IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/joafsc/359664.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptualizing Community Buy-in and Its Application to Urban Farming

Author

Listed:
  • Poulsen, Melissa N.
  • Spiker, Marie L.
  • Winch, Peter J.

Abstract

Supporters of urban farming — a type of urban agriculture that emphasizes income generation — view it as a productive use of vacant land, increasing access to fresh produce and contributing to local economies. Yet its viability depends on gaining "community buy-in" (i.e., the acceptance and active support of local residents). While recognized as important to the success of socially oriented programs, information is lacking regarding effective processes for gaining community buy-in. Through participant observation at urban farms and interviews with urban farmers, neighborhood leaders, city residents, and key stakeholders in Baltimore, Maryland, we explored the perceived importance of community buy-in for urban farming, as well as the barriers, facilitators, and strategies for gaining such buy-in. Findings reveal consensus regarding the importance of buy-in, justified by farms' vulnerability to vandalism and the need to align farm services with local residents' desires. Barriers to buy-in include unfamiliarity of residents with urban farming, concerns about negative impacts on the neighborhood, and perceptions of urban farms as "outsider projects." Buy-in is facilitated by perceived benefits such as access to fresh produce, improvement of degraded lots, employment and educational opportunities, the creation of community centers, and community revitalization. Strategies urban farmers use to gain community support followed three main phases: (1) gaining entry into a neighborhood; (2) introducing the idea for an urban farm; and (3) engaging the neighborhood in the urban farm. We make recommendations based on these three phases to assist urban farmers in gaining community buy-in and discuss themes that can be applied to community buy-in processes more broadly.

Suggested Citation

  • Poulsen, Melissa N. & Spiker, Marie L. & Winch, Peter J., 2014. "Conceptualizing Community Buy-in and Its Application to Urban Farming," Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, Center for Transformative Action, Cornell University, vol. 5(1).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:joafsc:359664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/359664/files/288.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    2. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    4. Bauwens, Thomas, 2019. "Analyzing the determinants of the size of investments by community renewable energy members: Findings and policy implications from Flanders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 841-852.
    5. Evangelos Tsiaras & Stergios Tampekis & Costas Gavrilakis, 2025. "Public Perceptions and Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Projects in Epirus, Greece: The Role of Education, Demographics and Visual Exposure," World, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-16, August.
    6. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    7. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. József Kádár & Martina Pilloni & Tareq Abu Hamed, 2023. "A Survey of Renewable Energy, Climate Change, and Policy Awareness in Israel: The Long Path for Citizen Participation in the National Renewable Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Russell, Aaron & Bingaman, Samantha & Garcia, Hannah-Marie, 2021. "Threading a moving needle: The spatial dimensions characterizing US offshore wind policy drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    10. Zilliox, Skylar & Smith, Jessica M., 2017. "Memorandums of understanding and public trust in local government for Colorado's unconventional energy industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 72-81.
    11. Sebastian Schär & Jutta Geldermann, 2021. "Adopting Multiactor Multicriteria Analysis for the Evaluation of Energy Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    12. García, Victoria Gómez & Bartolomé, Mercedes Montero, 2010. "Rural electrification systems based on renewable energy: The social dimensions of an innovative technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 303-311.
    13. Copena, Damián & Simón, Xavier, 2018. "Wind farms and payments to landowners: Opportunities for rural development for the case of Galicia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 38-47.
    14. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    15. Mouter, Niek & de Geest, Auke & Doorn, Neelke, 2018. "A values-based approach to energy controversies: Value-sensitive design applied to the Groningen gas controversy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 639-648.
    16. Mumtaz Derya Tarhan, 2015. "Renewable Energy Cooperatives: A Review of Demonstrated Impacts and Limitations," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 4(1), pages 104-120, August.
    17. Valentine, Scott Victor, 2010. "A STEP toward understanding wind power development policy barriers in advanced economies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2796-2807, December.
    18. Radtke, Jörg, 2025. "E-participation in energy transitions: What does it mean? Chances and challenges within Germany's Energiewende," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    19. Lukanov, Boris R. & Krieger, Elena M., 2019. "Distributed solar and environmental justice: Exploring the demographic and socio-economic trends of residential PV adoption in California," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Shan Zhou & Douglas S. Noonan, 2019. "Justice Implications of Clean Energy Policies and Programs in the United States: A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:joafsc:359664. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.