production.

The first thing that struck us as we prepared for the event was the huge value in drawing together different 91Ӱ�� activity related to food. For the first time we assembled a passionate international group of people working around the edges of these themes to foster a dialogue, understand synergies and imagine potential. This process yielded the framework for the first half of the session.

We set the scene with some big picture headlines. These all provide compelling motivation to address some very real and pressing challenges.

We then gave a concise overview of a number of 91Ӱ�� projects, conference papers, activities and emerging initiatives. These included an understanding of the significant value (economically and socially) of small-scale urban food production, the emerging policy context through Gold Coast Local Food Feasibility and Redlands Rural Futures strategies and physical input into urban food production in Brooklyn, New York and Christchurch, New Zealand. To bring this back to a local context, Brisbane City Council provided a snapshot of community gardens within the city.

We explored concepts of the near-future, such as the Urban Food Jungle, the integrated potential flowing from a strategic infrastructure approach to climate adaptation (Townsville example) and the power of statistics relating to land area, productive potential, water consumption and employment creation (Jeddah Plan Food Strategy). We demonstrated the simple steps required to turn existing places into productive urban places.

The second session began with morning tea and was an informal and energetic honey-fuelled discussion about ideas, innovations, priorities and opinions related to ‘what next’? We captured the different views and have committed to producing a paper to explore the role of the profession in defining a step change in urban food production, in what will be a tangible step towards creating a transformative moment.

The collaboration has yielded great potential. We now need to hold ourselves to account for taking the next steps. The carrot? That has to be the truly compelling and tangible benefits to be harvested from big picture edible infrastructure within our towns and cities.

My simple conclusion from this is that urban food production just requires intentional steps, but these need to influence the process at different stages, through a determined approach. Most of our cities adopt a strategic, finely-tuned and well-funded approach to transport infrastructure. We largely take for granted the benefits and value of good transportation. Our provocative question for our audience: using the example of transport, why don’t we create a ministry of urban food infrastructure as the next step towards harvesting the benefits of local food production?

Alastair Leighton (alastair.leighton@aecom.com) is an associate director with 91Ӱ��’s Design + Planning practice in Queensland.

The post Discussing ‘edible infrastructure’ in Brisbane appeared first on Blog.

Three cherry-picked projects exhibit the new frontier for food system planning and design.

Economic

Urban Farmers is a roof-top farm developer for cities. It was created in Zurich by a Swiss businessman and an aquaponics scientist at the Zurich University of Applied Sciences. They don’t grow tomatoes but provide the system to do it. This system includes advanced hydroponics and aquaponics (fish production). Scientists and Swiss bankers collaborated to develop a franchise system that teaches a diverse customer base of stores, hotels, individual operators, and neighborhood communities how to create, manage, maintain, and make money off of a rooftop farm. It looks at rooftops as vacant real estate assets and a business opportunity, as well as locations to reduce the environmental impact of urban life and grow food.

Social

21^st century Detroit has been victim to “poverty porn.” People view photos exhibiting its recent decline with the same intrigue as pictures of the Titanic. But in urban food system circles, Detroit is a celebrity. Much of this is due to efforts by urban “heel diggers” who still have hope. Earthworks Farm in Detroit is an extension of the Catholic Church’s Capuchin Soup Kitchen. Seven farms make up the complex over two city blocks. As Detroit de-populates, entire neighborhoods have become vacant. Open land for agriculture has become a viable and valuable land use. Although some product is sold at local markets, most of the food grown at the farm is used to feed people at the soup kitchen. In this fashion, Earthworks Farm has become a “working study is social justice.” They are working with the Department of Health to promote fresh food consumption. They have grown their activities by creating “value-add” products (canning, jams, pickling). Earthworks is making good use of vacant land, “recycling” blight into a resource that benefits those that live there.

Image courtesy of��http://www.cskdetroit.org/EWG/.

Environmental

Haiti has the sad legacy of being intensely deforested. It also has the added complexity of a recent disaster that spurred a chaotic urban reorganization. However, it is not surprising that some of the most integral and effective innovation is happening in “developing-world countries” like Haiti. Places where people already think about overlapping vital processes like growing, processing, and eating food show that necessity is easily the mother of invention. The silver lining to the horrible 2010 earthquake is an intense focus on rebuilding and improving urbanized and urbanizing areas of Haiti. Food systems play a large role.

The Catholic Church bought a deforested, wind-swept, steep parcel in the peri-urban community of Titanyen, Haiti outside of Port-au-Prince. It was established as an orphanage for children, many of whom were orphaned by the earthquake. Father Charles Moise, the priest leading this effort, had a holistic vision of the orphanage and its function on the landscape and in the community. Small business ventures were started. An integrated water system was developed that utilized well water, captured rain water, and waste water. Although the property was steep with little vegetation to maintain rainfall on site, deeply grooved by erosion, and scoured by sea winds, Father Charles enlisted the help of a young Haitian agronomist who helped create and implement an agro-forestry plan that surrounded the orphanage and church buildings. The entire site was terraced simply to create water catchment zones. Edible, low-water plants, many of which are native or adapted to the region, are planted in layers that form protection for the plants and over time will help augment and maintain precious top-soil. Repairing the ecological function of the site with food crops shows how multiple goals can be achieved in projects that address complex issues.

Rachel Hill (rachel.hill@aecom.com) is a landscape designer in 91Ӱ��’s Design + Planning practice. She worked for Verzone Woods Architects in Switzerland on the Food Urbanism Initiative (FUI). She helped develop a website that continues to grow as an “atlas” of urban food system projects, broken down into their functional components: .

The post Urban ag in action appeared first on Blog.

Food systems as part of our urban environments are nothing new. It is only in the last 100 or so years of city habitation that we’ve moved many parts of the process out of our cities and sterilized it such that children grow up not understanding that milk comes from cows, or the nitty gritty that goes into meat consumption. Cities built on the networks that gave us sustenance were named for them. Riverside streets in London are named after grains that arrived on boats from the agricultural fields. Butcher shops sat on the edges of cities where animals arrived from farms and fields, forming meat districts. (Hungry City – Carolyn Steel)

Courtesy of��

Industrial farming and distribution changed much of that.

Fortunately there is an emergence of urban food “awareness” and an effort to reintegrate the food system into urban environments. New interest in the urban food process adds to the typical production chain that involves farms, distribution, processing, packaging, sales, and consumption. It reveals and recognizes a part of the chain that has always been vital but rarely talked about – waste and decomposition. And it adds social functions to this seemingly linear chain with loops that link and weave food into other urban functions like education and recreation.

Whereas the (re)genesis of urban agriculture in the 20^th century came from utopian and altruistic efforts to feed people (for example, Victory gardens during World War II, farming coops in intentional communities, and efforts by Catholic churches in blighted urban areas like Detroit), it quickly moved into a realm of fad and popularity. Don’t get me wrong – this is critical for warming the masses to what is ultimately a messy process. A friend in a ritzy high-rise in Portland, Oregon, was allowed just recently to put tomato plants on her publicly-viewed veranda. Realizing that rooftop gardens can add considerable real estate value, landscape architects are developing a new specialty when working with urban developers. Real estate agents now put the proximity to community gardens on their listings, and farm-to-fork grocery stores have become neighborhood catalysts.

Courtesy of��

It is now time to look past the individual objects that make up food systems. One of the most compelling and motivating aspects of urban food systems to designers and planners is how these are being woven back into all the other interconnected systems within cities. We are examining how the different objects (gardens, fields, factories, stores, restaurants, compost bins) function together with elements of the city (stormwater, HVAC condensate, nutrient flows, open space, left-over space).

These systems are being understood and designed as organisms, nourished by the “big three” factors that underpin our understanding of sustainable development – economy, environment, society. They are relevant and responsive to modern needs instead of recreating a nostalgic agricultural past. They capitalize on modern modes of production, marketing, technology, sales, and consumption. They re-purpose old ways of doing things and aging infrastructure. A successful example is Eli’s Vinegar Factory in New York City, which put a small rooftop farm and grocery store in an old vinegar factory, creating opportunities to participate in and expose multiple parts of the urban food process.

Food system planning and design is happening at a spatial level, in how we organize and design spaces. It is also happening at an organizational and policy level, making possible or even incentivizing these processes. The landscape composition of house yards in Portland, Denver, Boston, Madison, and San Francisco (among others) now mix chicken coops together with plastic children’s slides and garden gnomes. Legally.

Although the good, old community garden may have been the catalyst for the expansion of the entire network in cities (community comes together to grow a garden that feeds its members, often in situ, while participating in communal goals and shared resources), the next phase of the design and planning of urban food systems will take on a more comprehensive span. It will consider and affect the larger physical urban context. It will more fully blend modern modes and innovations into its functioning. Financial fitness and creativity will drive it.

Look out for my next post to come shortly.

Rachel Hill (rachel.hill@aecom.com) is a landscape designer in 91Ӱ��’s Design + Planning practice. She worked for Verzone Woods Architects in Switzerland on the Food Urbanism Initiative (FUI). She helped develop a website that continues to grow as an “atlas” of urban food system projects, broken down into their functional components: .

The post A growing field appeared first on Blog.

Here in Queensland, Australia, agriculture is one of the ‘Four Pillars’ of the state economy.

Both industry and state government want to see the agricultural sector and regional economies flourish, with targets for Queensland to become Asia’s food bowl by “doubling food production by 2040” seen as the key vision.

However, in a context of increasing costs, declining farm gate prices, and fewer young people entering farming, it would seem unwise to try and “double food production” by doing more of the same and only investing in large-scale agricultural industries.

Do we really comprehend who will be producing our food, how it will be produced or how it will be consumed?

Much of the land at the fringes of our urban areas would appear to be suffering from a slow decline while awaiting seemingly inevitable redevelopment. As parcels come forward for development, often sporadically, there is an uneasy conflict between the incoming urban life-stylers and the traditional farming communities that remain.

There are many leading examples which can help guide Australia’s approach to developing alternative agricultural systems and more local food systems. Seattle, Detroit, New York, London, Tokyo and Melbourne are cities that share similarities in terms of government frameworks, political structures, and aspects of demography. What is clear from all these cities is that alternative agriculture – and in particular urban farming and peri-urban agricultural diversification – is more than just some romantic notion of local food, but rather a contributor to each city’s daily food requirements.

If Queensland is to achieve its target of doubling food production by 2040, it will need to establish a legacy and position agriculture as a vital and integrated feature of our urban environments, offering social, economic and health benefits.

Alternative but complementary production, supply and distribution methods need to be considered. We need to seriously consider the role that urban and peri-urban areas can play in achieving goals for food production.

There also needs to be a debate around the values we place upon our remaining rural areas close to the urban fringe. An increased emphasis must be placed on the social, environmental and economic contributions that existing rural areas make to our urban environments, and how these contributions can continue in conjunction with urbanisation. We need to be more creative about how those core attributes are retained as part of future urban expansion.

While agriculture may not be a critical issue for planners at the moment, the development of a more integrated and diverse agriculture system is fundamental to the implementation of a more sustainable, resilient, healthy and equitable future for all our urban and rural communities. As planners we need to stop largely ignoring local or community-based food systems and start to implement appropriate and reasonable measures to support them.

As planners, we can increase our awareness and knowledge regarding food system issues and become advocates for change in our workplaces. This means challenging our own perceptions of what the agricultural industry might be in order to support sustainable food production in all forms, not just in remote, rural locations. In this manner, we can create a more positive and valued perception of the agricultural industry as a whole.

Dylan Porter is an associate director of planning at 91Ӱ�� in Queensland, Australia. He will present his paper “Achieving big requires thinking small” at the Planning Institute of Australia , in Mackay, from Wednesday 6–Friday 8 November.��

The post Thinking locally about agriculture appeared first on Blog.

Here in Queensland, Australia, agriculture is one of the ‘Four Pillars’ of the state economy.

Both industry and state government want to see the agricultural sector and regional economies flourish, with targets for Queensland to become Asia’s food bowl by “doubling food production by 2040” seen as the key vision.

However, in a context of increasing costs, declining farm gate prices, and fewer young people entering farming, it would seem unwise to try and “double food production” by doing more of the same and only investing in large-scale agricultural industries.

Do we really comprehend who will be producing our food, how it will be produced or how it will be consumed?

Much of the land at the fringes of our urban areas would appear to be suffering from a slow decline while awaiting seemingly inevitable redevelopment. As parcels come forward for development, often sporadically, there is an uneasy conflict between the incoming urban life-stylers and the traditional farming communities that remain.

There are many leading examples which can help guide Australia’s approach to developing alternative agricultural systems and more local food systems. Seattle, Detroit, New York, London, Tokyo and Melbourne are cities that share similarities in terms of government frameworks, political structures, and aspects of demography. What is clear from all these cities is that alternative agriculture – and in particular urban farming and peri-urban agricultural diversification – is more than just some romantic notion of local food, but rather a contributor to each city’s daily food requirements.

If Queensland is to achieve its target of doubling food production by 2040, it will need to establish a legacy and position agriculture as a vital and integrated feature of our urban environments, offering social, economic and health benefits.

Alternative but complementary production, supply and distribution methods need to be considered. We need to seriously consider the role that urban and peri-urban areas can play in achieving goals for food production.

There also needs to be a debate around the values we place upon our remaining rural areas close to the urban fringe. An increased emphasis must be placed on the social, environmental and economic contributions that existing rural areas make to our urban environments, and how these contributions can continue in conjunction with urbanisation. We need to be more creative about how those core attributes are retained as part of future urban expansion.

While agriculture may not be a critical issue for planners at the moment, the development of a more integrated and diverse agriculture system is fundamental to the implementation of a more sustainable, resilient, healthy and equitable future for all our urban and rural communities. As planners we need to stop largely ignoring local or community-based food systems and start to implement appropriate and reasonable measures to support them.

As planners, we can increase our awareness and knowledge regarding food system issues and become advocates for change in our workplaces. This means challenging our own perceptions of what the agricultural industry might be in order to support sustainable food production in all forms, not just in remote, rural locations. In this manner, we can create a more positive and valued perception of the agricultural industry as a whole.

Dylan Porter is an associate director of planning at 91Ӱ�� in Queensland, Australia. He will present his paper “Achieving big requires thinking small” at the Planning Institute of Australia , in Mackay, from Wednesday 6–Friday 8 November.��

The post Thinking locally about agriculture appeared first on Blog.

Professor Tony Wong’s at Canberra, Australia in April, “Envisioning a Water Sensitive Future for our Cities and Towns,” describes approaches for integrating ��the built and natural environment by focusing on water.�� By incorporating natural hydrologic processes as a design template for city infrastructure he argues that we can create more resilient, restorative, and productive cities.

Tony highlights common urban inefficiencies such as the amount of rainwater that lands on cities and is quickly channeled out through gray infrastructure in patterns that damage surrounding watersheds, despite the fact that these cities are also struggling with water supply shortages.�� Wasted water is another major challenge and opportunity.��Using waste water to irrigate city landscapes, support urban agriculture, and even cool cities from climate change are some other exciting opportunities that many��cities are beginning to explore not only in Australia but around the world.

Isaac Brown was formerly��an urban designer and ecologist with 91Ӱ��’s Design + Planning practice in Orange, California. This information was updated Nov. 5, 2013.

The post Water sensitive cities appeared first on Blog.

Professor Tony Wong’s at Canberra, Australia in April, “Envisioning a Water Sensitive Future for our Cities and Towns,” describes approaches for integrating ��the built and natural environment by focusing on water.�� By incorporating natural hydrologic processes as a design template for city infrastructure he argues that we can create more resilient, restorative, and productive cities.

Tony highlights common urban inefficiencies such as the amount of rainwater that lands on cities and is quickly channeled out through gray infrastructure in patterns that damage surrounding watersheds, despite the fact that these cities are also struggling with water supply shortages.�� Wasted water is another major challenge and opportunity.��Using waste water to irrigate city landscapes, support urban agriculture, and even cool cities from climate change are some other exciting opportunities that many��cities are beginning to explore not only in Australia but around the world.

Isaac Brown was formerly��an urban designer and ecologist with 91Ӱ��’s Design + Planning practice in Orange, California. This information was updated Nov. 5, 2013.

The post Water sensitive cities appeared first on Blog.