In Manhattan, Stringer Makes the Case for Food Environmental Impact Statements | Civil Eats STAGING

In Manhattan, Stringer Makes the Case for Food Environmental Impact Statements

On Monday, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer released a proposal to require government agencies and developers in NYC to assess the impacts of their projects on the food system and to mitigate anticipated negative effects, whenever environmental assessments and environmental impact statements (EISs) are prepared.

Unlock the Full Story with a Civil Eats Membership

Expand your understanding of food systems as a Civil Eats member. Enjoy unlimited access to our groundbreaking reporting, engage with experts, and connect with a community of changemakers.

Join today

The City’s Environmental Quality Review process (CEQR) requires all discretionary actions of government (building new facilities, granting zoning variances) to undergo an assessment to determine whether the action will create adverse environmental impacts. The city’s environment is defined broadly to include the natural and physical environment as well as the socioeconomic environment and related infrastructure (e.g., housing) necessary for humans to live in cities. Despite the importance of food to human health and welfare, the effects of projects on the food infrastructure (such as the displacement of a supermarket by a proposed development, or the removal of an urban farm by a city facility) has never been required to be analyzed in an EIS. Stringer’s proposal is for the city’s CEQR manual to explicitly require such food system assessments.

EISs generally analyze the adequacy of existing infrastructure when a proposed action will increase the population of a neighborhood by, for instance, allowing tall residential buildings to be constructed in an area formerly zoned for low-density uses. Under the current practice, the effects of population growth on the water and sewer system, and other key parts of the city’s infrastructure, must be analyzed, and if the project will over-tax the existing infrastructure, the EIS must examine alternatives with lower impacts and measures to mitigate unavoidable impacts. EISs have not considered whether the existing supply of healthy food is sufficient to meet the demands of population-generating projects.

Under Stringer’s proposal, environmental impact statements would have to identify the following key information:

* The number, type and location of food retail stores including full-line supermarkets, convenience stores, restaurants, and fast-food establishments;
* The frequency, size, location and hours of farmers’ markets, green carts and fruit stands, urban agriculture sites, and other sources of fresh food; and
* The availability of authorized fresh food retailers that participate in Federal, State or City programs related to healthy food access such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (“SNAP”) and the Women, Infants, and Children (“WIC”) program.

banner showing a radar tracking screen and the words

One of the benefits of the environmental review process is that it enables city agencies, developers, and the affected community to discuss what alternatives and mitigation measures, if any, are needed and feasible. If an EIS were to identify adverse impacts on the food system, potential mitigation measures could include:

* no action — not building the project
* creating new on-site or off-site healthy food suppliers;
* improving existing fresh food supply by, for example, supplementing existing resources such as farmers’ markets; or
* by reserving retail space in a proposed project for fresh food retailers authorized to participate in programs such as SNAP or WIC.

The environmental review process is no guarantee that government decision-makers will use the information in them to require better projects that have fewer adverse impacts, which often makes developers irritated with the cost of preparation and the possibility that flaws in the impact statement will hold up a project.

Nevertheless, EISs are often the only publicly available sources of detailed data and analysis to enable communities and decision-makers to understand the anticipated consequences of new projects and programs. Adding the food system into that analysis, along with water, energy, transportation, open space and other critical urban systems, would provide the tools for agencies, developers, and citizens to become aware of potential negative impacts on the food system so that they can, hopefully, avoid them before irreversible decisions are made.

For more information about the proposal, see Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer’s website.

We’ll bring the news to you.

Get the weekly Civil Eats newsletter, delivered to your inbox.

Support Civil Eats during NewsMatch

Stories change how we see food — and how we act on it.

From farmworkers to policymakers, Civil Eats lifts up the people building a better food system.

Your gift this season will be doubled through NewsMatch, fueling independent journalism that’s hopeful, honest, and free for all.

Together, we can keep these stories alive — and keep the movement growing.

Give Today.

Civil Eats Supporting Membership $60/year $6/month
Give One, Get One Membership $100/year
Learn more about our membership program

Nevin Cohen is an associate professor at the City University of New York (CUNY) School of Public Health. He is also the Research Director at the CUNY Urban Food Policy Institute. Read more >

Like the story?
Join the conversation.


Warning: Undefined variable $aria_req in /srv/users/civileats/apps/civileats/public/wp-content/themes/CivilEats/comments.php on line 16

Warning: Undefined variable $aria_req in /srv/users/civileats/apps/civileats/public/wp-content/themes/CivilEats/comments.php on line 21
  1. Yes, it is the intelligible answer

More from

Local Food

Featured

Paulina Velasco from the Institute for Nonprofit News moderated a discussion with Brian Calvert, senior editor, Lisa Held, senior staff reporter and contributing editor, and Matt Wheeland, operations director.

Inside the Food Policy Tracker

At our latest Civil Eats virtual salon, our team talked about the launch and evolution of the Tracker, a running report on federal actions that affect food and agriculture.

Popular

Lorem Ipsum Post

EPA Hires Farm and Pesticide Lobbyist to Oversee Pesticide Regulation

A logo showing the Civil Eats Food Policy Tracker, looking like a radar following food policy proposals and actions

EPA Funds Projects to Help Farmers Reduce Runoff Into the Great Lakes

A logo showing the Civil Eats Food Policy Tracker, looking like a radar following food policy proposals and actions

Department of Labor Suspends Protections for H-2A Guest Workers and Announces Plan to Bring in More

A logo showing the Civil Eats Food Policy Tracker, looking like a radar following food policy proposals and actions