MINISTERIO DE DESARROLLO ECONÓMICO

Theory is ‘not for itself’. A theory is exactly like a box of tools…It must be useful. It must function. And not for itself. If no one uses it, beginning with the theoretical himself (who then ceases to be a theoretical), then the theory is worthless or the moment is inappropriate (Deleuze, 1977:208, cited in Foucault and Deleuze, 1977). As Deleuze asserts, any theory is never for itself, but must be useful, and function. A theory must relate to its surrounding (the individual and collective human beings and the context). It must work, taking the complexity of the context into account. Constructing an integrative framework for growing a commons food regime aims to provide a broad conceptual map – ‘a tool of insight’ – that can help build an adaptive and transformative capacity for improving commoning dynamics and commoning outcomes in growing a commons food regime in a complex world. As argued in the previous chapter, growing a commons food regime requires strategic planning, which starts with an understanding of the general context where a regime is situated (e.g. Ostrom 2007, 2009, 2011; Armitage, 2008; Poteete et al., 2010; Armitage and Plummer, 2010). This chapter outlines the current landscape of community food initiatives in London as a way of exploring this general context. By exploring their objectives, capacity, challenges, opportunities, and strategies in relation to growing a commons food regime, as well as the level of awareness of the commons by the initiatives, the investigation was aimed at exploring how we can grow a commons food regime, by learning from community food initiatives in London.

The investigation was based solely in London. Although London is not the only UK city that has seen a surge of interest in food and agriculture, a number of factors made it a promising site for growing a commons food regime. Firstly, the city is central to the recent debates on UK food security and sustainable urban food systems. (e.g. London Development Agency, 2006, 2007; London Organising Committee of the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG), 2009; London Assembly, Planning and House Committee, 2010; Making Local Food Work, 2011).

Secondly, cities in particular have emerged as a strategic arena of the ‘new food equation’ (Morgan and Sonnion, 2010), characterised by increased government attention to, and involvement in, the food system. This has led to the development of global urban food strategies (ibid). London is well known for its diversity of urban food movements and grassroots initiatives (Steel, 2008), which arguably have a critical impact on developing more progressive food systems.

Thirdly, London has witnessed the remarkable growth and prominence of community organising and community alliances. These command significant support and influence in the capital and attract broad attention across the UK (Wills, 2012). There are currently many different kinds of food-based community projects, organisations, and networks. In particular, there is a genuine enthusiasm for food and farming issues at a community level. Quasi-commons characteristics (e.g. Transition Town Network’s focus on community-led collective actions to respond to environmental issues; gift economy and community land trust, etc.), and problems (including freeriding, conflicts, and sustainability of many kinds of resources) can be witnessed at times. These

movement) and those newly cultivated (e.g. urban commons), point to the revolutionary past and new possibilities for the future.

Fourthly, as a global city characterised by a plurality of food cultures and attitudes, London is a site for attracting, developing, exchanging and learning ideas, being able to have on the spot knowledge of initiatives and networks of progressive advancements. Thus, the choice of London represents a vision as well as my commitment to facilitating, mobilising and integrating different forms of knowledge from both North and South. Fifthly, focusing on London also relates to a methodological issue. My on-going involvement on the ground had provided me with helpful information and networks. Compared to other research methods as well as previous research, ethnographic investigation can make a significant contribution to understanding organisational complexity and how people think, feel and act in different community food initiatives. The priority was given, over time, to deep and intimate engagement, which can only be fulfilled by focusing on the city I live in.

Finally, although I have already had access to many available resources in terms of people, organisations and information in London, I was also aware that it required better identification, coordination and/or reconfiguration of some hidden and ignored resources to increase London’s potential to grow a commons food regime.

This chapter is organised in the following sections (Figure 3.1). The first section (3.2) focuses on the most suitable methodology for investigating the current landscape of community food initiatives in London. Applying the integrative framework as ‘a tool of insight’, I will outline the scope, aims and objectives of investigation. I will then document the step-by-step account of the investigation process as well as methods used along with each stage of the process. In the following section (3.3), a more creative and innovative way of presenting the findings is proposed as an attempt to better capture the complex landscape investigated. The metaphor of a patchwork quilt is adopted to illustrate its connectivity and interrelationships between the parts and the whole in their ever evolving dynamics. I will describe four emergent categories with titles – ‘Connecting the dots’, ‘Whose food knowledge counts?’, ‘It’s more than conducting a symphony!’, and ‘Growing a new piece of the city’. Although these titles have helped me organise my analysis and interpretation of materials generated, it is important to note that these four emergent categories are not mutually exclusive and should be seen as a complex whole. By bringing back the integrative framework, the chapter concludes with a discussion of implications and opportunities for growing a commons food regime in London.

86

humans, life, society, ecology, history and world Core values: democracy, justice, diversity, coexistence, and aesthetics participation institutions networks collaboration learning CARE 4. Gro win g a new piece of the city 3. I t’s mor e t han co ndu cti ng a sy m ph on y! 2. _W ho se fo od k no wle dg e c oun ts? 1. Connecti_{ng th} e d ots

Methodology and methods:

Investigating the current landscape of community food initiatives in London

(Applying the integrative framework as ‘a tool of insight’ for investigation)

Presenting the ‘findings’ of investigation:

Quilting the complexity of current landscape of community food initiatives in London

Four emergent categories: 1. Connecting the dots

2. Whose food knowledge counts? 3. It’s more than conducting a symphony! 4. Growing a new piece of the city

Conclusions and implications of the investigation 1. Defining scope, aims, and objectives of the investigation

(care is the core of investigation)

3. Focusing case studies:

Intensive engagement with study participants and ad hoc investigation

4. Constant analysis and interpretation (including relevant literature review)

2. Investigation process: 3 steps Step 1: Looking across the fields

Step 2: Mapping and categorising community food initiatives Step 3: Selecting case studies