Secondary cities in Bangladesh, Kenya, Rwanda, and the Philippines are not yet ready for major food system transformation, according to Gram Research analysis. These mid-sized cities lack coordinated food policies, adequate infrastructure, sufficient funding, and strong partnerships between government and businesses needed to improve how food is produced, distributed, and consumed. However, the research identifies specific policy changes and investments that could enable these cities to build stronger food systems within 3 to 5 years.
A new research analysis examines whether secondary cities in Bangladesh, Kenya, Rwanda, and the Philippines are prepared to change how they produce, distribute, and consume food. According to Gram Research analysis, these mid-sized cities face unique challenges different from large capital cities, including limited resources, infrastructure gaps, and competing priorities. The study identifies specific policy changes and investments needed to help these cities build stronger, more sustainable food systems that can feed growing populations while reducing waste and improving nutrition for millions of people.
Key Statistics
A 2026 research analysis of secondary cities in Bangladesh, Kenya, Rwanda, and the Philippines found that most lack integrated food policies coordinating across government departments, limiting their ability to implement comprehensive food system improvements.
According to the 2026 study of four developing countries, secondary cities face critical infrastructure gaps including inadequate storage facilities and unreliable transportation networks that cause significant food spoilage before reaching consumers.
Research from 2026 examining secondary cities in Asia and Africa identified weak coordination between government agencies and private food businesses as a major barrier preventing food system transformation in these rapidly growing urban areas.
The Quick Take
- What they studied: Whether mid-sized cities in four developing countries have the policies, infrastructure, and resources needed to improve how food is grown, transported, stored, and eaten in their communities
- Who participated: Researchers analyzed food systems in secondary cities across Bangladesh, Kenya, Rwanda, and the Philippines, examining local government policies, business practices, and community needs
- Key finding: Secondary cities in these countries face significant barriers to food system transformation, including weak policies, limited funding, poor infrastructure, and lack of coordination between government agencies and businesses
- What it means for you: If you live in or care about mid-sized cities in developing countries, this research shows that meaningful food system improvements require targeted government support, investment in infrastructure, and partnerships between public and private sectors. Change is possible but requires intentional planning and resources.
The Research Details
Researchers conducted an in-depth examination of food systems in secondary cities, which are mid-sized urban areas that are smaller than capital cities but larger than rural towns. They looked at four countries representing different regions and development stages: Bangladesh in South Asia, Kenya and Rwanda in East Africa, and the Philippines in Southeast Asia. The team analyzed existing policies, infrastructure conditions, business environments, and community food security challenges in these cities. They reviewed government documents, interviewed stakeholders including city officials and food business owners, and assessed what changes would be needed to create more efficient, sustainable, and nutritious food systems.
Secondary cities are often overlooked in food policy discussions, which typically focus on either large capital cities or rural agricultural areas. Yet these mid-sized cities are growing rapidly and will soon be home to billions of people. Understanding their specific challenges and opportunities is crucial because solutions that work in capital cities may not work in secondary cities, which have different resources, governance structures, and constraints. This research provides practical guidance for policymakers and organizations working to improve food security and nutrition in these rapidly growing urban areas.
This research provides valuable policy insights based on analysis of real-world conditions in four countries across two continents. The findings are grounded in examination of actual policies, infrastructure, and local contexts rather than theoretical models. However, readers should note that the study focuses on policy readiness rather than testing specific interventions, so the recommendations are based on expert analysis of existing conditions rather than experimental evidence of what solutions will definitely work.
What the Results Show
The research identifies several critical barriers preventing secondary cities from transforming their food systems. First, many secondary cities lack clear, coordinated food policies at the local government level. Food system decisions are often scattered across multiple government departments that don’t communicate effectively with each other. Second, infrastructure gaps are significant: many cities have inadequate storage facilities, unreliable transportation networks, and limited cold chain capacity, meaning food spoils before reaching consumers. Third, secondary cities often lack sufficient funding and technical expertise to implement food system improvements. Fourth, there is weak coordination between government agencies and private food businesses, limiting the ability to implement comprehensive changes. The research shows that these barriers are not unique to one country but appear across all four study locations, suggesting they represent common challenges for secondary cities in developing regions.
The study also identifies important opportunities for transformation. Secondary cities often have stronger connections between urban and rural areas compared to large capital cities, which could be leveraged to improve agricultural supply chains. Local food businesses and entrepreneurs in these cities are often more flexible and responsive than large corporations, making them potential partners for innovation. Community organizations and civil society groups in secondary cities frequently have strong relationships with residents and could help drive behavior change around food consumption and waste reduction. Additionally, secondary cities are often more willing to experiment with new policies and approaches compared to large capital cities with established bureaucracies.
Previous research has focused heavily on food system challenges in large capital cities and rural agricultural areas, creating a gap in understanding mid-sized urban food systems. This research fills that gap by showing that secondary cities face a distinct set of challenges that require tailored solutions. The findings align with broader research showing that rapid urbanization in developing countries is creating new food security challenges, but add important nuance by demonstrating that city size and governance capacity significantly affect the types of interventions that will succeed.
The research is based on policy analysis and stakeholder assessment rather than experimental testing of specific interventions, so it cannot definitively prove which solutions will work best. The study focuses on four countries, so findings may not apply to all secondary cities globally, particularly those in different regions or with different governance systems. The research does not provide detailed quantitative data on the scale of food waste, malnutrition rates, or other specific metrics in these cities, which limits the ability to prioritize which interventions should be addressed first. Additionally, the study was conducted at a specific point in time, so conditions and policies may have changed since the research was completed.
The Bottom Line
Secondary cities in developing countries should prioritize: (1) developing integrated food policies that coordinate across government departments, (2) investing in basic infrastructure like storage facilities and transportation networks, (3) creating partnerships between government and private food businesses, and (4) building local technical capacity for food system management. These recommendations have moderate to strong support based on policy analysis and expert assessment, though they would benefit from pilot testing in specific cities. International organizations and development agencies should provide targeted funding and technical support to secondary cities specifically, rather than assuming solutions designed for capital cities will work in mid-sized urban areas.
City government officials and policymakers in secondary cities should use these findings to guide food policy development. Development organizations, nonprofits, and international agencies working on food security and urban development should prioritize secondary cities as a focus area. Food business owners and entrepreneurs in these cities should engage with government to help shape policies that support their work. Residents of secondary cities who care about food security, nutrition, and sustainability should advocate for the policy changes identified in this research. Researchers and academics studying urbanization and food systems should use these findings as a foundation for more detailed investigation of specific interventions.
Developing new policies typically takes 6 to 12 months of planning and stakeholder engagement. Infrastructure improvements like building storage facilities or improving transportation networks usually require 2 to 5 years depending on funding availability and project complexity. Meaningful improvements in food security and nutrition outcomes may not be visible for 3 to 5 years after policies and infrastructure changes are implemented, as it takes time for new systems to become established and for behavior to change.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are secondary cities and why do they matter for food security?
Secondary cities are mid-sized urban areas smaller than capital cities but larger than rural towns. They’re growing rapidly and will soon house billions of people. They matter because food policy solutions designed for capital cities often don’t work in secondary cities with different resources and governance structures.
What specific problems do secondary cities face with their food systems?
Secondary cities struggle with weak food policies, poor infrastructure like inadequate storage and transportation, limited funding, and lack of coordination between government and food businesses. These barriers prevent efficient food distribution and increase spoilage and waste.
How long would it take for secondary cities to improve their food systems?
Policy development typically takes 6 to 12 months, infrastructure improvements require 2 to 5 years, and visible improvements in food security may take 3 to 5 years after changes are implemented. The timeline depends on available funding and political commitment.
What can individuals do to support food system transformation in their city?
Support local food businesses, reduce household food waste, engage with community organizations working on food security, and advocate to city officials for improved food policies and infrastructure investments in your area.
Are the findings from these four countries applicable to other secondary cities?
The research identifies common challenges across Bangladesh, Kenya, Rwanda, and the Philippines, suggesting these barriers are typical for secondary cities in developing regions. However, specific solutions may need adjustment based on local conditions and governance systems.
Want to Apply This Research?
- Users in secondary cities could track local food availability and prices weekly, noting which nutritious foods are available, their cost, and quality. This data helps identify gaps in local food systems and can be shared with city officials to support policy advocacy.
- Users can support food system transformation by: (1) buying from local food businesses and farmers when possible, (2) reducing food waste at home, (3) engaging with community organizations working on food security, and (4) advocating to city officials for improved food policies and infrastructure.
- Track progress by monitoring changes in local food policies, infrastructure investments, and food availability over time. Users can document improvements in storage facilities, transportation networks, and government coordination around food issues in their city.
This research provides policy analysis and expert assessment of food system readiness in secondary cities, not medical advice. The findings are based on examination of existing conditions and policies rather than experimental testing of specific interventions. Individuals should consult with local government officials, nutrition experts, and community organizations when making decisions about food security initiatives in their city. This research does not replace professional guidance from food policy experts, urban planners, or public health officials.
This research translation is published by Gram Research, the science division of Gram, an AI-powered nutrition tracking app.