Multifunctional Urban Landscapes: The Potential Role of Urban Agriculture as an Element of Sustainable Land Management

Abstract

Urban agriculture (UA) has long been the subject of civic and scientific debate, since it provides cities with a diverse range of functions and services. UA is thought to have a positive effect on sustainable urban development in environmental, economic and social areas. Although most of the effects attributed to UA are positive, there are also critical aspects and concerns. For example, doubts have been raised about the quality of the products grown, considering the prevalence of air pollution and contaminated soils; and there are doubts about the contribution that urban agriculture makes to feeding urban populations, owing to the small quantities produced. Moreover, there are conflicts surrounding land use, especially in big cities; and in some cases, agricultural activities are undertaken in the city without the necessary building approvals. The concept of co-production and sharing as a (business) model is increasingly being applied with reference to urban gardens. This is particularly the case with volunteer-led community gardens, which are tremendously open to gardening enthusiasts and are renowned for the sharing of resources and space. Rather than seeking to make a profit, many of these initiatives operate under the principles of a non-profit or sharing economy. This chapter explores how UA can contribute to sustainable land management and co-production. To this end, background information is given on the (re-)emerging phenomenon of urban food production and on what motivates those involved to implement collaborative practices. The functions and services provided by UA as an element of sustainable land management are then explored using the three pillars of sustainability.

Introduction to the Special Issue “A Systemic Perspective on Urban Food Supply: Assessing Different Types of Urban Agriculture”

“…While two studies relied on pure qualitative analysis [25,34] and five on quantitative analysis [30,31,35,40,41], the majority of eight studies used mixed-methods approaches and combined qualitative methods (e.g., focus group discussions, stakeholder workshops, on-site visits, or expert interviews) with quantitative methods (e.g., online questionnaires or on-site surveys) [29,32,33,[36][37][38][39]42]. Given the multidimensional impacts of UA and its general multifunctionality [2,43], a mixed-methods approach often seems to be an advisable choice to tackle the different dimensions. Using various methods usually allows the researchers to get insight into the problem (e.g., understanding of respondents or important details), while still having broad coverage of the issue (receiving answers from representative samples of respondents, data for economic calculations, etc.…”

“…online questionnaires or on-site surveys) [29,32,33,[36][37][38][39]42]. Given the multidimensional impacts of UA and its general multifunctionality [2,43], a mixed-methods approach often seems to be an advisable choice to tackle the different dimensions. Using various methods usually allows the researchers to get insight into the problem (e.g.…”

Prioritizing Achievable Goals for Food Security in the Developing World

“…At the same time, urban agriculture has seen increased interest, although most of the harvested food from urban agriculture is for self-consumption, with the remainder sold in the market (Armanda, Guinée, & Tukker, 2019). Some people also doubt whether the small harvests of urban agriculture will actually make a significant difference to food security (Specht, Schimichowski, & Fox-Kämper, 2021).…”

Ecosystem Services of Urban Agriculture: Perceptions of Project Leaders, Stakeholders and the General Public

“…On the other hand, the capacity of UA to satisfy the food demand of citizens has been questioned. While some authors acknowledge that UA can serve as a complement to rural agriculture [64], others have pointed out the limitations that UA faces (e.g., in terms of space, resources or know-how) to fully compete with rural-sourced food [65][66][67].…”