A report issued earlier this month, compiled by Michigan State University and research institution PolicyLink, outlines policy suggestions for two cities in desperate need of a food system makeover—Detroit and Oakland, Calif. The authors of the report, titled “Healthy Food for All,” suggest strategies to address the problem areas they discovered after conducting a study of more than 150 residents in each city.

One finding of the study was that many residents of the two cities were displeased with their access to fresh, high-quality foods. One study participant stated that she had no choice but to shop at a nearby convenience store because there aren’t any grocery stores in her neighborhood. She was not alone—other residents also cited limited transportation as the reason they do not frequent grocery stores, which are often located in suburban areas. (The Seattle City Council passed the Local Food Action Initiative to help address the problem of food access in Seattle.)

One way to encourage grocery chains to establish new stores in urban areas, the report suggests, is to create incentive-based financing programs. Retailers can be successful in urban neighborhoods, but higher start-up costs usually discourage investment. To lower start-up costs, the report recommends that state agencies provide incentives to encourage development through providing grants or low-interest loans to food retailers in urban areas.

The report cites Philadelphia as an example of a city that developed financing mechanisms to address inequities in grocery store distribution. In the 1990s a nationwide study of major cities found that Philadelphia had one of the worst ratio of grocery stores per person. The Fresh Food Financing Initiative (FFFI) was developed to address this problem. Under the FFFI, eligible supermarkets—stores that provide produce, meat, baked goods and dairy products—can apply for financial assistance to build new locations in underserved neighborhoods. Underserved neighborhoods are defined as areas that have high unemployment rates, low supermarket density, or residents who have low or moderate incomes.

Financial assistance through FFFI can come in the form of grants that can be used for such activities as conducting market studies, putting deposits on land, environmental remediation, construction, and soft costs such as paying for employee training and security services. As part of this program, individual borrowers may also receive up to $3.2 million in low-interest loans to help cover the costs of land acquisition, construction and equipment.

Nearly 70 grocery stores have participated in the FFFI so far, increasing fresh food access for 400,000 Philadelphia residents. The report’s authors believe that this program could be successfully implemented in Detroit, Oakland, Calif., and other urban centers. The FFFI was successful in “providing jobs, healthy food, economic benefit and uplifting the morale of [the] community,” stated White House Urban Affairs Director Adolfo Carrión Jr. during his recent stop at a participating Philadelphia grocery store.

Other departments of the administration must have been taking note; last week U.S. Department of Agriculture Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan released a memo discussing new programs that will give incentives to elligible applicants who participate in “projects that support local and regional food systems,” such as farmer’s markets, community kitchens and nonprofit food distribution facilities.

The Food Retail Expansion to Support Health (FRESH) program in New York City, another program cited in the report, also offers financial incentives to grocery outlets. Grocery retailers can receive a reduction in property taxes for up to 25 years and sales tax exemptions for any materials bought for the construction or renovation of stores established in the underserved neighborhoods of Northern Manhattan, the South Bronx, Central Brooklyn and Jamaica, Queens. Stores participating in the FRESH program are required to have at least 6,000 square feet of space dedicated to food, and products for food preparation and consumption. At least 30 percent of space must also be devoted to fresh produce, fresh meat, dairy products and frozen foods.

In addition to providing financial incentives to grocery stores to locate in underserved neighborhoods, the report also suggests policy makers eliminate any zoning barriers that may hinder the ability to convert some areas—such as vacant lots—into thriving community gardens. The FRESH program subscribes to this two-pronged model by giving zoning perks to participating grocery stores. For instance, eligible stores may be allowed to exceed the maximum building height by up to 15 feet, provide less than the required amount of parking spaces and increase their floor to area ratio. The program is designed to attract and retain many grocery retailers, leading to the reduction of underserved neighborhoods.

Another related policy recommended for Detroit (and other cities with similar characteristics) is that the city should utilize the thousands of acres of unused, publicly-owned land as garden plots to grow much-needed fresh produce for city residents. The Garden Resource Program Collaborative in Detroit is applying this method already. The program’s cultivated land includes more than 115 community gardens and 20 school yards. Some growers involved with the collaborative have created a co-op so they can sell the harvested goods at farmer’s markets as well.

One motivated group in New Jersey decided to take over a large tract of vacant land destined for development. Between now and when the land is slated for development, the nonprofit group Grow it Green Morristown will use the land for a garden. Though the plants will be replaced by hundreds of homes in the fall, a summer harvest will provide fresh food for 40 families. The gardeners have already begun scoping out new grounds to reproduce the project elsewhere in the city.

In addition to access problems, lack of safety and environmental pollution were also cited as challenges to obtaining fresh food in urban areas. Many residents who have gardens would like to grow their own food, but fear the soil may be contaminated with toxins. Others feared that being outdoors in a high-crime neighborhood may risk their personal safety.

Each city has its own resources and hurdles, but the policies outlined in the report can be adapted and applied to other cities, including Seattle. As Seattle policy makers mull over the Local Food Action Initiative to develop strategies that better incorporate urban agriculture efforts into the city, they should look to other cities to see how they approach similar problems. The successes of the aforementioned programs prove that despite challenges, it is not impossible to integrate fresh foods into urban centers.