In the city of Milan, Italy, the first restrictions on the activities and movement of people took place on February 24 and the national lockdown was decided on March 8. Since Italy was the first European nation to officially recognize the presence of Coronavirus (while it is now clear that the virus has been circulating in Europe since at least January), there has been very little time to prepare individually and collectively to deal with impacts of the lockdown and without being able to compare with other experiences of countermeasures to counteract the effects of the virus on access to food. In this situation of rapid change, individual solutions and neighborhood micro-networks have often made up for the sudden lack of what allows a product to reach citizens: knowledge, organization, transport, communication, etc. What happened in Milan and in other Italian cities is the rapid growth of organizations based on families of the same condominium, parishes, associations and informal networks that have autonomously managed to collect needs, to contact food producers or processors and to co-organize distribution and payments. These social organizations have guaranteed the supply of food by implementing approaches that are complementary or alternative to the usual ones and this also in the case of people or social actors who previously did not specifically dedicate themselves to food. The strength of social ties even beyond issues strictly related to food, shows how these ties can fulfill some tasks that, in our societies, are assigned to the market. This approach has proven to be able to respond to even a very strong shock in a much more flexible way than most market players. It should also be considered that these experiences developed outside any kind of public support and having, in fact, almost only supermarkets as the only consolidated channels of food supply that were legitimized by the norms or that were able to maintain standards of social distancing and adequate logistics. Many of these social experiences cannot replace the entire current socio-economic organization and they are not necessarily optimal in terms of costs and employment, but they have also been a solution for those many shops (bakeries, vegetable shops, butchers, etc.) which constitute a widespread basis on which a large part of the Italian culinary tradition rests but which are not linked to networks of organized consumers and which often depend on a macrologistica that they do not control. In fact, many small and mediumsized stores have slowly reopened after many weeks, relying on these networks of citizens, and the ability of the “demand side” to organize parts of the food system has allowed the maintenance of a certain vitality also on the supply side. Those who managed to face the situation in a better way are the people who previously made individual choices in favour of sustainable lifestyles (rationalization of consumption, reduction of waste, recycling, local purchases, limited intermediation, etc.) and, above all, those who were already part of networks organized for the purchase of food such as, for example, solidarity economy networks, Community Supported Agriculture, consumer cooperatives, local consortia, etc. All this teaches us that, for access to food, lifestyles are not to be traced only to the sphere of the “private” or the “individual”, or to be separated or opposed to the public or to the market dimension, but they are part of the structural aspects of our society and economy and, as such, they should be recognized and valued as part of public policies and in the different forms of what we call “the market”. The question that arises now is how to multiply the positive effects of solutions that have shown themselves to be flexible and which, in addition to satisfying the need for food, have allowed us to respond to other needs that are connected to food (sociability, health, wellness, etc.). I am This article is part of the Topical Collection: Agriculture, Food & Covid-19.

中文翻译：

---

冠状病毒及其他：增强城市食品系统的社会自组织能力

意大利米兰市于 2 月 24 日首次限制人们的活动和流动，并于 3 月 8 日决定全国封锁。由于意大利是第一个正式承认存在冠状病毒的欧洲国家（而它现在很清楚，该病毒至少从一月份开始就在欧洲传播），几乎没有时间单独和集体准备应对封锁的影响，并且无法与其他应对措施的经验进行比较以抵消影响获取食物的病毒。在这种瞬息万变的情况下，个体解决方案和社区微网络往往弥补了产品接触公民的突然缺失：知识、组织、交通、通信等。在米兰和其他意大利城市发生的情况是，以同一公寓、教区、协会和非正式网络为基础的组织迅速增长，这些组织自主设法收集需求、联系食品生产商或加工商并共同组织分销和付款。这些社会组织通过实施与通常方法互补或替代的方法来保证食物供应，对于以前没有专门致力于食物的人或社会行为者也是如此。社会纽带的力量甚至超越了与食物严格相关的问题，显示了这些纽带如何完成我们社会中分配给市场的一些任务。事实证明，这种方法能够以比大多数市场参与者更灵活的方式应对非常强烈的冲击。还应该考虑的是，这些经验是在任何形式的公共支持之外发展起来的，事实上，几乎只有超市作为唯一的统一食品供应渠道，这些渠道被规范合法化，或者能够保持社会距离和充足的标准。后勤。这些社会经验中的许多不能取代整个当前的社会经济组织，它们在成本和就业方面不一定是最优的，但它们也已经成为许多商店（面包店、蔬菜店、肉店等）的解决方案。) 构成了一个广泛的基础，意大利烹饪传统的很大一部分赖以存在，但与有组织的消费者网络无关，并且通常依赖于他们无法控制的宏观逻辑。事实上，许多中小型商店在数周后慢慢重新开业，依靠这些市民网络，“需求方”组织部分食品系统的能力使得供应上也保持了一定的活力。边。那些设法以更好的方式面对这种情况的人是那些以前做出个人选择以支持可持续生活方式（消费合理化、减少浪费、回收利用、本地购买、有限中介等）的人，最重要的是，那些他们已经是为购买食品而组织的网络的一部分，例如，例如，团结经济网络、社区支持的农业、消费者合作社、地方财团等。所有这些都告诉我们，为了获得食物，生活方式不能仅追溯到“私人”或“个人”领域，或与公众或市场维度分开或反对，但它们是我们社会和经济结构方面的一部分，因此，它们应作为公共政策的一部分并以不同的形式得到承认和重视我们所说的“市场”。现在出现的问题是，如何将已经证明自己具有灵活性的解决方案的积极影响倍增，这些解决方案除了满足对食物的需求外，还使我们能够响应与食物相关的其他需求（社交、健康、健康等）。