IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i21p6070-d282370.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology-Driven Transition in Urban Food Production Practices: A Case Study of Shanghai

Author

Listed:
  • Mohsen Hosseinifarhangi

    (Department of Architecture and Arts, University IUAV of Venice, 30135 Venice, Italy)

  • Margherita E. Turvani

    (Department of Architecture and Arts, University IUAV of Venice, 30135 Venice, Italy)

  • Arnold van der Valk

    (Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning group, Wageningen University & Research; P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Gerrit J. Carsjens

    (Landscape Architecture and Spatial Planning group, Wageningen University & Research; P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The continuing decline of arable land per person and global human population growth are raising concerns about food security. Recent advances in horticultural technology (i.e., growing using light-emitting diode (LED) lighting, hydroponics, vertical farming, and controlled environments) have changed the ways in which vegetables can be produced and supplied. The emerging technology makes it possible to produce more food using fewer resources, independent of the weather and the need for land. They allow bringing agricultural practices inside urban built up spaces and making horticultural production an integrated part of the daily life of urban residents. However, the process and consequences of this technology-driven transition on urban planning and development are hardly understood. This paper uses the theory of multi-level perspective (MLP) on sustainability transitions and actor–network theory (ANT) to explore this technology-driven transition and its adoption in urban planning and development. The high-tech horticulture zone development in Shanghai was used as a case study. The results show the importance of both social (i.e., policymakers and planners) and material (i.e., technologies and policy documents) actants in the transition of the sociotechnical regime. Furthermore, the transition toward sustainable urban horticulture practices requires the simultaneous preparation of supportive and compatible spatial development, agricultural and sustainable development policies, and adequate policy implementation and evaluation tools to increase the competitive strength of innovative practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohsen Hosseinifarhangi & Margherita E. Turvani & Arnold van der Valk & Gerrit J. Carsjens, 2019. "Technology-Driven Transition in Urban Food Production Practices: A Case Study of Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-31, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:21:p:6070-:d:282370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/21/6070/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/21/6070/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul M. Weaver & Jan Rotmans, 2006. "Integrated sustainability assessment: what is it, why do it and how?," International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(4), pages 284-303.
    2. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    3. Kaifang Shi & Yun Chen & Bailang Yu & Tingbao Xu & Linyi Li & Chang Huang & Rui Liu & Zuoqi Chen & Jianping Wu, 2016. "Urban Expansion and Agricultural Land Loss in China: A Multiscale Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    5. Smith, Adrian & Stirling, Andy & Berkhout, Frans, 2005. "The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1491-1510, December.
    6. Graamans, Luuk & Baeza, Esteban & van den Dobbelsteen, Andy & Tsafaras, Ilias & Stanghellini, Cecilia, 2018. "Plant factories versus greenhouses: Comparison of resource use efficiency," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 31-43.
    7. Genus, Audley & Coles, Anne-Marie, 2008. "Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1436-1445, October.
    8. Monica Billger & Liane Thuvander & Beata Stahre Wästberg, 2017. "In search of visualization challenges: The development and implementation of visualization tools for supporting dialogue in urban planning processes," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 44(6), pages 1012-1035, November.
    9. Whitmarsh, Lorraine, 2012. "How useful is the Multi-Level Perspective for transport and sustainability research?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 483-487.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ye Tian & Qin Liu & Yiting Ye & Zhaofang Zhang & Ribesh Khanal, 2023. "How the Rural Digital Economy Drives Rural Industrial Revitalization—Case Study of China’s 30 Provinces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Anna Zaręba & Alicja Krzemińska & Renata Kozik, 2021. "Urban Vertical Farming as an Example of Nature-Based Solutions Supporting a Healthy Society Living in the Urban Environment," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Bikram Pratim Bhuyan & Ravi Tomar & Amar Ramdane Cherif, 2022. "A Systematic Review of Knowledge Representation Techniques in Smart Agriculture (Urban)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-36, November.
    4. Mohsen Farhangi & Sara Farhangi & Paulien C. H. van de Vlasakker & Gerrit J. Carsjens, 2021. "The Role of Urban Agriculture Technologies in Transformation toward Participatory Local Urban Planning in Rafsanjan," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-30, August.
    5. Donald Coon & Lauren Lindow & Ziynet Boz & Ana Martin-Ryals & Ying Zhang & Melanie Correll, 2024. "Reporting and practices of sustainability in controlled environment agriculture: a scoping review," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 301-326, June.
    6. Paulien C. H. van de Vlasakker & Esther J. Veen, 2020. "Effects of High-Tech Urban Agriculture on Cooking and Eating in Dutch Nursing Homes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-21, July.
    7. Mohsen H. Farhangi & Margherita E. Turvani & Arnold van der Valk & Gerrit J. Carsjens, 2020. "High-Tech Urban Agriculture in Amsterdam: An Actor Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-35, May.
    8. Anna Zaręba & Alicja Krzemińska & Mariusz Adynkiewicz-Piragas & Todor Stojanovski & Haifeng Jia & Riccardo Privitera & Dan van der Horst, 2025. "Multifunctional Vertical Farming Systems as a Basis for Transforming Urban Food Systems Amid Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-18, September.

    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. Nina Savela & Jarkko Levänen & Sara Lindeman & Nnenesi Kgabi & Heikki Koivisto & Meri Olenius & Samuel John & Damas Mashauri & Minna M. Keinänen-Toivola, 2020. "Rapid Urbanization and Infrastructure Pressure: Comparing the Sustainability Transition Potential of Water and Energy Regimes in Namibia," World, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    3. Culot, Giovanna & Battistella, Cinzia, 2024. "Future ecosystem business model tool: Design science and field test in the efuel ecosystem towards the sustainability transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    4. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    5. Nilsson, Måns & Nykvist, Björn, 2016. "Governing the electric vehicle transition – Near term interventions to support a green energy economy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1360-1371.
    6. Geels, Frank W., 2010. "Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 495-510, May.
    7. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    8. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    9. Sillig, Cécile, 2022. "The role of ideology in grassroots innovation: An application of the arenas of development framework to organic in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. Nicos Komninos, 2022. "Transformation of Industry Ecosystems in Cities and Regions: A Generic Pathway for Smart and Green Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    11. Zhang, Marina Yue, 2016. "Meso-level factors in technological transitions: The development of TD-SCDMA in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 546-559.
    12. Jenkins, Kirsten & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & McCauley, Darren, 2018. "Humanizing sociotechnical transitions through energy justice: An ethical framework for global transformative change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 66-74.
    13. Johan Schot & Laur Kanger, 2016. "Deep Transitions: Emergence, Acceleration, Stabilization and Directionality," SPRU Working Paper Series 2016-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Nihit Goyal & Michael Howlett, 2018. "Technology and Instrument Constituencies as Agents of Innovation: Sustainability Transitions and the Governance of Urban Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, May.
    15. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The interplay of institutions, actors and technologies in socio-technical systems — An analysis of transformations in the Australian urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 298-312.
    16. Arapostathis, Stathis & Carlsson-Hyslop, Anna & Pearson, Peter J G & Thornton, Judith & Gradillas, Maria & Laczay, Scott & Wallis, Suzanne, 2013. "Governing transitions: Cases and insights from two periods in the history of the UK gas industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 25-44.
    17. Kok, Kristiaan P.W. & Loeber, Anne M.C. & Grin, John, 2021. "Politics of complexity: Conceptualizing agency, power and powering in the transitional dynamics of complex adaptive systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    18. Becker, Sophia & Bögel, Paula & Upham, Paul, 2021. "The role of social identity in institutional work for sociotechnical transitions: The case of transport infrastructure in Berlin," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    19. Stefano Basilico & Nils Grashof, 2023. "The transition of brown regions: A matter of timing?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2023-003, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    20. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:21:p:6070-:d:282370. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.