IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i24p10446-d461817.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Esther Sanyé-Mengual

    (Research Centre in Urban Environment for Agriculture and Biodiversity (ResCUE-AB), Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences (Distal), University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
    These authors equally contributed to this work.)

  • Kathrin Specht

    (ILS—Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development, 44135 Dortmund, Germany
    Department of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany
    These authors equally contributed to this work.)

  • Jan Vávra

    (Faculty of Social and Economic Studies, Jan Evangelista Purkyně University in Ústí nad Labem, 400 96 Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic)

  • Martina Artmann

    (Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, 01217 Dresden, Germany)

  • Francesco Orsini

    (Research Centre in Urban Environment for Agriculture and Biodiversity (ResCUE-AB), Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences (Distal), University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy)

  • Giorgio Gianquinto

    (Research Centre in Urban Environment for Agriculture and Biodiversity (ResCUE-AB), Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences (Distal), University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy)

Abstract

Within the scholarly debate, Urban Agriculture (UA) has been widely acknowledged to provide diverse environmental and socio-cultural ecosystem services (ESs) for cities. However, the question of whether these potential benefits are also recognized as such by the involved societal groups on the ground has not yet been investigated. This paper aims at (1) assessing the perceived ESs of UA, comparing the views of different societal groups in the city of Bologna, Italy (namely: UA project leaders, stakeholders and the general public) and (2) to identify differences in the evaluation of specific UA types (indoor farming, high-tech greenhouses, peri-urban farms, community-supported agriculture, community rooftop garden and urban co-op). In total, 406 individuals evaluated 25 ESs via a standardized Likert-scale survey. The study unveiled similarities and divergences of perceptions among the different societal groups. The statistical analysis indicated that the general public and UA stakeholders agree on the high relevance of socio-cultural ESs, while provisioning ESs was considered as less significant. UA types focusing on social innovation were expected to provide higher socio-cultural ESs whereas peri-urban activities were more closely linked to habitat ESs. We assume that involvement and knowledge of UA are determining factors for valuing the provision of ESs through UA, which needs to be considered for ES valuation, particularly in a policymaking context.

Suggested Citation

  • Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Kathrin Specht & Jan Vávra & Martina Artmann & Francesco Orsini & Giorgio Gianquinto, 2020. "Ecosystem Services of Urban Agriculture: Perceptions of Project Leaders, Stakeholders and the General Public," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-23, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:24:p:10446-:d:461817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/24/10446/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/24/10446/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krasny, Marianne E. & Russ, Alex & Tidball, Keith G. & Elmqvist, Thomas, 2014. "Civic ecology practices: Participatory approaches to generating and measuring ecosystem services in cities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 177-186.
    2. Kubi Ackerman & Michael Conard & Patricia Culligan & Richard Plunz & Maria-Paola Sutto & Leigh Whittinghill, 2014. "Sustainable Food Systems for Future Cities: The Potential of Urban Agriculture," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 45(2), pages 189-206.
    3. Helena Nordh & Kristin Tuv Wiklund & Kaja Elisabeth Koppang, 2016. "Norwegian allotment gardens — a study of motives and benefits," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(8), pages 853-868, November.
    4. McPhearson, Timon & Kremer, Peleg & Hamstead, Zoé A., 2013. "Mapping ecosystem services in New York City: Applying a social–ecological approach in urban vacant land," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 11-26.
    5. Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Daniela Gasperi & Nicola Michelon & Francesco Orsini & Giorgio Ponchia & Giorgio Gianquinto, 2018. "Eco-Efficiency Assessment and Food Security Potential of Home Gardening: A Case Study in Padua, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-25, June.
    6. Daniela Gasperi & Giuseppina Pennisi & Niccolò Rizzati & Francesca Magrefi & Giovanni Bazzocchi & Umberto Mezzacapo & Monique Centrone Stefani & Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Francesco Orsini & Giorgio Gianq, 2016. "Towards Regenerated and Productive Vacant Areas through Urban Horticulture: Lessons from Bologna, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-25, December.
    7. Megan Horst & Nathan McClintock & Lesli Hoey, 2017. "The Intersection of Planning, Urban Agriculture, and Food Justice: A Review of the Literature," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(3), pages 277-295, July.
    8. Jesus Ochoa & Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Kathrin Specht & Juan A. Fernández & Sebastián Bañón & Francesco Orsini & Francesca Magrefi & Giovanni Bazzocchi & Severin Halder & Doerte Martens & Noemi Kappel &, 2019. "Sustainable Community Gardens Require Social Engagement and Training: A Users’ Needs Analysis in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-16, July.
    9. Litt, J.S. & Schmiege, S.J. & Hale, J.W. & Buchenau, M. & Sancar, F., 2015. "Exploring ecological, emotional and social levers of self-rated health for urban gardeners and non-gardeners: A path analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 1-8.
    10. Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Kathrin Specht & Erofili Grapsa & Francesco Orsini & Giorgio Gianquinto, 2019. "How Can Innovation in Urban Agriculture Contribute to Sustainability? A Characterization and Evaluation Study from Five Western European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-31, August.
    11. Martina Artmann & Katharina Sartison, 2018. "The Role of Urban Agriculture as a Nature-Based Solution: A Review for Developing a Systemic Assessment Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-32, June.
    12. Giuseppina Pennisi & Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Francesco Orsini & Andrea Crepaldi & Silvana Nicola & Jesús Ochoa & Juan A. Fernandez & Giorgio Gianquinto, 2019. "Modelling Environmental Burdens of Indoor-Grown Vegetables and Herbs as Affected by Red and Blue LED Lighting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, July.
    13. Camps-Calvet, Marta & Langemeyer, Johannes & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2016. "Ecosystem services provided by urban gardens in Barcelona, Spain: Insights for policy and planning," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 14-23.
    14. Langemeyer, Johannes & Baró, Francesc & Roebeling, Peter & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2015. "Contrasting values of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas: The case of park Montjuïc in Barcelona," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 178-186.
    15. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    16. Raymond, Christopher M. & Frantzeskaki, Niki & Kabisch, Nadja & Berry, Pam & Breil, Margaretha & Nita, Mihai Razvan & Geneletti, Davide & Calfapietra, Carlo, 2017. "A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 15-24.
    17. Calvet-Mir, Laura & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Reyes-García, Victoria, 2012. "Beyond food production: Ecosystem services provided by home gardens. A case study in Vall Fosca, Catalan Pyrenees, Northeastern Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 153-160.
    18. Lucie Sovová & Esther J. Veen, 2020. "Neither Poor nor Cool: Practising Food Self-Provisioning in Allotment Gardens in the Netherlands and Czechia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, June.
    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. Miriam Bertran-Vilà & Ayari G. Pasquier Merino & Jessica Geraldine Villatoro Hernández, 2022. "Food Producers in The Peri-Urban Area of Mexico City. A Study on the Linkages between Social Capital and Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Nanamhla Gwedla & Susanna Francina A. Cornelius & Marié J. Du Toit & Sarel S. Cilliers, 2022. "Stakeholder Perceptions of the Ecosystem Services of Health Clinic Gardens in Settlements and Small- to Medium-Sized Cities in the North-West Province, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-20, October.
    3. María Victoria Marinelli & Evangelina Beatriz Argüello Caro & Irene Petrosillo & Franca Giannini Kurina & Beatriz Liliana Giobellina & Carlos Marcelo Scavuzzo & Donatella Valente, 2022. "Sustainable Food Supply by Peri-Urban Diversified Farms of the Agri-Food Region of Central Córdoba, Argentina," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Tianlin Zhai & Jing Wang & Ying Fang & Longyang Huang & Jingjing Liu & Chenchen Zhao, 2021. "Integrating Ecosystem Services Supply, Demand and Flow in Ecological Compensation: A Case Study of Carbon Sequestration Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Giulia Giacchè & Jean-Noël Consalès & Baptiste J-P. Grard & Anne-Cécile Daniel & Claire Chenu, 2021. "Toward an Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Services Delivered by Urban Micro-Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Garrett M. Broad & Wythe Marschall & Maya Ezzeddine, 2022. "Perceptions of high-tech controlled environment agriculture among local food consumers: using interviews to explore sense-making and connections to good food," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 417-433, March.
    7. Martina Artmann & Kathrin Specht & Jan Vávra & Marius Rommel, 2021. "Introduction to the Special Issue “A Systemic Perspective on Urban Food Supply: Assessing Different Types of Urban Agriculture”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-11, March.

    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. Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Kathrin Specht & Erofili Grapsa & Francesco Orsini & Giorgio Gianquinto, 2019. "How Can Innovation in Urban Agriculture Contribute to Sustainability? A Characterization and Evaluation Study from Five Western European Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-31, August.
    2. Martina Artmann & Katharina Sartison, 2018. "The Role of Urban Agriculture as a Nature-Based Solution: A Review for Developing a Systemic Assessment Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-32, June.
    3. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    4. Mário Santos & Helena Moreira & João Alexandre Cabral & Ronaldo Gabriel & Andreia Teixeira & Rita Bastos & Alfredo Aires, 2022. "Contribution of Home Gardens to Sustainable Development: Perspectives from A Supported Opinion Essay," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-26, October.
    5. Paola Clerino & Agnès Fargue-Lelièvre, 2020. "Formalizing Objectives and Criteria for Urban Agriculture Sustainability with a Participatory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    6. Giulia Lucertini & Gianmarco Di Giustino, 2021. "Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture as a Tool for Food Security and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: The Case of Mestre," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    7. Jesus Ochoa & Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Kathrin Specht & Juan A. Fernández & Sebastián Bañón & Francesco Orsini & Francesca Magrefi & Giovanni Bazzocchi & Severin Halder & Doerte Martens & Noemi Kappel &, 2019. "Sustainable Community Gardens Require Social Engagement and Training: A Users’ Needs Analysis in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-16, July.
    8. Ina Säumel & Suhana E. Reddy & Thomas Wachtel, 2019. "Edible City Solutions—One Step Further to Foster Social Resilience through Enhanced Socio-Cultural Ecosystem Services in Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Francesco Orsini & Giorgio Gianquinto, 2018. "Revisiting the Sustainability Concept of Urban Food Production from a Stakeholders’ Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Giuseppina Pennisi & Esther Sanyé-Mengual & Francesco Orsini & Andrea Crepaldi & Silvana Nicola & Jesús Ochoa & Juan A. Fernandez & Giorgio Gianquinto, 2019. "Modelling Environmental Burdens of Indoor-Grown Vegetables and Herbs as Affected by Red and Blue LED Lighting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-21, July.
    11. Ayambire, Raphael Anammasiya & Amponsah, Owusu & Peprah, Charles & Takyi, Stephen Appiah, 2019. "A review of practices for sustaining urban and peri-urban agriculture: Implications for land use planning in rapidly urbanising Ghanaian cities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 260-277.
    12. Thomas Elliot & Javier Babí Almenar & Samuel Niza & Vânia Proença & Benedetto Rugani, 2019. "Pathways to Modelling Ecosystem Services within an Urban Metabolism Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-22, May.
    13. Shahryar Ershad Sarabi & Qi Han & A. Georges L. Romme & Bauke de Vries & Laura Wendling, 2019. "Key Enablers of and Barriers to the Uptake and Implementation of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Settings: A Review," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, June.
    14. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    15. Jahrl, Ingrid & Moschitz, Heidrun & Cavin, Joëlle Salomon, 2021. "The role of food gardening in addressing urban sustainability – A new framework for analysing policy approaches," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    16. Kosorić, Vesna & Huang, Huajing & Tablada, Abel & Lau, Siu-Kit & Tan, Hugh T.W., 2019. "Survey on the social acceptance of the productive façade concept integrating photovoltaic and farming systems in high-rise public housing blocks in Singapore," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 197-214.
    17. Leslie Gray & Laureen Elgert & Antoinette WinklerPrins, 2020. "Theorizing urban agriculture: north–south convergence," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(3), pages 869-883, September.
    18. Ana M. Bartolome & Deiyalí A. Carpio & Beatriz Urbano, 2022. "Urban Agriculture Digital Planning for the European Union’s Green Deal," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 24(59), pages 159-159.
    19. Giulia Giacchè & Jean-Noël Consalès & Baptiste J-P. Grard & Anne-Cécile Daniel & Claire Chenu, 2021. "Toward an Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Services Delivered by Urban Micro-Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    20. Rolf, Werner & Diehl, Katharina & Zasada, Ingo & Wiggering, Hubert, 2020. "Integrating farmland in urban green infrastructure planning. An evidence synthesis for informed policymaking," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).

    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:12:y:2020:i:24:p:10446-:d:461817. 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.