Urban agriculture has been heralded as a solution for enhancing local food and nutritional security primarily by providing increased access to fresh foods and creating new streams of income opportunities. Many case studies have looked at whether urban agriculture improves local food security. However, few have sought to understand how it does so and even fewer have provided evidence-based insights for best practices, making it difficult for other countries to know 1. if urban agriculture does indeed improve local food security in all contexts, and; 2. what best practices an urban agricultural programme should adopt if their goal is to improve food security through increased food access and income streams.
This systematic review does exactly this by asking: under what conditions does urban agricultural programmes impact food security.
The results found that while urban agricultural programmes do improve food security [as opposed to not having programmes], the quality and quantity of outputs favoured those who have [access to secure land tenures, larger lands, ability to afford the buy-in costs and inputs] more than those who do not have.
In individual case studies, urban agriculture is often presented as a survivalist strategy among food insecure households. However, this systematic review revealed that engagement in urban agriculture can be restrictive, only allowing those who can afford its high buy-in price. Additionally, while urban agricultural programmes do not have a positive impact on food security, its impacts are most certainly not strong enough to eradicate food security. Hence, programmes should be designed to complement other interventions rather than a replacement. Lastly, the conditions in which urban agricultural programmes impact food security intersect many policy areas. Policy makers who wish to successfully introduce urban agricultural programmes in their food security strategy must evaluate existing policies in all involved areas, particularly land policy