Urban food trees: Recognition of care and belonging by local governments

Abstract Within a context of pronounced attention towards urban greening, the inclusion of food‐producing trees (FPT) in the public realm remains a marginal practice. In this paper, we consider why this may be the case. Building on recent scholarship investigating more‐than‐human care infrastructure (Alam & Houston, 2020; Power & Williams, 2020; Power & Mee, 2020), we consider the socio‐material relations that enable (and limit) care of, and by, FPT in the urban context. To do so, we draw on document analysis and interviews with council staff in metropolitan Melbourne to unpack how FPT come to be understood as offering and deserving of care (or not), and how such characterisations impact if, and how, FPT come to be ‘welcome’ in urban public places. Our analysis, first, highlights dominant ways in which urban trees are understood through local government strategy and policy, and how an orientation towards (care‐through) canopy works to exclude FPT. Second, we explore competing valuations of FPT and their capacity to contribute to sustainable cities. Across these accounts, FPT care and belonging remains ambiguous and contested. Third, we examine actual and imagined relations of FPT care and belonging, and how these work with but also remain limited by, dominant strategic directions and norms. Based on this analysis, we find that while an openness to FPT in council documentation is a significant step in enabling FPT inclusions, it is also necessary to recognise and value extant and/or potential care relations among people and FPT.