The potential of trans‐local policy networks for contributing to sustainable food systems—The Dutch City Deal: Food on the Urban Agenda

Abstract

To foster more sustainable food systems, collaboration between local governments for knowledge exchange and cooperation is essential. Trans-local food policy networks potentially serve this purpose but their functioning and outcomes remain largely unexplored. We address this gap by analyzing collaboration and its outcomes for one of the first trans-local food policy networks in the Netherlands: City Deal: Food on the Urban Agenda. We use Ansell and Gash's collaborative governance model as an ideal type to analyze the City Deal drawing on two rounds of semi-structured interviews with civil servants and politicians in 2016 and 2019 resulting in a total of 37 interviews with 49 unique respondents. The collaborative process was a continuous searching and negotiating for roles, goals, and activities, on the one hand, combined with great eagerness among participants to collaborate and improve local food systems on the other. Although this process led to collective identity building and learning, it resulted in limited collaborative action between participants or tangible results on the ground. The main outcomes were the active network itself, which fostered the strengthening of connections, exchanging knowledge, learning, and agenda setting.Based on our findings, we identify five key points of attention for successful food policy collaboration: ensuring stakeholder commitment, striking a balance between a sectoral and holistic focus, avoiding too abstract ambitions, fostering interdependence, and investing in political commitment.Abbreviations: LFPG, local food policy group; MUFPP, Milan Urban Food Policy Pact.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Unraveling institutional complexity in engaged education practices: rationales, responses, and roles of individual practitioners

“…Second, in the Netherlands, the expansion of core missions and visions are apparent across the whole spectrum of post-secondary education institutes from MBO (Simons et al, 2000;Geurts and Meijers, 2009) to HBO and WO (Meijs et al, 2019). Lastly, this expansion is informed and influenced by policy initiatives such as the City Deals on Education, which have fostered engaged educational projects in which cities (local governments), MBO, HBO, WO, civil society and / or the private sector collaborate to find solutions to pressing local social and urban challenges (see for example: Mees et al, 2019;Sibbing et al, 2021). Within the Dutch context, the city of Amsterdam is one of about 10 cities in the Netherlands in which WO, HBO and MBO are present.…”

Planning food system transitions: Exploring spatial, citizen‐driven, and agroecological approaches

“…“Food policy collaboration is about identity‐building and learning, not collective action” explain Lara Sibbing, Jeroen Candel, and Katrien Termeer in their paper titled The potential of trans‐local policy networks for contributing to sustainable food systems: The Dutch “City Deal: Food on the Urban Agenda” (Sibbing et al., 2021). The importance of food policy within local governments takes center stage.…”

Circular food systems: a blueprint for regenerative innovations in a regional UK context

“…Our emphasis on 'regional' does not imply a protectionist or isolationist agenda that dovetails with the UK's recent exit from the European Union. On the contrary, a predominantly regional focus of food system intervention does not preclude global cooperation and sharing between regions for mutual co-benefit and global human, environmental and economic health gain (Sibbing, Candel & Termeer, 2021). Indeed, our circular approach to food systems closely aligns with a number of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and other governmental and inter-governmental policy agendas.…”