Comparison of international approaches to sustainable remediation

Since mid-to-late 2000s growing interest for sustainable remediation has emerged in initiatives from several international and national organisations as well as other initiatives from networks and forums. This reflects a realisation that risk-management activities can about bring environmental, social, and economic impacts (positive or negative) in addition to achieving risk-based remediation goals. These ideas have begun to develop as a new discipline of "sustainable remediation". The various initiatives have now published a number of frameworks, standards, white papers, road maps and operative guidelines. The similarities and differences in the approaches by these outputs and general trends have been identified. The comparison is based on a set of criteria developed in discussion with members of these various initiatives, and identifies a range of similarities between their publications. Overall the comparison demonstrates a high level of consensus across definitions and principles, which leads to the conclusion that there is a shared understanding of what sustainable remediation is both across countries and stakeholder groups. Publications do differ in points of detail, in particular about the operational aspects of sustainable remediation assessment. These differences likely result from differences in context and legal framework. As this analysis was carried out its findings were debated with members of the various international initiatives, many of whom have been included as authors. Hence the outcomes described in this paper can be seen as the result of a sort of multi-level debate among international experts (authors) and so can offer a starting point to new sustainable remediation initiatives (for example in other countries) that aim to start developing their own documents. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

How Food Secure are South Africa’s Cities?

Food insecurity in South Africa remains a persistent challenge. Traditionally, food insecurity has been seen as affecting rural areas only, and this perspective had previously informed, and is still informing, policy and food security responses. South Africa is over 60% urbanised and yet policies and mandates regarding food security do not reflect this shift. This chapter seeks to answer the question ‘how food secure are South Africa’s cities?’, describing the state of food insecurity in South Africa’s cities, but also highlighting the specific nature of urban food insecurity. The chapter argues that food insecurity is the result of poorly framed and mandated policies, that food insecurity is driven by changes in the food system, and that spatial and structural issues also drive food insecurity. These challenges are reinforced in cities where the food insecure rely on the market as a means to ensure food availability. South Africa’s cities are food insecure and will remain so within the current market and governance regimes