Page added on May 3, 2016
Urban farms may provide a delicious source of delicate salad greens, honey, and even the occasional eggs, but they’re a long way from feeding entire cities. As rural areas continue to house much of the world’s poor, the question of who feeds these dense, agriculture-scarce areas becomes even more important. Linking small or subsistence farmers to urban markets could provide a way out of poverty for them, as well as opportunities for developing better infrastructure, creating new jobs along the way.
Some of the highest growth is in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, where “feeding urban populations has become an urgent and critical challenge,” according to a new report by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. As incomes rise, consumer diets stop focusing on subsistence crops such as grains or starches as they demand more meats, produce, and other high-value items. In developing regions, 80 to 90 percent of food consumed comes from domestic supply chains rather than imports.
“In Ethiopia, Malawi, and Niger, the majority of economic activity of small towns has been found to be linked to food supply chains,” the report reveals. Farmers with access to urban markets can transition to higher-value crops, which, because of their perishability, often require developing a number of additional jobs along the food chain. In addition to transportation infrastructure, there is a need to handle, package, and process these foods, “providing critical rural employment opportunities,” according to the report.
And these supply chains can span a large geographic distance. In Beijing, for example, the chain for rice, fish, and potatoes can reach 600–800 miles outside of the city. Moving perishable foods over these distances requires access to electricity for cold storage, which is out of reach for many smallholder farmers. Yet, if cities and organizations can invest in shared food hubs that offer on-demand access to cold storage, it would allow many small rural farmers to access urban markets. Additionally, access to rural credit and extension services can give farmers the means and skills to improve their operations.
It wasn’t that long ago that New York City’s fish, produce, and meat markets were concentrated in dense Lower Manhattan, and much of the food traveled relatively short distances, from neighboring areas like Connecticut, Long Island, or upstate New York. Now, more than 5.7 million tons of food a year are flown into the city’s main market from locations around the world.
Cities can source food from many locations, making it hard for small farmers to compete in production and transaction costs without help. While the year-round demand for food in urban areas can become an important source of income, it also requires farmers to diversify enough to provide food for more of the year and to do so while maintaining high standards for appearance and food safety.
Urban markets will continue to grow. The question is whether small farmers will be allowed to grow with them or get left behind entirely.
23 Comments on "How Will We Feed the Megacities of the Future?"
Harquebus on Tue, 3rd May 2016 9:15 pm
How will we feed the mega-cities? Answer: We won’t. Survivors will move to where the food is. Agricultural serfdom here we come.
Makati1 on Tue, 3rd May 2016 9:17 pm
“How Will We Feed the Megacities of the Future?”
Answer: We won’t.
They will die and become not even the pyramids of the future. They were not built to last, only for profit. Without ongoing maintenance, most will collapse in the first 100 years after abandonment and will be covered with whatever plant growth survives. But the Egyptian pyramids will still be there for thousands of years to come. They were built to last, not for profit.
BTW: The stick-built home you likely live in will not even last that long. Maybe 20 yeas, or less, without maintenance with supplies from the local Home Depot.
Makati1 on Tue, 3rd May 2016 9:19 pm
Harquebus, you beat me to the punch and have the same thoughts I have. LOL.
energyskeptic on Tue, 3rd May 2016 10:46 pm
These vague nice happy urban farms and rooftop fantasies need to be backed up scientifically. A recent paper does this, titled “Urban food crop production capacity and competition with the urban forest” by Jeffrey J Richardson., L. Monika Moskal Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 15 (2016) 58–64
The paper finds that Seattle could at most grow 1% of its food: The sourcing of food plays a significant role in assessing the sustainability of a city, but it is unclear howmuch food a city can produce within its city limits. In this study, we propose a method for estimatingthe maximum food crop production capacity of a city and demonstrate the method in Seattle, WA USAby taking into account land use, the light environment, and a mix of food crops necessary to supply ayear-round vegetarian diet. By artificially removing trees from the city, we estimate the effect of treeshading on food crop production capacity. We find that at maximum food production, urban food cropscan produce between 1% and 4% of the city’s food needs under the most realistic land use scenarios, andthat tree shading reduces food crop production capacity between 19% and 35%. We expand beyond thecity Seattle limits to find that a buffer of 58 km around the city is required to meet 100% of the city’s food needs.
Though there are cities that could grow more food, which you can figure out from the recent book by John W. Day and Charles “EROI” Hall titled: America’s Most Sustainable Cities and Regions Surviving the 21st Century Megatrends.
Over 2 years ago they wrote (along with David Pimentel and others) a paper their 300+ page book is based on, my review of it is at:
http://energyskeptic.com/2014/scientists-on-where-to-be-in-in-the-future/
Ralph on Wed, 4th May 2016 5:51 am
My stick built home is 300 years old and counting. But then it is in the country, as been continuously occupied, and very few of the sticks are actually 300 years old.
makati1 on Wed, 4th May 2016 6:18 am
Ralph, if it is sticks, they have probably been replaced multiple times over the years. A stone or brick home built pre-1900 may survive if the roof is kept repaired, but that too requires materials and labor. I lived in a small log house built before Washington was president and the walls were still solid oak, but the roof had been replaced and patched multiple times as was evident in the attic. No home is forever unless you keep spending on it. Well, maybe a cave. LOL
Davy on Wed, 4th May 2016 6:52 am
The collapse process we are in will unfold over time. I personally think within a decade or less the pressures of destructive change and systematic decay will spell the end of globalism. How globalism flies apart is a spectrum of possibilities. It is the process speed and the degree of the change that will dictate the success of adaptation. This is a no brainer and can be applied to any ecosystem but with humans there is a uniqueness to this process because we are forcing the change.
Most ecological systems have participants all adapting in a natural balancing. In our situation we have conscious decisions we can make that have huge consequences for us and all other participants. Food sourcing is one of these conscious decisions. For modern man food and fuel are the most critical elements to our survival. Both appear to be in adequate supply but with dynamics that point to limits, diminishing returns, and depletion. We have a population rapidly growing but a food system productivity growth that is stagnating. We have an oil sector that is in dangerous demand, supply, and price compression. I mention oil because our food chain is significantly influenced by oil. Just like water to energy production oil is vital to modern food production.
Food sourcing has options currently but as time passes these options will decline as our economy and resources contract. We must move to local food production and quick. This is not because it is a nice idea it is because it is for survival. Global monocultures and industrial processing driven by oil energy intensity is reaching terminal decline. The trade networks and systems that support this global food sourcing are in dangerous disequilibrium. If the trade systems fail even a little then food production and distribution will cause serious disruptions. If food systems are effected we can be sure oil systems will be under stress.
Urban farming is a good idea but keep in mind urban areas themselves will have to depopulate to a significant degree. Mega cities have no future whatsoever except as sources of human migration. What will be left is an urban wasteland of decay. Some cities will retain importance but with greatly reduced population densities. Urban areas will make great sources of salvage for many years.
There is not much point in focusing on urban farming if these areas are going to depopulate. We must not think urban farming is a solution to our coming food issues. Where urban farming can be a great success is education. We must start educating the masses that have been disenfranchised from their basic human nature and that is food production. In past times all humans were involved in some way with the food process. Food is a process of producing, processing, preserving, preparing, and finally utilizing the waste stream. Today it is industrial and just in time which is not sustainable nor resilient.
We will have to have a huge migration out of unsustainable urban areas into rural areas and into farming communities. This may not happen well if the depopulation of urban areas becomes a crisis of collapse. Many surrounding rural areas will be destroyed in an uncontrolled chaotic urban area depopulation.
It is likely this collapse process will be a little of both success and failure depending on your location. Some locations have no hope of a transition from urban to rural but others do. Once globalism fails we will be talking regional and local arrangements. Some with the right stuff will survive other will decay and dissipate. Urban farming is a great way to reeducate the population to farming. The process speed and duration of change is unclear at this point so the efforts are worthwhile. Personally I doubt the status quo will allow meaningful change until it is too late but being defeatist now ensures failure. It is more likely you can make a difference locally. Get out of areas with no future. Start your education process now. The rest is fate in an unknown process. Sure we may have a complete collapse but if we don’t your inaction will have left you unprepared.
dave thompson on Wed, 4th May 2016 8:19 am
We can make no preparation for the meltdown of 430+ untended nukes when the shtf. SHUT IT DOWN.
makati1 on Wed, 4th May 2016 9:06 am
Desperation….
“United Arab Emirates Is Considering Building a Fake Mountain to Bring Real Rain”
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/uae-is-considering-building-an-artificial-mountain
LMAO
penury on Wed, 4th May 2016 10:11 am
It seems that the Cornys have not shown up yet. We are unanimous, there will be no masses to feed. Living in caves and trying hunting and gathering will make life, short and brutal.
PracticalMaina on Wed, 4th May 2016 10:23 am
I will play the part of the corn porn enthusiast. I recently placed a link on here that stated 15-20% of global food production is from an urban environment. Not that it means we are not utterly and totally screwed, but 15-20% of urbanites, if they can defend their food and are not in the middle east or south west or anywhere that temperatures will become 2 hot, might be alright.
PracticalMaina on Wed, 4th May 2016 10:24 am
I am going to ignore the other needs that they probably will have trouble fulfilling, just to stir everyone up. 🙂
GregT on Wed, 4th May 2016 10:54 am
The 80-85% that don’t have a reliable food supply will likely create quite a stench for the 15-20% that do.
Move now, or invest in a NIOSH certified respirator.
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/topics/respirators/disp_part/
sidzepp on Wed, 4th May 2016 10:56 am
Mak, I don’t think it is desperation rather it can be seen as the arrogance of mankind in believing that we can continually use our technology to solve our problems and continue unrestrained economic growth. Look at the massive dam projects in the American West as examples of man making monumental changes to the environment and then we see those consequences of our arrogance today in a region that is facing massive water problems. We have destroyed a once thriving estuary that flowed into the Gulf of California. We saw a massive influx of population into a semi-arid to arid region and converted much of the land into agricultural land that needs massive amounts of irrigation.
Modern Humanity prides itself on the ability to transform nature to suit our own comforts. And where generations look in awe at the accomplishments we fail to heed the situation we place future generations in.
I believe that for the next few decades humanity will find temporary technological fixes to some of the messes we have created. But they will come back to bite us in the ass and the fall will be quick and swift.
dave thompson on Wed, 4th May 2016 11:16 am
http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVr8OICpXmagAIsUnnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTE0NWhpa3VqBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDRkZVSTJDMV8xBHNlYwNzcg–/RV=2/RE=1462407311/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fmead.uslakes.info%2flevel.asp/RK=0/RS=YgccH6h0.b.Ax7W9vKIPranNwgI-
Davy on Wed, 4th May 2016 11:25 am
Right Pen, have you noticed how the cornucopians are falling out of line on our board. Many of us here don’t get along on who is to blame but we do all agree on the doom. The cornucopians cannot maintain their optimistic narrative in the face of overwhelming doom. We have a few hardcore denialist hangers’ons but I predict even they will fall soon. Soon we doomers will own the board and rightly so.
PracticalMaina on Wed, 4th May 2016 12:24 pm
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-04/harvard-scientist-a-former-solar-skeptic-now-sees-the-light
marmico on Wed, 4th May 2016 1:05 pm
It seems that the Cornys have not shown up yet
What’s up fuctard! Still doing your primary school circle jerk with Davy Greenacres.
The megacities 50 years from now will be fed by today’s millennials working the STEM labs.
You’ll be an afterthought in your casket or urn. Thank the DOG that another neo-Malthusian will be along to pick up your soylent green (aka Limits to Growth innumerate bull shit artists).
Apneaman on Wed, 4th May 2016 1:49 pm
marmi, take a good look at Ft McMurray if you want a glimpse of the future of cities. The near future……………..fuctard.
Apneaman on Wed, 4th May 2016 1:59 pm
marmi,are the STEM geniuses going to invent self repairing roads and bridges? Or are we not going to need them because we are finally getting our flying cars…..again.
Annual Report: Michigan Roads Only Getting Worse
http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2016/05/02/annual-report-michigan-roads-only-getting-worse/
poor widdle marmi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNtjksCUMIA
GregT on Wed, 4th May 2016 6:47 pm
@Practical,
One word. Bloomberg.
makati1 on Wed, 4th May 2016 6:49 pm
Ap, Marmi, like a few others here, does not think. That hurts too much. Every square foot of highway is oil in some form. But few understand that they are not forever. They are constantly disintegrating under weather and use. They will not last as long as the life time of an automobile (10 years or less) without constant oily repairs.
Sissyfuss on Wed, 4th May 2016 7:50 pm
We need to get the robots in our auto assembly plants to start paying their fair share of state taxes to finance road repairs. That way the self driving cars will enjoy their jaunts and traverses in splendorous comfort.