Debt-deflation and asset bubbles A case study of the carbon bubble

(1)

Increasing food security in Sub-Saharan African slums with

urban agriculture

A comparative analysis of Lagos and Nairobi

Interdisciplinary Project: Sustainable resilient (mega)cities

Jorick Amsman - 10670084 - Urban planning Roos de Boer - 10667075 - Human geography David Boks - 10597379 - Earth sciences Kasper Köhler - 10624104 - Economics

Tutor: Njal van Woerden

Supervising expert: Pieter Heyning Date: 18-12-2015

(2)

Abstract

Many African countries are rapidly urbanising, which leads to major problems in the big cities. One of the most pressing problems is the high food insecurity level of slum areas. This paper aims to gain insight into the way in which food security can be increased with urban agriculture in developing African countries. This is done by observing and comparing Lagos, Nigeria and Nairobi, Kenya. An additional aim is to investigate how urban agriculture and food security can decrease the negative effects of the poverty trap that exists in these slums. Methods used for information gathering include literature research, secondary

dataset-analysis and empirical findings. Urban agriculture has the potential to positively influence all four pillars of food security: availability, access, utilisation and stability. Urban agriculture also has positive influence on the social capital of slum dwellers, self-sufficiency levels, diet diversity, resilience and environmental impacts. It can therefore be combined with other poverty combating plans so that slum dwellers can escape the poverty trap. Lagos can implement small scale subsistence agriculture as can be found in Nairobi in its slums, while Nairobi can focus more on the small scale commercial agriculture found in Lagos.

Recommendations for governments dealing with slums are to recognise and legalise urban agriculture and promote it as a way of feeding the poorest part of the urban population. Multiple forms of urban agriculture should be implemented and innovative solutions can be found for local constraints.

(3)

Introduction

With a continuously growing world population, efforts in solving global problems such as world hunger, climate change and poverty have drastically increased. Due to the complexity of these large scale problems, it is often unclear how local struggles relate to these

overarching issues. To be able to effectively tackle such issues, a series of worldwide local measures should be implemented. Local constraints and possibilities relevant to these issues should therefore be investigated. This research aims to gain insight into the way in which food security can be increased with urban agriculture in the slums of Sub-Saharan African countries. An additional aim is to investigate how urban agriculture and food security can decrease the negative effects of the poverty trap that exists in these slums.

Two cities with high annual growth rates and large slum areas have been selected to be able to gain useful insight into the subject. Both Lagos in Nigeria and Nairobi in Kenya are among the fastest growing cities in the area and are seen as the commercial centres of the respective countries (Akom, 1984; Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). The reason why these cities are useful to compare to gain insight into the impact of urban agriculture in increasing food security is because of the different roles that urban agriculture play in each city.

In literature studies, urban agriculture is presented as an effective way of increasing food security in developing countries (Orsini et al., 2013). Nevertheless, in Lagos, urban agriculture has not been recognised or promoted as a feasible way of improving urban food security. Nairobi on the other hand is a city that is shaped by its urban agriculture activities (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). Urban agriculture is a common sight in Nairobi and it has been used for many years to increase household food security levels (Mwangi, 1995). As food security encompasses many elements of poverty, it is important to research to what extent urban agriculture can influence food security and other elements in the poverty trap.

The research question therefore states: How can food security in the slums of Lagos and Nairobi be increased with urban agriculture? The focus while researching this question is on the differences between Lagos and Nairobi and what can be learned from both situations to increase food security and influence the poverty trap. To be able to answer the research question, the following sub questions are necessary to gain sufficient insight into the subject:

-What is the current food security situation in Lagos and Nairobi? -What is the current urban agriculture situation in Lagos and Nairobi? -What are the constraints for urban agriculture in Lagos and Nairobi?

-What is the effect of urban agriculture on food security and the poverty trap? -What can be learned from both situations to improve food security?

The subject of increasing food security in the slums of Lagos and Nairobi with urban agriculture is a complex problem, and therefore requires insights from different disciplines (Repko, 2012). The paper is structured as follows: first, the theoretical framework and interdisciplinary methodology are presented. These are followed by the results from

(5)

question will be answered with accompanying recommendations.

Theoretical framework & interdisciplinary methodology

This section will begin by providing a perspective on the interdisciplinary methods that are used to answer our research question. Thereafter we will describe the concepts urbanisation, slum formation, the poverty trap, food security and urban agriculture. Throughout these descriptions the relevant disciplinary influences, theories and assumptions are incorporated.

Interdisciplinary methodology

Food insecurity is a concept that contributes to the poverty trap, as will become clear later on in the theoretical framework. The concept of food security and how to increase this with urban agriculture is the focus of this study. Urban agriculture in slums and the contribution to food security cannot be understood by relying only on insights from one discipline, since the relevant variables are covered by different and sometimes multiple disciplines. Therefore it is a complex problem and an interdisciplinary approach is necessary (Repko, 2012).

Repko (2012) introduces several integrative techniques to create common ground between different disciplines; one of these techniques is organisation. Organisation focuses on the overall relations between district variables. First commonalities in the meaning of important concepts are identified, after which these are organised to display a relation between them. Because there are several variables that influence urban agriculture, this technique is very suitable for our research. In the theoretical framework it will become clear which variables are of importance to urban agriculture and food security in slums and what the relations between these variables are. Methods used for information gathering include: literature research, secondary dataset-analysis and empirical findings.

Theoretical framework

Urbanisation and slum formation

Slum formation is usually described as a result of rapid urbanisation in combination with lack of governance (Morakinyo et al., 2012). The migration of residents from rural areas to the cities is defined as urbanisation, as the proportion of people living in urban areas increases compared to the proportion of people living in rural areas. For millions of poor rural residents, urban areas are a possibility for improving their socio-economic status. The rural areas exhibit deteriorating living conditions and the prospects for getting better jobs and incomes has generated a considerable flow of migrants to cities (Morakinyo et al., 2012). The reality, however, is often that the migrants do not succeed in finding a formal job. When governments do not regulate the trend of urbanisation, either due to inactivity or

uncontrollability, poor migrants create informal settlements, commonly known as slums. Slums are characterised by lack of sanitation, supply of clean water, electricity, infrastructure, other basic facilities and the buildings usually have very poor building quality. The slum

(6)

residents live outside the community, they are excluded from, amongst other things, formal housing, formal jobs and infrastructure and often experience high levels of poverty.

Poverty and the poverty trap

Slums are characterised by poverty; migrants come to the city to improve their socio-economic status but often do not succeed and end up in slums. Poverty is a multifaceted concept: it includes economic, social, political and many other elements. Absolute poverty is defined as a lack of means necessary to meet basic needs such as food, clothing and shelter, which is exactly the case in slums. Escaping poverty in slums is usually very difficult because the residents are often caught in the so called ‘poverty trap’.

The poverty trap theory is a long-standing hypothesis in the theories of economic growth and development (Sachs et al., 2004). It is the self-reinforcing mechanism which causes poverty to persist. The concepts that contribute to the poverty trap by disabling the slum dwellers to improve their situation are just like poverty itself multifaceted (Grant, 2010).

Economic factors that cause poverty to persist in slums are the lack of economic activity and a correctly functioning labour market. Slums dwellers are often unable to obtain any formal monetary income. Urban planning factors include a lack of space, affordable and safe shelter, infrastructure and basic (health) facilities. Slum dwellers are often ill due to the poor living conditions and there are no opportunities to improve their economic situation.

There are also social factors that contribute to the persistence of poverty; a lack of social capital, community networks and food security play a great deal (Grant, 2010). There is no social capital in the slums, nor are there community networks to build upon. The slum dwellers are often food insecure and surviving is their main occupation. Malnutrition, which causes poor health, makes slum dwellers unable to perform heavy work and earn enough money to save for investments or even for better food. Improving food security is therefore a main focus.

Food security

Food security is one of the main concepts in this paper as it is the variable to improve with urban agriculture. It also encompasses many elements of the poverty trap and is therefore highly relevant for influencing the poverty situation in slums. The definition currently states: “food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for a healthy and active life” (World Food Summit, 1996).

The most commonly used method to measure household food security is the U.S. Household Food Security Scale (HHFSS). This scale determines the level of household food security by assigning scores ranging from 0-10 to 18 topics relevant for food security. The added scores then assign each household to one of the following categories (Keenan et al., 2001):

(7)

2. Food insecure without hunger: households with concerns and adjustments to food management (e.g. reduced dietary quality) but little or no reported reduction in the quantity of food intake by household members

3. Food insecure with hunger: households in which adults have reduced food intake to the extent that they have experienced hunger

4. Food insecure with severe hunger: households in which children have reduced food intake and adults report going whole days with no food owing to a lack of resources.

These categories show how well households are developed on the four pillars of food security (figure 1): availability, access, utilisation and stability. Availability refers to sufficient food quantities of appropriate quality. Access refers to the political, social, cultural and economic processes that connect supply to individuals. Utilisation refers to the knowledge to use food in an efficient and safe way. Only if these three factors are sufficiently met, food security can exist (Daniels, 2008). Stability was added as a fourth pillar of food security in 2009 and focuses on long term food security. It determines the level of food security over time: (sudden) changes in local conditions might cause an area to become more food insecure. Food insecurity with regard to stability can therefore either be transitional, seasonal or chronic (FAO, 2009). The four pillars of food security should of course be taken into consideration when implementing urban agriculture to increase food security. The relation between the pillars of food security and the poverty trap is also very important to look at as food insecurity plays a major role in areas that experience poverty.

Figure 1: The four pillars of food security (FAO)

(8)

Urban agriculture

The scale of urban agriculture in the world is often underestimated: according to the most accepted estimation urban farming provides 800 million urban dwellers with at least some of their food (Nelson, 1996). Around 20% of the world's food was produced by urban farming in 1993 (Armar-Klemesu, 2000).

Urban agriculture is generally described as “any farming activity within the city boundaries, including the cultivation of food and cash crops, animal husbandry, forestry and the production of flowers and garden plants” (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). These activities are present in almost all cities, either within the built-up city as intra-urban farming or on its surrounding area as peri-urban farming (De Zeeuw et al., 2011). In developing countries, urban agriculture takes on multiple forms, as can be seen in figure 2 on socio-economic profiles of urban farmers (Orsini et al., 2013).

Figure 2: socio-economic profiles of urban farmers in developing countries

While urban agriculture is practised by the middle class in backyards to supplement the household diets, the majority of the lower class urban population implements urban agriculture simply as a surviving strategy (Bryld, 2003). Larger scale urban agriculture is often practised for small or main income generation and is generally used for supplying the urban markets.

(9)

Results

This section will provide the results of our research for each sub question. First, we will explain the current situations in the slums of Lagos and Nairobi by describing what it is like to live in the slums with all its contributing factors and constraints. This is followed by a part on the potential of urban agriculture for increasing food security. The last part will describe what can be learned from both situations to improve food security.

Living in the slums of Lagos and Nairobi

This part will begin with the contextual background information and analyses of living in the slums of Lagos and Nairobi. In this part it will become clear what the living conditions for a slum dweller in Lagos and Nairobi look like. Then the different current roles of urban agriculture in these cities will examined. It will lastly become clear what the constraints for applying urban agriculture in the two cities are.

Characteristics

Lagos

Lagos is an African megacity, meaning it has more than 10 million inhabitants, and is located on the western side of the coast of Nigeria. It covers an area of 356,861 hectares that is sensitive to flooding as the average elevation is only about 15 metre above sea level. A total area of 75,755 hectares is classified as wetlands. The annual mean rainfall in Lagos state is 1647.26 mm and the mean annual temperature is 26 °C (Adelekan, 2009).

Although Lagos State is the smallest state in the country, the area is home to more than 5% of the Nigerian population. Of this area, Metropolitan Lagos is home to around 85% of the state population while it covers a mere 37% of the land area of Lagos State (Adedeji & Ademiluyi, 2009). The population of Lagos has recently grown exponentially: over the last 15 years the population has more than doubled and the city is now host to almost 21 million people (Barredo et al., 2004). Almost all this growth is concentrated in the low income areas, resulting in informal settlement (slums).

Approximately 70% of the population of Lagos is reported to live in areas with slum conditions (Adelekan, 2009). In these slums, absolute poverty is present, with an average income that lies under US$1 per day. Slum dwellers lack basic needs such as food, clothing and shelter (Grandy, 2006).

When looking at slums in Lagos is becomes clear that they exhibit almost perfect conditions for a poverty trap. All the important concepts that contribute to the poverty trap, lack of economic activity and a dysfunctioning labour market, lack of housing, infrastructure and basic (health) facilities and lack of social capital, community networks, health and food security, are present in Lagos. There are, for example, almost no formal jobs available; slum dwellers mostly rely on informal, micro-scale business activities (including begging, theft, illegal brewing and prostitution) for their monetary income (Morakinyo et al., 2012). There is

(10)

The slum dwellers are often ill due to these poor living conditions; at least two-thirds of childhood disease is caused by lack of safe drinking water (Grandy, 2006). Thereby many parts of the city are sensitive to floods due to it low altitude.

As became clear in the theoretical framework, food security is a very important aspect of poverty and the poverty trap. Ajani et al. (2006) measured the food security in slums in Lagos. Their findings are based on the Household Food Security Scale (HHFSS). They conclude that in Lagos 28% of the slum residents is food secure, 37.2% is food insecure without hunger, 22.8% is food insecure with moderate hunger and 12% are food insecure with severe hunger (figure 3). They also found strong correlations between education, income and malnutrition.

Figure 3: Household Food Security Scale results of randomly selected slum households in Lagos

Nairobi

Nairobi is located at the southern end of Kenya's Central Highlands and lies at an altitude of between 1600 and 1800 metres above sea level. The mean annual temperature is 17 °C. Mean annual rainfall ranges from about 800 to about 1,050 mm, depending on the altitude.

Due to the large influx of people from the rural areas, the population grew from approximately half a million people in 1969 to an estimated 2 million in 1998. It continued to grow and from 2009 on the population consists of more than 3 million people (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). Just like Lagos, most of the growth was centralised in the low-income areas of the city. The population densities in some areas can be more than 30,000 persons/km² (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000).

Slum conditions in Nairobi are quite similar to those of Lagos; residents are very poor and are often caught in a poverty trap. Around two-thirds of the working population depend on the informal sector for their livelihood, and this percentage is most likely even higher in the informal settlements. With an average income of 340$ a year (0.93$ a day) in the slums, most of the slum dwellers live in poverty (Mwangi, 1995).

(11)

Faye et al. (2011) measured food security in two slums in Nairobi (Viwandani and Korogocho), using the Household Food Security Scale (HHFSS) as well. They conclude that over the period 2006–2008, 28% of the residents of Viwandani and 7% of the residents of Korogocho is food secure. They also found that the situation worsened over time; in the year 2006, 36% of Korogocho’s residents either always or sometimes did not have enough food to eat, while by 2008 this had increased to 55%. In Viwandani the situation worsened as well (figure 4). The food security in Lagos is with 28% higher than the average of the food security in the two slums of Nairobi, which is 17.35%.

Figure 4: HHFSS results of the Korogocho and Viwandani slums from 2006-2008

Urban agriculture

In both Nairobi and Lagos urban agriculture is used to improve the food security of the slum dwellers. In both cities urban agriculture is performed by rural migrants that come to the city for formal jobs. Because of the lack of formal jobs and the sometimes severe food insecurity urban farming is used to make ends meet. Nevertheless there is a great difference in the way of practising urban agriculture in both cities.

Currently 30% of the households in Nairobi can be classified as urban farmers (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). Urban farming practised by households of all socio-economic classes, but poor households are highly over-represented. There are five farming systems that can be recognised in Nairobi (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000).

(12)

Small-scale subsistence crop cultivation is by far the most common system and is often practised in combination with the second type, small-scale livestock production. These two strategies are used by mostly female, less educated residents that already live in Nairobi for some time; they farm to increase food security on a household level. It is practised on small plots, in backyards, on public lands (roadsides, riversides) or on privately-owned land belonging to somebody else (along railroads, in estates, on industrial land). Mwangi (1995) found that households that are active with these forms of urban farming produce 20-25% of their food requirements and are significantly better off in terms of both energy and protein consumption.

The third type is small-scale market-oriented crop production and the fourth is large-scale commercial farming, but these two types are under-represented. The plots are often further away from the houses and therefore require a larger production to make it worthwhile (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000).

The last form of urban agriculture practised in Nairobi is one that has recently gained a lot of interest (Gallaher et al., 2013). It is a form of gardening that is especially useful for densely populated areas. This is because it depends on the technique of vertical crop growth in sacks that do not take up much space. These sacks can be hung on windows, roofs and other places that are present in every household in the slums. Gallaher et al. (2013a) found that the farmers were better off in terms of quantities of food; 60% of the farmers have enough to eat but not what they want, while of the non-farmers, only 40% have enough to eat but not what they want (figure 5).

Foeken and Mwangi (2000), Mwangi (1995) and Gallaher et al. (2013) showed that urban agriculture does not only increase the food security of the farmers. They found that there is a link between urban farming and social capital; urban farming has potential to help build up a community network. If farmers can exchange products but also improve the overall production by working together.

Lagos

The farming community of Lagos, just as in Nairobi, mainly consists of rural migrants in search of employment in the formal sector. In the absence of other job opportunities, they embraced farming as a means of survival (Taiwo, 2014). A big difference with Nairobi is that most of the urban farmers in Lagos (72 to 88%) are male (Anosike & Fasona, 2004; Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). These migrants are often young Muslim males that came from the Northern part of the country. Compared to Nairobi, these farmers are often relatively new residents, often living under a year in the city. They are almost all married and therefore practice urban agriculture to financially support their families (Orsini et al., 2013). This is why urban farming in Lagos is usually carried out on a larger scale, although urban agriculture of all scales are present in some form. It is mostly performed on unauthorised plots in the outskirts of the city usually designated for a commercial purpose. Most of the produce are destined for supplying the local markets, although for around 70% of farmers the produce is also consumed by the households themselves. In some slums, mostly those on higher elevation, people use home plots to cultivate vegetables and some others have poultry such as turkeys, chickens and ducks (Taiwo, 2014).

(13)

Figure 5: Quantity of food analysis, Farmer vs Non-Farmer households

Constraints

Clearly, Nairobi is currently a step ahead in improving food security on a household level with urban agriculture. As seen there, urban agriculture can improve food security

significantly. But there are also some constraints for urban farmers. Lawal & Aliu (2012) investigated urban agriculture with a questionnaire in Lagos and concluded that the most pressing constraints on urban agriculture were lack of land, lack of funds and insecurity. Other possible difficulties they found relate to flooding, water supply. Roughly the same constraints have been found in Nairobi, although many constraints are more pressing in Lagos. Lack of governance was found as an additional problem for the upscaling of urban agriculture in both cities. The major constraints are discussed below.

Policy and urban planning

First of all, the attitude of governments towards slums and urban agriculture is crucial; there are governments that believe that when they provide urban services in the slums, it will cause the slums to grow because it would attract more migrants (Drescher, 1999). In other cases governments take a more passive attitude, they simply cannot keep up with the rapid urbanisation and lack proper planning tools. Despite the proven contribution of urban agriculture to the food security and overall economic status of urban residents, governments often discourage or outlaw it. The governments believe that farming activities do not fit their conceptions of modern cities (Drescher, 1999). Currently, urban agriculture in the city o f Lagos is prohibited. In Nairobi, crop cultivation is formally forbidden as well, but in contrast to Lagos the present policy is to ignore and tolerate the activity, most likely because of the

(14)

city (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). In both cities the current policy and land planning is thus a major constraint.

Poverty

A major constraint to urban agriculture is that the farmers are usually very poor; none of them have the means to purchase necessary inputs. Also, when households do invest in the

production of crops, the risk of losing crops (due to theft or unfavourable conditions) forces them to harvest the crop as early as possible, when it is usually less rewarding both

financially and nutritionally.

Space

A large part of Lagos is situated on an island, and some settlements are even located on land submerged with water. These settlements are therefore not suitable for most agricultural practices (Adedeji & Ademiluyi, 2009). Lagos is also extremely densely populated with about 20,000 inhabitants per square kilometre. It is clear that little open space is available for urban agriculture. This holds even more so in the slums, which have grown as informal settlements. Urban planning has often been absent, therefore it is difficult to find large plots for agriculture.

This is different in Nairobi, where open plots are still present although decreasing in size and number (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). Due to the growing population, the demand for housing is large and open space have been sold to private developers, which has led to more buildings and less open spaces (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). Especially in the slums of Nairobi there is a very limited amount of space available for urban agriculture because of the high population density. A lack of space is therefore a significant constraint on the practice of urban agriculture in Lagos, and a smaller but growing constraint in Nairobi.

Floods

Although Lagos’s location on the coast has strongly contributed to its development as the economic centre of Nigeria and West Africa, the water also poses risk to a significant amount of the population. Adelekan (2010) states that approximately 70% of the people in Lagos live in slums with ‘extremely poor environmental conditions’. This situation may even be

worsened by climate change. The risk of flooding is especially high during heavy rainfall. Although flooding may bring nutrients to the soil, it can also destroy existing crops and ruin tools. Furthermore, the salty sea water may cause salinisation of soils, making these

unsuitable for most regular crops.

As Nairobi is not situated near the sea its risk of flooding is significantly smaller. Flooding does occur near the Nairobi river, which is a major problem for some slum

inhabitants according to Douglas et al. (2008), while Foeken and Mwangi (2000) argue that this flooding is beneficial for urban farmers with a plot near the river. However, they also mention that the Nairobi river is heavily polluted, causing some crops to be contaminated. In both Nairobi and Lagos, poor urban planning and quality of buildings contribute to the severity of flooding (Adelekan, 2010; Douglas et al., 2008).

Water

When not enough rainwater is available, different sources of water for irrigation have to be found. According to Adedeji and Ademiluyi (2009), recycled treated wastewater is the best

(15)

option in Lagos. They argue that the FAO estimates that this wastewater could supply all necessary nitrogen and much of the required phosphorus and potassium for urban agriculture. However, wastewater is currently not treated sufficiently for crop irrigation, although it is already being utilised as such. Sewage water therefore brings the risk of crop contamination. The same is the case in Nairobi, where about 25% of the urban farmers use sewage water for irrigation (Foeken & Mwangi, 2000). Therefore, the lack of available clean water for

irrigation remains a constraint on the practice of urban agriculture in both Lagos and Nairobi.

Increasing food security with urban agriculture

Studies conducted by Ogden (1993), Maxwell, Levin and Csete (1998), Mwangi (1995), Unicef (1990) and Gallaher et al. (2013) demonstrate that urban agriculture can impact poor urban households’ food security in multiple ways; either by providing an additional income source, increasing dietary diversity, or helping to protect against seasonal unavailability in the food supply. It is therefore interesting to investigate the potential effects of successful urban farming.

This part will look at the contribution of urban agriculture to the pillars of food security and discuss the following topics relevant for the poverty trap: social capital, self-sufficiency, diet diversity, resilience and environmental impacts. The next section will look at what can be learned from both situations to improve food security.

Building the pillars of food security

The pillars of food security are: availability, access, utilisation and stability. Availability is of course increased with more urban agricultural practices. Whether it is meant as

supplementary household food provision or increased market shares, it does directly increase the food quantity. When water of sufficient quality and adequate soil is used it does also increase the quality of available food. This is because locally grown food is fresher than imported foods and are often sold for lower prices because no transportation costs are included (De Zeeuw, 2011). Urban agriculture therefore also influences the access pillar of food security. This is not only by influencing market prices but also by creating farming communities that increase connectivity and therefore enhance supply opportunities to individuals (Gallaher et al., 2013). The utilisation pillar can also be improved when urban agriculture communities share their knowledge on efficient and safe crop growth. NGOs and the government can also choose to positively affect this pillar by sharing knowledge and providing necessary startup supplies. The stability pillar is the most difficult to improve on in general as it is influenced by numerous complex factors. Urban agriculture does however improve stability by increasing local food production levels that can combat transitional, seasonal and chronic food insecurity. It is therefore safe to say that successful urban

agriculture can be a very effective way to increase food security in slums since it contributes to all four pillars of food security.

(16)

Social capital

Both Gallaher et al. (2013; 2015) and Foeken & Mwangi (2000) show that urban agriculture has raised social capital for urban farmers in Nairobi. The urban farming communities were not only effective in sharing knowledge of their shared practice but also enhanced social bonding. The households practicing urban agriculture were more likely to lend each other tools and cash loans and shared food with each other more often. The combination of increased supplementary food with increased social capital made farming households less dependent on coping strategies in times of food shortages. This of course resulted in higher continued food security levels for farming households compared to non-farming households. De Zeeuw et al. (2011) also found a connection between urban agriculture and social

inclusion of disadvantaged minorities such as refugees, HIV/AIDS affected households and handicapped people. Urban agriculture was found to be an effective way of providing those households with fresh and nutritious foods and simultaneously building a social safety net.

Self-sufficiency

Urban agriculture of course increases the self-sufficiency levels of urban areas by stimulating local markets and supplementing household diets. This makes farming households less economically dependent with regard to their food share and reduces local market food prices (Orsini et al., 2013). The urban areas therefore become less vulnerable to shortages in food imports from rural areas and therefore increases food security by being a backup food

provision plan. Producing food locally and increasing self sufficiency are important factors in becoming a sustainable and resilient city (De Zeeuw, 2011). Although the road towards sustainability is still very long for both cities, urban agriculture does have the potential to make a significant first step.

Diet diversity

Although urban agriculture does not often increase the overall household diet diversity since it has a supplementary role, it does increase the frequency at which certain fresh foods are eaten (Orsini et al., 2013). Farming households reported to more frequently eat the vegetables found on the local markets and sometimes even saved enough money to buy quality foods like grain and fish. This has increased the nutritional values of farming households and positively affects health standards (De Zeeuw et al., 2011).

Resilience

All the above factors contribute to the resilience of the population. This means that during hard times the population can more easily fall back to its original food security state. This is because social connections are stronger, self-sufficiency is higher and overall health

standards are better to begin with. This makes many last resort coping strategies such as skipping meals less frequent or even unnecessary. Areas with urban farming can therefore easier cope with food shortages from imported and rural food supplies (De Zeeuw et al., 2011). This will cause the system to be more flexible and will fall back easier to higher levels of food security during better times.

(17)

Environmental impacts

Another way in which urban agriculture can contribute to food security is by positively influencing certain environmental aspects. Urban agriculture can, for example, make use of many waste products by composting organic waste and recycling objects as urban farming equipment (Orsini et al., 2013). A higher amount of plots designated for urban agriculture also makes the area greener and local communities become more aware of their environment when they are invested in urban agriculture (De Zeeuw et al., 2011). This will therefore positively influence living conditions including food security.

Escaping the poverty trap

As mentioned before, a poverty trap is considered a ‘trap’ because it forms a vicious circle. The people inside this trap do not have the means to leave this circle. The only way to escape this trap is with help from outside (Mabogunje, 2007). Such an impulse can and should take several forms. The most effective way to combat the poverty trap is to tackle multiple elements of the trap at once. As can be seen above, the potential of urban agriculture is not only to increase the major element of food security in the poverty trap, but can also positively influence the elements of social capital, self-sufficiency, diet diversity, health, nutritional value, resilience and environmental impacts.

Elevating slums out of the poverty situation should be a major point of attention when trying to tackle the goals of reducing poverty and combating world hunger. For cities that contain slum areas it would be economically advantageous as well. When poverty levels are reduced in slums, the city is able to include the slums into its policies, and plans to improve and include the economic communities can be incorporated. Stimulating different forms of urban agriculture can therefore be combined with plans to reduce poverty so that the vicious circle can be broken and living conditions are improved. A viable plan should also include a strategy to avoid slum dwellers from ending up back in the trap. The next section will describe what can be learned from both situations to improve food security.

Learning from both situations to increase food security

In consideration of the former constraints to urban agriculture in Lagos and Nairobi and the potential of successful urban agriculture, the focus should be at finding and using

(innovative) solutions to apply urban agriculture. This part will look into the way in which urban agriculture can be applied in both cities to improve food security and influence elements of the poverty trap. This is done by looking at the different forms of urban

agriculture in both cities and look at what could be learned from both situations. Innovative solutions and the role of the government in making changes possible are also discussed.

Clearly the city of Lagos can learn from the way in which urban agriculture is practised in Nairobi. As described above, different factors have contributed to the fact that urban

(18)

copied easily; due to the extremely limited availability of land, clever solutions are required to make urban agriculture possible in Lagos. However, the implementation of sack farming as practised in Nairobi could be such a solution, providing food while requiring very little space. As the constraints on and requirements for practising sack farming are significantly smaller than with other forms of agriculture, it is a promising technique in densely populated areas. Furthermore, the agriculture currently practised on the outskirts of Lagos could also be implemented in Nairobi; the larger scale could be a source of higher efficiency and help combat the food insecurity as well as the unemployment in slums.

Innovative solutions

Because some areas experience very pressing local constraints with regard to implementing urban agriculture, sometimes innovative solutions have to be found. A possibility for

innovation would be trying to build urban agriculture communities for in slums that are built on wetlands. Techniques such as allocation of land on the borders of the wetlands or even innovative designs such as sack gardening on boats, rooftops, or on the sides of buildings should be thought of in these slums. Other forms of innovative urban agriculture include organoponics and hydroponics (Orsini et al., 2013; Hossain & Akter, 2011).

These techniques are useful for areas that suffer from lack of space, have low fertility rates and/or lack of available water. It also ensures safe and healthy food so that no negative environmental impacts arise. Organoponics uses the technique of growing crops on organic substrates from compost or other organic waste sources. When combined with animal manure this technique has shown to provide healthy produce while having high yields. This can therefore have a positive impact on the environment by processing organic waste while simultaneously feeding households. Simplified hydroponics systems rely on a floating system where the roots of the plants are submerged in water or on substrate growth with

supplemented nutrient input through watering. This technique is already used in many countries and in diverse climates (Orsini et al., 2013). The technique is of course very dependent on the quality of water and is therefore especially suitable during rain seasons. Involvement of public institutions are however ideal, so the role of the government should be looked at.

Role of the government

The first step that has to be realised is that local governments begin to view urban agriculture as a way of increasing food security, especially for the urban poor. Although this view is shared by most of the local population, the government of Nairobi does not outspokenly recognise urban agriculture in the same way. The misrepresented view on urban agriculture is even more apparent in Lagos, where urban agriculture is not recognised as an effective way of improving food security. Recognising the possibilities of urban agriculture is therefore the first area of improvement for local governments.

When urban agriculture is fully recognised as a way to increase food security for the urban poor, the logical next step is legalising urban agriculture in both the built-up areas and the peri-urban areas. In this way landowners are stimulated to designate parts of the land to

(19)

urban agriculture as alternative for housing designations. This will lead to clearer land tenure contracts and therefore increased tenure security. The open spaces will then allow urban farming communities and commercial practices to develop on their own or with a little help.

NGOs and governments can then start to promote urban agriculture either by

providing tools and supplies, aiding financially or by sharing knowledge through education. While improving on these areas, future planning should aim at incorporating urban

agriculture in the city growth. It should be the primary goal to try and steer new migrants into the right parts of the city and prevent the formation of new slums. Clear and progressive policies should regulate the housing of the incoming migrants. These policies should include simple and inexpensive housing solutions, which could be used for housing migrants who would otherwise end up in slums, to prevent expansion of existing slums and formation of new ones. Open spaces planning should protect the most suitable plots for urban agriculture so that settlements will be built around them. Only then will there be enough space for crops and perhaps even livestock, which could be maintained by residents.

Conclusion and recommendations

There are some major differences in the way that urban agriculture plays a role in Lagos and Nairobi. The most important being the different form of urban farming: small-scale

subsistence agriculture by female heads of households in Nairobi versus small-scale

commercial farming by married males in Lagos. Although both governments certainly do not promote urban agriculture, it is condoned in Nairobi purely because of its necessity to feed the poorest households. In Lagos on the other hand it is strictly forbidden to practise urban agriculture within the city itself, while it is not uncommon in the outskirts.

The level of food security and poverty seem to play a big role in the way urban agriculture is practised in both locations. The urgency to practice urban agriculture is currently higher in Nairobi and therefore small scale urban agriculture for supplementary purposes are more common. The constraints on practising urban agriculture are currently larger in Lagos. flooding is a major problem, space is very limited inside the city and insecure in peri-urban areas. Meanwhile, the action undertaken by those in power is minimal.

It was found that urban agriculture can have a positive influence on all four pillars of food security: local grown food has many advantages, including freshness and pricing, causing availability and access to improve. Furthermore, utilisation and stability are improved by sharing knowledge and guaranteeing a steady source of food unaffected by outside influences. Urban agriculture can also positively influence social capital of slum dwellers, their self-sufficiency, diet diversity and resilience and the environment they live in. As these are important elements to combat poverty, urban agriculture has the potential to be combined with poverty reduction plans to provide a basis for escaping the poverty trap.

The recommendations for governments dealing with slums is to recognise and legalize urban agriculture and promote it as a way of feeding the poorest part of the urban population. New policies should be clear and progressive to regulate the housing of the

(20)

incoming migrants where possible. Open space planning should aim to protect fertile soils so that settlements will be built around them. For existing slums it is important to promote all levels of urban agriculture and find (innovative) local solutions. In this way the most pressing problem of many slum dwellers, being able to feed themselves, will be tackled while

simultaneously providing a foundation for a better life.

Discussion

The poverty trap theory proved to be relevant for multiple disciplines concerned with the subject of urban agriculture in slums. Even so much so, that more than the four disciplines involved in this research paper could be integrated in the framework used here. For example, both sociology and political science seem highly relevant in this case. The insights of these disciplines could possibly be valuable for future researches on the researched topic.

To construct a definite image of the role urban agriculture can play in increasing food security in slums, more research is required, preferably of a larger scale. If enough studies show positive signs for urban agriculture in slums there should be a series of experimental studies that actually implements urban agriculture in target areas. Also more research could be done on the effect of other global issues on urban agriculture such as global warming and sea level rise.

The current situations in Lagos and Nairobi are formed by numerous local factors that cannot be generalised for an overarching solution. Every city can contribute in the general areas of improvement to recognise, legalise, promote and incorporate urban agriculture in future plans, but every urban area will have its own local factors that influence the outcome of stimulating inputs. It is therefore necessary to take local factors into account when trying to increase food security with urban agriculture. Simply adapting a technique from another area might not work for certain locations. It should therefore be clear what the local

constraints, beneficial factors and possibilities for urban agriculture are before trying to implement certain plans.

(21)

References

Adedeji, O. H., & Ademiluyi, I. A. (2009). Urban agriculture and urban land use planning: Need for a synthesis in metropolitan Lagos, Nigeria. Journal of Geography and Regional Planning, 2(3), 43-50.

Adelekan, I. O. (2010). Vulnerability of poor urban coastal communities to flooding in Lagos, Nigeria. Environment and Urbanization, 22(2), 433-450.

Ajani, S. R., Adebukola, B. C., & Oyindamola, Y. B. (2006). Measuring household food insecurity in selected local government areas of Lagos and Ibadan, Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 5(1), 62-67.

Akom, A. A. (1984). Development strategies for the slums of Lagos. Habitat International, 8(3), 159-171.

Altieri, M. A., Companioni, N., Cañizares, K., Murphy, C., Rosset, P., Bourque, M., & Anosike, V., & Fasona, M. (2004). Gender dimensions of urban commercial farming in Lagos, Nigeria. Urban Agriculture Magazine, 12, 27-28.

Armar-Klemesu, M. (2000). Urban agriculture and food security, nutrition and health. Growing cities, growing food. Urban agriculture on the policy agenda, 99-118.

Barredo, J. I., Demicheli, L., Lavalle, C., Kasanko, M., & McCormick, N. (2004). Modelling future urban scenarios in developing countries: an application case study in Lagos, Nigeria. Environment and Planning B, 31(1), 65-84.

behaviour in Lagos, Nigeria. Land Use Policy, 39, 320-330.

Bryld, E. (2003). Potentials, problems, and policy implications for urban agriculture in developing countries. Agriculture and human values, 20(1), 79-86.

De Zeeuw, H., van Veenhuizen, R., & Dubbeling, M. (2011). The role of urban agriculture in building resilient cities in developing countries. The Journal of Agricultural

Science, 149(S1), 153-163.

degradation in Lagos State, Nigeria. GeoJournal, 78(1), 103-115.

Douglas, I., Alam, K., Maghenda, M., Mcdonnell, Y., McLean, L., & Campbell, J. (2008). Unjust waters: climate change, flooding and the urban poor in Africa. Environment and Urbanization, 20(1), 187-205.

Ezedinma, C., & Chukuezi, C. (1999). A comparative analysis of urban agricultural enterprises in Lagos and Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Environment and urbanization, 11(2), 135-144.

FAO (2009). Declaration of the World Food Summit on Food Security. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Faye, O., Baschieri, A., Falkingham, J., & Muindi, K. (2011). Hunger and food insecurity in Nairobi’s slums: an assessment using IRT models. Journal of Urban Health, 88(2), 235-255.

Foeken, D., & Mwangi, A. M. (2000). Increasing food security through urban farming in Nairobi. Growing Cities, Growing Food: Urban Agriculture on the Policy Agenda.

(22)

Deutsche Stiftung für Internationale Entwicklung (DSE), Zentralstelle für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft, Feldafing, Germany, 303-327.

Gallaher, C. M., Kerr, J. M., Njenga, M., Karanja, N. K., & WinklerPrins, A. M. (2013). Urban agriculture, social capital, and food security in the Kibera slums of Nairobi, Kenya. Agriculture and human values, 30(3), 389-404.

Gallaher, C. M., WinklerPrins, A. M., Njenga, M., & Karanja, N. K. (2015). Creating space: Sack gardening as a livelihood strategy in the Kibera slums of Nairobi, Kenya.

Hossain, S. T., & Akter, S. (2011). Organic sack garden ensuring nutrition and improve the food security on small scale households. In Proceedings of 17th IFOAM Organic World Congress 2011.

Keenan, D. P., Olson, C., Hersey, J. C., & Parmer, S. M. (2001). Measures of food insecurity/security. Journal of Nutrition Education, 33, S49-S58.

Kibera.org.uk (2015). Kibera facts & information. Retrieved on 28/10/2015 from http://www.kibera.org.uk/facts-info/

Lawal, M., & Aliu, I. (2012). Operational pattern and contribution of urban farming in an emerging megacity: evidence from Lagos, Nigeria. Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic series, 17(17), 87-97.

Mabogunje, A. L. (2007). Tackling the African “poverty trap”: the Ijebu-Ode experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(43), 16781-16786.

Maxwell D, Levin C & Csete J. 1998b. Does urban agriculture help to prevent malnutrition? evidence from Kampala. FCND Discussion Paper 43. Washington DC: IFPRI.

Maxwell, D. (1999). The political economy of urban food security in Sub-Saharan Africa. Morakinyo, K. O., Ogunrayewa, M. O., Olalekan, K. B., & Adenubi, O. O. (2012). Urban Mougeot, L. J. (2000). Urban agriculture: definition, presence, potentials and risks. Growing

cities, growing food: Urban agriculture on the policy agenda, 1-42.

Mwangi, A. M. (1995). The role of urban agriculture for food security in low income areas in Nairobi.

Nelson, T. (1996). Closing the nutrient loop. World Watch, 9(6), 3.

Ogden C. 1993. Urban malnutrition: maternal activities and child nutrition in Kigali, Rwanda. Unpublished PhD thesis, Cornell University.

Orsini, F., Kahane, R., Nono-Womdim, R., & Gianquinto, G. (2013). Urban agriculture in the developing world: a review. Agronomy for sustainable development, 33(4), 695-720. Sachs, J., McArthur, J. W., Schmidt-Traub, G., Kruk, M., Bahadur, C., Faye, M., & McCord,

G. (2004). Ending Africa's poverty trap. Brookings papers on economic activity, 2004(1), 117-240.

Slums as Spatial Manifestations of Urbanization in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Case Study of Ajegunle Slum Settlement, Lagos, Nigeria. Developing Country Studies, 2(11/12), 1-10. Taiwo, O. J. (2014). Determinants of peri-urban and urban agricultural locational choice

the current studies and constraints. Land Use Planning, 22, 555-574.

UNICEF. 1995. Strategy for improved nutrition of children and women in developing countries. UNICEF Policy Review Paper. New York: UNICEF.

World Food Summit (1996). Rome Declaration on World Food Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action.

(23)

Zezza, A., & Tasciotti, L. (2010). Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security: Empirical evidence from a sample of developing countries. Food policy, 35(4), 265-273.