How Can Innovation in Urban Agriculture Contribute to Sustainability? A Characterization and Evaluation Study from Five Western European Cities

Abstract

Compared to rural agriculture, urban agriculture (UA) has some distinct features (e.g., the limited land access, alternative growing media, unique legal environments or the non-production-related missions) that encourage the development of new practices, i.e., "novelties" or "innovations". This paper aims to (1) identify the "triggers" for novelty production in UA;(2) characterize the different kinds of novelties applied in UA; (3) evaluate the "innovativeness" of those social, environmental and economic novelties; and, (4) estimate the links between novelties and sustainability. The study was based on the evaluation of 11 case studies in four Western European countries (Italy, Germany, France and Spain). The results show that the trigger and origin of new activities can often be traced back to specific problems that initiators were intended to address or solve. In total, we found 147 novelties produced in the 11 case studies. More novelties are produced in the environmental and social dimensions of sustainability than in the economic. In most cases, external stakeholders played an important role in supporting the projects. The analysis further suggests that innovativeness enhances the overall sustainability in urban agriculture projects.Goldstein et al. [7] defined UA as follows: "Most broadly, urban agriculture refers to growing and raising food crops and animals in an urban setting for the purpose of feeding local populations." Guided by this definition, we focus our research on this type of agricultural or horticultural production that is taking place either within the city or in very close proximity to it. UA as an InnovationDespite the early origin of UA in cities, it has often been considered an "innovative" way to address current urban problems. Therefore, this raises the following question: If UA is not new, why is it so often considered innovative? Pfeiffer et al. [8] indicated that many aspects of urban agricultural production are indeed very similar to those of small-scale rural farms and not entirely new, while other factors set UA apart from traditional agricultural operations. In their study, Pfeiffer et al. also described the distinct features of UA, such as the limited and nontraditional land access, the usage of urban soils and alternative growing media, the unique legal and political environments, the non-production-related missions, and the involvement of nontraditional farmers, which force the development of new practices. Prain and De Zeeuw [9] confirmed and complemented those findings by elaborating that the key factors for innovation in UA are those factors, such as multiple livelihood strategies, lower community cohesion, fewer possibilities for integrated agriculture, and quick market access, which differentiate urban from rural agriculture. They identified a direct correlation between urban settings and innovation processes in UA. Those specific conditions and characteristics drive urban operations to develop unique new practices adapted to the urban context.

Modelling Environmental Burdens of Indoor-Grown Vegetables and Herbs as Affected by Red and Blue LED Lighting

“…Improving energy efficiency has been pointed out as a very common technological innovation in the environmental dimension of urban agriculture [51]. The results of this study allowed for exploring how the energy efficiency of the different lighting treatments affected the final environmental impact.…”

“…As the environmental impact was calculated per the functional unit of mass of the product (1 kg of vegetable), other LED treatments had a better performance even with a relatively higher electricity consumption. Improving energy efficiency has been pointed out as a very common technological innovation in the environmental dimension of urban agriculture [51]. The results of this study allowed for exploring how the energy efficiency of the different lighting treatments affected the final environmental impact.…”

Features and Functions of Multifunctional Urban Agriculture in the Global North: A Review

“…As farming takes place closer to cities or even inside them, several differences from conventional agriculture arise, translating into both advantages and limitations (Table 1), whose perception among societal groups and initiatives may largely vary (Sanyé-Mengual et al, in review). It appears that, according to Sanyé-Mengual et al (2019), in order to be viable among the three sustainability dimensions (social, economic and environmental) and overcome the constraints related to the urban environment, the development of UA needs to combine both social and technological innovations. As a result, urban farming must bring together the existing knowledge and advances from the traditional agricultural sector with a set of new skills, technologies, tools and strategies allowing to target a diversified set of ES, falling into four main categories (TEEB, 2010):…”

“…Contribute to the city food security Orsini et al, 2014 Improve food system sustainability, reduces food miles and post-harvest handling Sanyé-Mengual et al, 2013;Pascale et al, 2015;Dimitri et al, 2016 Landscape management Donadieu, 2006 Biodiversity promotion Halaj et al, 2000;Colding et al, 2006;Andersson et al, 2007;Baker and Harris, 2007;Breuste et al, 2008;Loram et al, 2008;Matteson et al, 2008;Ricketts et al, 2008;Sperling and Lortie, 2010;Shrewsbury and Leather, 2012;Burkman and Gardiner, 2014;Lin et al, 2015;Pölling et al, 2016a;Bazzocchi et al, 2017;Lanner et al, 2019;Tresch et al, 2019;Bazzocchi, 2020 Social inclusion Armstrong, 2000;Saldivar-Tanaka and Krasny, 2004;Wakefield et al, 2007;Teig et al, 2009;Anguelovski, 2013;Taylor and Taylor Lovell, 2014;Camps-Calvet et al, 2015;Marchetti et al, 2015;Gasperi et al, 2016;Reynolds and Cohen, 2016;Calvet-Mir and March, 2017;Specht et al, 2017;Sanyé-Mengual et al, 2019 Job creation and creation of business opportunities Yang et al, 2010;Draus et al, 2014;Clausen, 2015;Ikejima, 2016;…”

Sustainable Community Gardens Require Social Engagement and Training: A Users’ Needs Analysis in Europe

“…Sharing experiences was unveiled as the second-most demanded skill. Recent studies on innovation in urban agriculture highlighted the role of urban food projects networks [3,32]. The exchange of knowledge and experiences between practitioners (including both managers and users) results in a source of practical learning for urban gardeners, which allows for overcoming certain barriers that are specific to the urban environment.…”