Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative research investigates how faith-based organizations govern food poverty in Rome, indicating implications for policy integration.
Despite increasing attention in urban studies to the role of third-sector actors in food aid provision, limited research has examined how faith-based organizations, as key actors within urban food systems, shape strategies and practices for addressing food poverty in advanced economies. Adopting a governance lens, this article investigates the conditions that have enabled faith-based organizations to become dominant food aid providers in Rome and the implications of this role for policy coordination and institutional change. The study applies a qualitative research design based on documentary analysis, non-participant observation, and semi-structured interviews. Findings show that welfare retrenchment and weak public steering, combined with the historically accumulated material and immaterial resources and organizational capacity of major faith-based organizations, have entrenched these actors at the centre of Rome's food aid system. Over recent decades, this configuration has sustained service continuity and emergency responsiveness, but it has also reproduced a fragmented and predominantly charitable model characterised by power asymmetries and scarce policy integration. Recent governance and policy developments have broadened participation and advanced a more rights-based and multidimensional understanding of food poverty. However, they have yet to produce a substantial redistribution of resources, institutional authority, and responsibilities. The article concludes that Rome is undergoing an incipient and uncertain transition towards more coordinated food poverty governance and comprehensive policy arrangements. Consolidating this shift will require enduring public commitment, stable funding, equitable access to resources, effective collaboration among actors, and reliable systems for data collection and accountability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Quaglia et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: