Consultation Report on the Validity and Capacity of the Canadian Institute of Planning (CIP) to Facilitate a National Planning for Food Systems Platform.

This report is the result of Jamie Unwin's Master's in Environmental Studies (Planning) Major Project. It was conducted over a twelve-month period and designed to explore the validity and capacity for the Canadian Institute of Planning (CIP) to facilitate a national Planning for Food Systems Platform to help spur the shift of the food system1 toward sustainability and health, required for food secure2 Canadian communities. This shift is necessary because the current dominant food system is incapable of fostering
\nhealthy sustianable food systems3 as it undermines the very environmental, social and economic resources that our food systems depend upon (Mendes, 2008; Potukuchi &Kaufman, 2000; Wittman, Desmarais & Wiebe, 2011; Le Vallee, 2008).
\n
\nThe results of this research clearly highlight the validity and capacity of CIP to facilitate a national planning for food systems platform that engages with the complexity of food systems from an interdisciplinary collaborative approach involving knowledge sharing, networking, and professional development. Due to this, this report has been designed to explain and provide background information for further consultation on: the validity and capacity of CIP to facilitate this platform and to adopt 'Food Systems' as a "topic" on their website.
\n
\nThis platform focuses on planning for food systems4 through the lens of the profession of planning, whereas food system planning is about the design and management of the entire food system itself. The term platform5 was used because it provided for exploration of alternative ways to engage with planning for food systems within and outside of the existing subcommittee structure of CIP's National Initiatives
\nAdvisory Committee. A food systems framework has been used as the professional discourse (OPPI, 2011; Wegener, Seasons & Raine, 2013; MacRae & Donahue, 2013; Hodgson, 2012; RTPI, 2010) and the key food system actors interviewed see it as necessary for fostering the innovation required to plan for sustainable healthy food secure communities.
\n
\nThis report is rooted in Participatory Action Research (Rennie & Singh, 1995) as I was a CIP Board Member in the position of Student Representative, conducting twenty-six interviews with key planning for food systems actors from across Canada, CIP Board Members and CIP Staff, completing a preliminary literature review on the planning discourse on food systems, and developing a variety of annotated bibliographies on planning for food systems, the results of which can be found in the appendices of this report.
\n
\nThe links between planning and food systems have been made by numerous planning organizations including the Ontario Professional Planners Institute, the Commonwealth Association of Planners, the Royal Town Planning Institute and the American Planning Association. (See Appendix A for a list of planning institute reports on planning for food systems.) However, in spite of all this, many Canadian planners and members of the general public do not have a strong understanding of the multifunctional
\nsynergies planning has with food systems change and how to utilize these to achieve existing planning goals such as sustainable community development (Personal Communication: Wayne Roberts PhD., food policy analyst & former Manager of the Toronto Food Policy Council (TFPC), April 02, 2014; Lauren Baker PhD, current Coordinator/Manager of the TPFC May 05, 2014; Janine de la Salle Registered
\nProfessional Planner (RPP) and leader in planning for food systems, April 03, 2014; Rod MacRae PhD, food policy analyst & leader in food systems thinking, May 09, 2014; Kimberley Hodgson RPP and leader in planning for food systems, May 06, 2014; and, John Turvey RPP, co-founder of Planning for Agriculture and Food Network (PAFN) & Policy specialist on land use planning for the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, March 24, 2014). Please see Appendix B for a list of individuals Interviewed and their relevant background information. Wegener et al, supports the need for planners to have increased access to networking, knowledge sharing and professional development with their statement that "food system considerations are relatively new to planners. There is a need to examine the current policies and practices that may be hindering supportive local planning activity." (2013, p 94)
\n
\nThis report explores:
\n• The history and importance of CIP and Provincial and Territorial Institutes and Associations (PTIAs) engaging with food systems, and engagement from similar organizations such as the American Planning Association (APA), the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI), and the Commonwealth Association of lanners (CAP);
\n• Why a Platform is Needed Under the Aegis of CIP;
\n• The multifunctional ways that a Planning for Food Systems platform fits CIP's recently accepted Articles of Continuance and the associated Consensus Statement, CIP's
\nStrategic Plan and CIP's National Initiatives Committee Mandate;
\n• The benefits of a CIP based platform to support members and the planning community on the emerging topic of planning for food systems;
\n• The willingness and capacity of CIP's membership to support planning for food systems knowledge sharing, networking and professional development;
\n• Potential Platform Activities and Outputs;
\n• Current Projects for Potential Partnership;
\n• Potential Topic Areas for Exploration by a CIP Planning for Food Systems Platform and partnership opportunities, particularly the Planning for Agriculture and Food
\nNetwork (PAFN);
\n• Key platform organizational elements;
\n• Key qualities and skill sets of potential platform committee members;
\n• Key groups to consult with;
\n• Potential ways to increase capacity through the organizational design of the platform; and,
\n• Suggested next steps for developing a proposal to CIP for the implementation of a Planning for Food Systems Platform in the form of a CIP Subcommittee.
\n
\nThe research explored in this report clearly shows that as a national organization representative of the planning profession CIP should develop the role of planners in food systems and support the validity of planning for food systems. As such undertakings help CIP fulfill its vision of "Improved quality of life through excellence in professional planning," its mission "to advance planning in Canada and abroad by serving, educating, informing and engaging our members," and CIP values of "integrity, innovation, (and) collaboration." (CIP, 2014, a)
\n
\nCIP's new Articles of Continuance were accepted by its membership and enacted on July 07, 2014 at CIP's Annual General Meeting in Fredericton, New Brunswick. Then Articles changed CIP's name from the Canadian Institute of Planners to the Canadian Institute of Planning. Within the articles was an approved Consensus Statement which speaks to CIP's primary purpose being "to promote and advance the value of planning in Canada." (2014, b) This report explains how the proposed platform supports the renewal of CIP and its ability to achieve its primary purpose.
\n
\nBased on an organizational analysis, participation in the Board of Directors, and interviews with twenty-six key actors all of whom agree that CIP should be engaging with food systems, I conclude that the capacity and validity exist for CIP to facilitate a national planning for food systems platform and through this provide knowledge sharing, networking, and professional development.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.