19pgs, Advocates of indoor vertical farming have pitched the enterprise as key to the future of food, an opportunity to use technological innovation to increase local food production, bolster urban sustainability, and create a world in which there is “real food” for everyone. At the same time, critics have raised concerns about the costs, energy usage, social impacts, and overall agricultural viability of these efforts, with some insisting that existing low-tech and community-based solutions of the “good food movement” offer a better path forward. Drawing from a mix of participant observation and other qualitative methods, this article examines the work of Square Roots, a Brooklyn-based indoor vertical farming company cofounded by entrepreneur Kimbal Musk and technology CEO Tobias Peggs. In an effort to create a market for what I refer to as “techno-local food,” Square Roots pitches its products as simultaneously “real” and technologically optimized. As a way to build trust in these novel products and better connect consumers with producers, Square Roots leans on transparency as a publicity tool. The company’s Transparency Timeline, for instance, uses photos and a narrative account of a product’s life-cycle to tell its story “from seed-to-store,” allowing potential customers to “know their farmer.” The information Square Roots shares, however, offers a narrow peek into its operations, limiting the view of operational dynamics that could help determine whether the company is actually living up to its promise. The research provides a clear case study of an organization using transparency–publicity as market strategy, illustrating the positive possibilities that such an approach can bring to consumer engagement, while also demonstrating how the tactic can distract from a company’s stated social responsibility goals.
12 pages, Current food systems fail to directly link urban consumers with rural producers. City-regional strategies need to reconnect consumers with producers through sustainable local food systems. This research developed and distributed a survey questionnaire to 400 consumers in Bangkok. Findings prove that there is a statistically significant association between urban-rural relation and sustainable urban consumer behavior (Pearson’s Chi-square test for independence resulting in a significance level of p < 0.05). Sustainable consumer behavior is influenced by environmental, sociocultural, economic and health drivers, while lack of food traceability, lack of rural experience, lack of access to rural communities and negative social perception disrupt consumer-producer links. Community-based gastrotourism emerges as one of the best practices to link urban consumers with rural producers and plan sustainable food systems in mega-cities like Bangkok.
21pgs, The concept of a regenerative city goes far beyond a sustainable one. The regenerative approach is to think of urban green space as a productive landscape, a source of food, and a support for biodiversity. In this approach, the so-called urban wastelands have a positive significance. Urban agriculture (UA) has become a commonly discussed topic in recent years with respect to sustainable development. Therefore, the combination of urban fabric and local food production is crucial for ecological reasons. The key issues are the reduction of food miles and the demand for processed food, the production of which strains the natural environment. At the same time, UA enables regeneration and restoration. An original methodological approach was used in the study following the mixed-method research concept: literature survey, case studies, and comparative analysis of objects. A review of UA architecture (UAA) projects was carried out to supplement the knowledge acquired during the bibliometric analysis. In sum, 25 existing projects, including allotment gardens, community gardens, and urban farms in the global north, were compared in this study. As a result of the analyses carried out, the breakdown of urban agriculture was developed into the following categories: (i) architectural–urban, (ii) ecological, (iii) social, and (iv) economic, including the impact of UA on physical activity and social interaction. UA is also a factor shaping the urban landscape. In conclusion, agrarian practice in urban environments has led to the creation of a new type of space, known as UAA. Production in the context of UA exceeds private goods, such as food produced for sale or for individual use. Additional goods include public goods. The review shows that UA fulfills economic, social, and environmental functions, thus falling under the concept of sustainable development.
3pgs, The award recognizes organizations working towards stronger local food systems and more power in the hands of smaller agricultural producers around the globe.
6pgs, Valerie Horn works with several community action groups in Whitesburg, Kentucky. The state’s recent flooding has made these organizations even more vital to the community.
8pgs, The global trend of urbanization coupled with an increasing awareness of the importance of food systems resilience, has led to an increasing interest in urban agriculture to sustainably feed the rapidly growing urban population and mitigate against food supply chain disruptions. While home and community gardens have been long studied, there has been relatively little empirical research focused specifically on commercial urban agriculture (CUA) operations. The purpose of this study was to characterize commercial urban farms, and to identify their primary barriers to business development and expansion, their perceptions of future opportunities, and their specific informational needs. Because CUA has received relatively less attention in previous empirical research, a qualitative approach was used for this needs assessment to collect rich, contextualized information to help differentiate the specific barriers, opportunities and needs of CUA operations as opposed to their rural counterparts. We conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 29) of CUA producers in Florida. These interviews revealed that CUA operations face many of the same barriers that are common to establishing and growing small farms, with additional barriers due to local government regulations and tensions associated with farming on land that is not traditionally used for agriculture. Despite these difficulties, CUA operators believe their urban location is a key benefit to their operation and they see a variety of opportunities for future business and market expansion.
17pgs, There is a lack of data on resources used and food produced at urban farms. This hampers attempts to quantify the environmental impacts of urban agriculture or craft policies for sustainable food production in cities. To address this gap, we used a citizen science approach to collect data from 72 urban agriculture sites, representing three types of spaces (urban farms, collective gardens, individual gardens), in five countries (France, Germany, Poland, United Kingdom, and United States). We answered three key questions about urban agriculture with this unprecedented dataset: (1) What are its land, water, nutrient, and energy demands? (2) How productive is it relative to conventional agriculture and across types of farms? and (3) What are its contributions to local biodiversity? We found that participant farms used dozens of inputs, most of which were organic (e.g., manure for fertilizers). Farms required on average 71.6 L of irrigation water, 5.5 L of compost, and 0.53 m2 of land per kilogram of harvested food. Irrigation was lower in individual gardens and higher in sites using drip irrigation. While extremely variable, yields at well-managed urban farms can exceed those of conventional counterparts. Although farm type did not predict yield, our cluster analysis demonstrated that individually managed leisure gardens had lower yields than other farms and gardens. Farms in our sample contributed significantly to local biodiversity, with an average of 20 different crops per farm not including ornamental plants. Aside from clarifying important trends in resource use at urban farms using a robust and open dataset, this study also raises numerous questions about how crop selection and growing practices influence the environmental impacts of growing food in cities. We conclude with a research agenda to tackle these and other pressing questions on resource use at urban farms.
Vigne Bennedetti, Luiza (author), Antônio de Almeida Sinisgalli, Paulo (author), Lamano Ferreira, Maurício (author), and Lemes de Oliveira, Fabiano (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2023-01-24
Published:
Netherlands: MDPI
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12839
14pgs, Urban agriculture (UA) can be used as an action to promote sustainability in cities and inform public health policies for urban populations. Despite this growing recognition, its implementation still presents challenges in countries in the Global North and Global South. Background: In this context, this systematic review aims to identify the development of frameworks for the implementation of UA as a sustainable action and its main opportunities and shortcomings in meeting urban socio-environmental demands. Methods: In this review, using the PRISMA protocol, we evaluated 26 studies on the interplay between UA and sustainability surveyed on the Web of Science to provide an overview of the state of the art. Conclusions: In summary, it was possible to identify many key challenges in UA adoption, which regard air and soil contamination, availability of green areas, layout of urban infrastructure, food distribution, among others. Due to numerous socio-economic and environmental contextual factors in cities, especially when comparing realities of the Global North and Global South, there is a need to develop a model that can be adaptable to these different contexts. Thus, it is recognized that the concept of sustainability does not present a universal understanding and that in its search it could be argued that one of the most important gaps is still to address social issues in relation to environmental ones.
17 pages, US farmers market managers must be strategic in deciding which vendors sell at their markets. They would benefit from understanding how market characteristics impact vendor sales, although the few studies that have explored this topic have found inconclusive results. We use a unique panel database of sales at 13 farmers markets to estimate how vendors' sales are influenced by the characteristics of their farmers market. We find that average sales at weekend farmers markets becomes increasingly large as farmers markets increase in size. At weekday markets, average sales increase as small markets add vendors but eventually decline as markets become larger. These results could occur if weekend markets attract shoppers from increasingly greater distances as they become larger, while average sales eventually decline as weekday markets increase in size due to vendor competition. Produce vendors experience higher average sales at weekend markets than weekday markets and experience a relatively small increase in sales as market size increases. Vendors of hot prepared foods experience higher sales at weekday markets [EconLit Citations: Q10, Q12, Q13].
