ANOREXIA NERVIOSA: CARACTERÍSTICAS Y SÍNTOMAS

The situation at Sekelanani was somewhat different with regard to economic access— for some items, such as bunches of spinach or kale, the prices at Sekelanani were the same as or cheaper than those of nearby shops. Bunches of herbs were usually R10, and much larger than what would be available in a supermarket (though the nearby supermarket did not offer as many varieties of herbs as the garden). In Johannesburg, organic produce tends to be more expensive than non-organic produce, when it is available at higher-income supermarkets and weekend food markets. The prices for organic produce from Sekelanani were generally lower than what one might find at those places, and the selection of organic items was generally wider. In Bertrams, however, the nearby shops and supermarket did not tend to sell organic produce, so the price comparison was between the organic goods from Sekelanani and non- organic foods at those shops—in this case, the garden was not always less expensive. 5.2.3) Culture of sharing

Many of the gardeners at both gardens had grown up in rural areas, in homes that produced most of their own food. Thus the concept of needing to purchase all of your food represented a shift from the culture of self-provision that they knew from

childhood. As one gardener explained: “We grew up eating vegetables because we were growing food. Most of our food was from the garden. We didn't buy much from shops. It's only now that we're working that we buy things at the shops" (Bongani, personal communication, February 25, 2015). Another lamented the shift from

growing their own food to having to purchase: “They plant mealie, pumpkin,

everything, we eat very good. ... Also morogo, our grandmother. Also a lot of peach, apple in the garden, because it was a big place. Also the cows were there, we drank milk... There were chickens, when they want chicken they kill one, they eat. It was very nice. Life was good, but not like now--everything you buy it" (Margaret, personal communication, February 26, 2015).

Many gardeners also referred to a sharing economy in their childhoods, in which neighbours shared seeds, assisted with the agricultural workload, and also shared their food. “Sometimes we had a system where we'd give other people seeds, and in

exchange they would come and assist us,” one gardener said. “And even us, just to make sure they were growing food, we'd go and assist them in growing food from their gardens" (Isaac, personal communication, February 25, 2015). Another explained that in his childhood, the whole community grew their own food, so the concept of purchasing it was quite foreign. They also shared freely with the children of the community. “I didn’t know that mealies have got a price, you know. But when I came to Joburg, I heard that they’re saying that mealies is this much, when we know that our mothers, our grandmothers, our neighbours can cook a big pot, and then you go and eat as much as you want” (Moses, personal communication, April 2, 2015). Thus the shift from rural childhood homes with a strong culture of sharing to Johannesburg, where everything must be purchased, was a major change for many gardeners. Remnants of this culture of sharing can be seen in the gardeners’ desire to share their produce with the most vulnerable members of their communities,

discussed in Section 5.3, below.

5.2.4) Participant access and community access

Before moving on to consider the question of sufficient food, it is worth noting a distinction between the access of the food gardeners themselves, and the access of their customers. For community garden participants, the produce from the garden was free, and they could take home as much as they wished. Of course, it involved a trade- off, as anything they took home was not sold, thereby reducing garden income. However, it represented direct access to food, and a savings on food expenditure for the participants. Almost all of the garden participants at both gardens lived within

walking distance of the gardens, so produce from the garden did not involve any transport costs.

At Vunani, there were usually four or five garden participants working in the garden, and while at Sekelanani there were two to six participants most of the time. It was impossible for me to ascertain the number of customers at each garden on any given day, despite my attempts to keep track. My best estimate for Vunani is an average of about eight to ten customers per day—split between individuals purchasing for own consumption and street vendors buying to resell. At Sekelanani, this calculus is even more difficult as there were different kinds of customers—walk-ins from the local community, people in cars from wealthier suburbs, employees of the on-site

Department of Social Development offices, as well as the supermarket up the road. I can definitely state that much more of the produce at both gardens was sold to customers than taken home by participants.

Most garden customers lived in the immediate vicinity of the two gardens, and indeed first learned about the gardens by passing by. In Alexandra, some of the customers at Vunani were street hawkers, who came from a bit further away to buy many bunches of kale, which they then divided into smaller bunches to sell near transport hubs (e.g. the Marlboro Gautrain station). These vendors also travelled to the Johannesburg Fresh Produce Market in the south of the city—a much greater distance—to get other items to sell, such as potatoes and onions. South African research indicates that street traders commonly purchase fresh produce from the large distributors in the formal sector (Philip, 2010, p. 13), limiting the amount of revenue that stays in the local community. Visibility of the garden was also important at Sekelanani, as people walking by frequently shouted through the fence to enquire about the prices or availability of particular vegetables. However, because it was located on a bus line, some of the passers-by might have resided further away from the garden. In addition, Sekelanani was well known for its quality organic produce, so wealthier customers from the suburbs also came to the garden, by car, to buy vegetables.

At both gardens, the members spoke of improving the community’s access to fresh vegetables as one of the objectives of their gardens. One of the founding members of Vunani said “the elderly can come here and buy vegetables instead of taking a taxi to

somewhere far” (Bongani, personal communication, January 20, 2016). Participants at Sekelanani expressed their desire to improve community access to healthy food. “What I like most about this garden is that it’s a garden that allows people to come and buy food… we’re helping other people to access vegetables” (Thandi, personal communication, February 25, 2015). Another participant agreed, “we help the community with veggies” (Lindiwe, personal communication, February 25, 2015). Thus the gardens improved both geographic and economic access to fresh produce for both the participants and their surrounding communities, but in slightly different ways.

5.3) Sufficient food

The notion of sufficient food is fundamental to the logic of food gardens as a response to food insecurity and hunger. Sufficient food means enough food to meet one’s daily caloric requirements. Ideally it encompasses access to sufficient nutrients as well, but that question will be addressed in the next section, on healthy food. This section will examine three issues: production levels of the gardens; participants’ food

consumption; and the surrounding communities’ consumption from the gardens. 5.3.1) Production levels

First, it is important to state that I was never able to determine precise production levels. Poor record-keeping is a common problem amongst urban agriculture projects (Kekana, 2006, p. 41; Ruysenaar, 2012, p. 15). Neither garden kept records of

quantities of produce, and even sales records were imperfect. Further, sales records did not include produce taken home by the gardeners, nor that given away to

volunteers or community institutions such as orphanages. At Vunani, the amount of cash collected from sales (though not the items sold) was written down on a scrap of paper at the end of each day, with one member keeping the records and another holding on to the cash, in order to prevent disagreements or theft. This system of record keeping had been suggested by the garden’s extension officer from GDARD. At Sekelanani, no sales records were kept during the early part of my fieldwork, but later, once a corporate sponsor came into the picture, a system of record keeping was started. Because Sekelanani sometimes ordered seeds or seedlings from large

suppliers, there were some records of the amount planted, but that was not a clear indication of the amount actually grown and harvested.

One important aspect of production volume in community gardens is seasonal fluctuation, which impacts the stability aspect of food security. In Johannesburg, the cold dry winter months are not conducive to growing most of the vegetables

commonly grown in the community gardens (Ruysenaar, 2012). In summer,

significantly more kinds of vegetables, as well as fruits, can be grown. Also, due to labour shortages at both gardens, planting did not always happen on the most ideal schedule to ensure maximum, continuous production. Summer production at Vunani was fairly diverse, while in winter the garden had a much more limited selection of produce (see Table 5, below). All year, the majority of the planted area of the garden was always devoted to kale and spinach. The gardeners selected vegetables to grow based on what seeds they could find at the nearby supermarket, as well as on what the customers wanted to buy. When they planted other items, or when volunteers did, those tended to go to waste. On more than one occasion, one of the gardeners asked me about herbs or other items growing in the garden—what they are used for or how they are prepared, because they didn’t know. As far as I could ascertain, none of the participants used any fresh herbs from the garden when cooking at home. It should be noted that the herbs planted in the garden by the NGO and volunteers were not

indigenous herbs, but rather ‘European’ herbs such as basil and mint.

Table 5: Summer and winter produce, Vunani

Vunani production Spring/

Summer Winter

Aloe x x

Artichokes

Baby marrows x

Beetroot x

Bell peppers (green)

Butternut x Cabbage x x Carrots x x Chillies x Chinese spinach x Fennel x Green beans x x

Herbs (basil, coriander, mint, parsley, rosemary sage,

Kale (chou moellier) x x Leeks x Lemons x Lemon verbena x Lettuce x Onion x x Potatoes x Pumpkins x Rhubarb x

Spinach/ Swiss chard x x

Spring onions x x

Sweet potatoes x

Tomatoes (3 varieties) x

At Sekelanani, items also went to waste if they were produced at the wrong time—for instance, large amounts of tomatoes ripened all at once around Christmas, when there were fewer customers in the area and their regular weekend market was closed (see Photo 8 below). “In December, we lost a lot of tomatoes,” explained one gardener. “We didn’t sell. …Our stuff was just thrown to waste” (Thato, personal

communication, January 21, 2016). Despite the waste, the gardeners did not seem to take many of the tomatoes home to eat.