Urban food markets have formal and informal components which are classified with reference to various factors. There is a tendency to pathologize informal systems but valorize formal ones as being better for food systems. This postulation has often created tension between and among food system stakeholders, especially local authorities and traders. This paper looks into the characteristics of business formality/informality and the pros and cons of the same in food systems in an effort to create a better understanding of the two and their impact on food systems. It draws from the experiential learnings of the authors and supported by relevant literature. Our observations indicate that informal and formal aspects of food systems play critical roles towards the sustainability of urban food systems but also have negative impacts on the same. Hence, efforts should be directed at leveraging the strengths of each side while mitigating their negative impacts. Food systems are better with both as opposed with either of the two in their efforts to achieve zero hunger (SDG 2). Indeed, a purely formal or informal food system would not be able to meet all the needs of urban dwellers; the poor, middle class and the rich.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Awuor et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: