IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i14p11251-d1197550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring Trade-Offs between Potential Economic, Social and Environmental Outcomes of Urban Agriculture in Adelaide, Australia and the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Arun Kafle

    (Sustainable Infrastructure and Resource Management (SIRM), UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Mawson Lakes Campus, Mawson Lakes, SA 5095, Australia)

  • James Hopeward

    (Sustainable Infrastructure and Resource Management (SIRM), UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Mawson Lakes Campus, Mawson Lakes, SA 5095, Australia)

  • Baden Myers

    (Sustainable Infrastructure and Resource Management (SIRM), UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Mawson Lakes Campus, Mawson Lakes, SA 5095, Australia)

Abstract

Urban Agriculture (UA) is widely presented as a feature of sustainable cities, with various claims around economic, social, and/or environmental benefits. However, the extent to which these different benefits may reinforce or compete with one another is not clear. This paper presents an integrated modelling framework using proxy measures for economic benefit (the net margin, NM), social benefit (the full-time farmer employment equivalent (FTE) per consumer) and environmental benefit (reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, CO 2 ). The model is applied in two divergent development scenarios, including Adelaide, Australia, and the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal, to study the characteristic features of UA in different settings. Two-stage optimisation is used to explore trade-offs and synergies when pursuing different objectives (NM, FTE and CO 2 ). The model seeks the optimal farming area and selects from three levels of mechanisation (non-mechanised, garden tiller and garden cultivator), two purposes (gardening and commercial), two crop value categories (mixed and mid- to high-value vegetables) and two market mechanisms (wholesale vs. retail). The results of the optimisation provide insights into the key features of a UA system depending on the objective(s) being pursued, which we believe is a novel approach to justify UA research. For instance, the model favours a commercial UA form (in which both land and labour are costed) with a larger area when pursuing an economic objective, whereas it favours a gardening form of UA when aiming to maximise participation in the food system, with the preferred area depending on the extent to which either the economic or environmental objective is also being pursued. In Adelaide, the model favours commercial UA for the best-case profit and carbon emissions, and gardening for FTE maximisation. In the Kathmandu Valley, the model chooses the gardening UA within the given model assumptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Arun Kafle & James Hopeward & Baden Myers, 2023. "Exploring Trade-Offs between Potential Economic, Social and Environmental Outcomes of Urban Agriculture in Adelaide, Australia and the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-28, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11251-:d:1197550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11251/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/14/11251/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dorward, Andrew, 2013. "Agricultural labour productivity, food prices and sustainable development impacts and indicators," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 40-50.
    2. Chethika Gunasiri Wadumestrige Dona & Geetha Mohan & Kensuke Fukushi, 2021. "Promoting Urban Agriculture and Its Opportunities and Challenges—A Global Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    3. Alana Siegner & Jennifer Sowerwine & Charisma Acey, 2018. "Does Urban Agriculture Improve Food Security? Examining the Nexus of Food Access and Distribution of Urban Produced Foods in the United States: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-27, August.
    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. Megan Burritt & Simone Valle de Souza & H. Christopher Peterson, 2025. "When Will Controlled Environment Agriculture in Its Vertical Form Fulfill Its Potential?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Oekan S. Abdoellah & Indri Wulandari & Kinanti Indah Safitri & Nafa Destri Fianti & Rahma Maulia Fadli Basagevan & Mega Nurul Aini & Rosalina Ilmi Amalia & Mahardhika Puspa Arum Suraloka & Gemilang La, 2023. "Urban Agriculture in Great Bandung Region in the Midst of Commercialization, Food Insecurity, and Nutrition Inadequacy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-15, June.
    3. Marini, Michele & Caro, Dario & Thomsen, Marianne, 2023. "Investigating local policy instruments for different types of urban agriculture in four European cities: A case study analysis on the use and effectiveness of the applied policy instruments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Luiza Vigne Bennedetti & Paulo Antônio de Almeida Sinisgalli & Maurício Lamano Ferreira & Fabiano Lemes de Oliveira, 2023. "Challenges to Promote Sustainability in Urban Agriculture Models: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-14, January.
    5. Suchá, Lenka & Dušková, Lenka, 2022. "Land access mechanisms of Soweto farmers: Moving beyond legal land tenure for urban agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    6. Baležentis, Tomas & Li, Tianxiang & Chen, Xueli, 2021. "Has agricultural labor restructuring improved agricultural labor productivity in China? A decomposition approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Vardges Hovhannisyan & Marin Bozic, 2017. "Price Endogeneity and Food Demand in Urban China," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(2), pages 386-406, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Qureshi, Salman & Tarashkar, Mahsa & Matloobi, Mansour & Wang, Zhifang & Rahimi, Akbar, 2022. "Understanding the dynamics of urban horticulture by socially-oriented practices and populace perception: Seeking future outlook through a comprehensive review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    11. Surya Bhushan, 2021. "Labour Productivity Dynamics in Indian Agriculture: 2000–2016," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 64(2), pages 371-388, June.
    12. Rios-Flores, Jose Luis & Navarrete-Molina, Cayetano, 2017. "Huella hídrica y productividad económica del agua en Nogal Pecanero (Carya illinoiensis) al sur oeste de Coahuila, México /Water Footprint and Economic Productivity of Water in Pecan (Carya Illinoiens," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 35, pages 697-716, Agosto.
    13. Hansen, Henning Otte, 2019. "The agricultural treadmill - a way out through differentiation? An empirical analysis of organic farming and the agricultural treadmill," MPRA Paper 98210, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Jules-Daniel Wurlod & Derek Eaton, 2015. "Chasing After the Frontier in Agricultural Productivity," CIES Research Paper series 37-2015, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    15. Minjie Li & Jian Wang & Yihui Chen, 2019. "Evaluation and Influencing Factors of Sustainable Development Capability of Agriculture in Countries along the Belt and Road Route," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-28, April.
    16. Bamadev Mahapatra & Mohd Irfan, 2024. "Asymmetric adjustments between energy and labour efficiencies in India: new evidence using sectoral panel data analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 3921-3948, August.
    17. Egbe Bassey Etowa & Olugbenga Wilson Adejo, . "Occupational Choice And Agricultural Labour Efficiency In Nigeria: Impact Of Icts," APSTRACT: Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, AGRIMBA, vol. 11(01-2).
    18. Zuxuan Song & Fangmei Liu & Wenbo Lv & Jianwu Yan, 2023. "Classification of Urban Agricultural Functional Regions and Their Carbon Effects at the County Level in the Pearl River Delta, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-29, September.
    19. Wojewodzic, Tomasz & Sroka, Wojciech, 2018. "Commercial farms in metropolitan areas in Poland: changes in production factor resources," Village and Agriculture (Wieś i Rolnictwo), Polish Academy of Sciences (IRWiR PAN), Institute of Rural and Agricultural Development, vol. 181(4), December.
    20. Rosmah Murdad & Mardiana Muhiddin & Wan Hurani Osman & Nor Elliza Tajidin & Zainol Haida & Azwan Awang & Mohamadu Boyie Jalloh, 2022. "Ensuring Urban Food Security in Malaysia during the COVID-19 Pandemic—Is Urban Farming the Answer? A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-24, March.

    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:15:y:2023:i:14:p:11251-:d:1197550. 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.