Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Ana De Jesus
 -- 1692 2024-02-20 11:37:34 |
2 update references and layout
Rita Xu
 Meta information modification 1692 2024-02-21 02:31:12 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
De Jesus, A.; Aguiar Borges, L. Urban Agriculture in the Circular Economy. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/55217 (accessed on 18 May 2024).
De Jesus A, Aguiar Borges L. Urban Agriculture in the Circular Economy. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/55217. Accessed May 18, 2024.
De Jesus, Ana, Luciane Aguiar Borges. "Urban Agriculture in the Circular Economy" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/55217 (accessed May 18, 2024).
De Jesus, A., & Aguiar Borges, L. (2024, February 20). Urban Agriculture in the Circular Economy. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/55217
De Jesus, Ana and Luciane Aguiar Borges. "Urban Agriculture in the Circular Economy." Encyclopedia. Web. 20 February, 2024.
Urban Agriculture in the Circular Economy
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su16031258

As major hubs for energy and resource consumption and carbon emissions, cities are at the forefront of the discussion on the impacts of megatrends, such as demographic changes, technological advancements, and the shift toward climate neutrality.

urban agriculture circular economy urban resilience

1. Introduction

The last decade was marked by high volatility and different shocks, from the aftermath of a global financial crisis and its political and socio-economic fallout to the more recent effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian-Ukraine war. The next 10 years are foreseen to be just as unpredictable, if not more, with several megatrends, such as demographic changes, technological developments, and the transition toward climate neutrality, expected to assume even greater importance.
In this context, cities are major hubs with a prominent role in the world’s energy and resource consumption and carbon emissions. In 2018, cities were already consuming around 70% of global resources and energy, producing over 70% of all greenhouse gases, and creating more than 70% of global waste [1]. Considering the projections pointing to 70% of the global population living in urban areas by 2050 [2], these numbers are expected to rise, emphasizing the urgency to transform urban dysfunctional ecosystems, in which natural resources are distributed, used, and disposed within the prevalent linear “take-make-dispose” economy, into more sustainable, resilient, and circular approaches [3].
Since linear, industrial agri-food systems are at the center of the socio-ecological crisis [4][5], and the role played by cities in the global transition toward more sustainable food production, consumption, and waste systems will only increase in forthcoming years, it is important to debate how to re-conceptualize urban food provision toward more closed loop paradigms and align it to sustainable development [6][7].
UA has been gaining importance as a strategy to tackle some of the social, economic, and environmental challenges cities face today [8][9]. Proponents of UA argue that it can promote agri-food sustainability and food security while delivering various ecosystem services with positive impacts, ranging from health benefits to the promotion of social inclusion [9][10][11], as well as supporting circular practices—such as regenerative techniques, pollution reduction, waste recycling, and efficient resource utilization [12][13].
In reimagining cities’ role in the worldwide shift toward sustainable food production, consumption, and waste management systems, it seems therefore pertinent to discuss the role of a circular approach in cities. Considering the systemic, transformative nature of the C-E concept [14][15], change appears dependent on overcoming challenges of technological and economic nature, as well as socio-cultural factors. Nevertheless, the pathway is unclear, and different urban centers are facing different challenges when considering transitioning to a more circular UA paradigm.

2. Cities and the Role of Urban Agriculture

UA has been defined as the practice of food production within and around cities [16]. This umbrella concept is used to describe a range of multifunctional and multi-purpose practices that involve different actors and imply a variety of development options [17]. It can include commercial and non-commercial activities [16] and can be operated from intra-urban to peri-urban areas, on public or private land, employing a variety of more advanced (high-tech) to simpler (low-tech) technologies [18], including examples from community gardens to vertical farming [17].
Driven by global consumption and demographic trends, as well as increasing and rapid urbanization, UA is expected to play a crucial role in food production in the coming decades. It has been stressed as enabling shorter and more resilient food supply chains (e.g., with lower transportation costs and a lower food miles impact, as well as lower resource requirements concerning land, water, and fertilizers), supporting several ecosystems services (e.g., cooling, recreation, runoff mitigation) as well as reducing negative environmental impacts [19][20]. Additionally, in times of crisis and economic hardship, including rising energy costs and inflation uncertainty, UA can potentially alleviate poverty and reduce living costs while granting access to healthy food [21][22][23]. Overall, the benefits of UA have been underlined as supporting resilience, as it strengthens the capacity of urban systems to cope with shocks, ranging from climate change to other social, political, and economic challenges [9][20][24].
Alongside these benefits, however, some undesirable effects of UA have also been documented. These primarily relate to potential environmental impacts and risks, namely excessive water consumption [25], potential contamination of aquatic ecosystems, and water quality [26].
The impacts, as well as the challenges of UA, are nevertheless highly contextual and country-specific, dependent on the actors involved, purpose, land use, property, technology, and production system [16][22][27]. For example, in the Global South, UA has been identified as a means of survival and poverty alleviation, while in the Global North, its potential has been related to reducing negative urban development impact on the environment, improving the quality of life of urban communities, as well as improving physical and mental well-being and social inclusion [18][22][28][29]. Nevertheless, the current global challenges have emphasized the fragility of global food supply chains, blurring the South–North distinctions and calling for the re-evaluation of the concept, especially concerning its contribution to close resource loops in cities [22][28][30].

3. Circular Economy and Its Strategies at an Urban Level

At the same time that the conceptual debate on UA’s definition, purposes, functions, and overall impacts is still ongoing, UA as a sustainability practice is considered more viable when it becomes “circular (using regenerative practices, eliminating pollutants, recycling waste and maximizing exploitation of the inputs used)” [13].
C-E is an “economic system that replaces the ‘end-of-life’ concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling, and recovering materials in production/distribution and consumption processes” [31]. Inspired by natural ecosystems, the concept conveys the possibility of moving away from the “linear” extraction, production, distribution, consumption, and disposal paradigm toward a permanently regenerative economy, focusing on circular flows of reuse, restoration, and renewability, encompassing the entire value chain [32].
While the debate on C-E’s “revolutionary” potential [33][34][35] is still on-going, its possible benefits to achieve SDGs [7][36] have permeated the global agenda. Overall, C-E has received immense attention in the global sustainability discourse: from the European Union Circular Economy Action Plan “(…) establishing an ambitious long-term path leading towards waste prevention and recycling” (EC, 2017a, p. 3), reinforced by the European New Green Deal [37][38], that influenced several Northern European countries C-E strategies and Action Plans [39][40][41]; to Asian legislative frameworks relating C-E to recycling initiatives, eco-parks, and eco-cities [42][43][44]; as well as recognition of the C-E’s potential benefits to the Global South [45][46][47].
As circularity strategies vary substantially depending on the geographies and contexts, the most common definitions encompass activities focused on the 3R principles—reduce; reuse; and recycle [15][32][48]—accepted in academia and C-E practices, and employed in global policy, namely on the European Union, United Nations, and Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. This recognition reinforces the potential of the C-E framework when addressing global challenges [42].

4. From a Linear to Circular Urban Agriculture

As cities are racing toward more sustainable, healthy, and resilient paradigms, C-E has emerged as a possible strategy [49][50], with metropolises such as London and Paris already deploying urban circular roadmaps [51]. At the same time that 80% of the global GDP was generated in cities in 2018, in a linear economy, cities are still “food deserts”, utterly dependent on production from rural areas [52]. The separation between “places of production” and “places of consumption” affects not only food supply but also waste management. When food and organic waste are the endpoints of a linear production-consumption-waste system, cities must contend with an expensive waste management problem [5]. Introducing the C-E concept at a city level can address these challenges, making urban environments more resilient, healthier, resource-efficient, and less dependent on external supply chains (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Comparing the linear vs. circular economy.
Cities are potentially ideal test beds for the implementation of C-E strategies. Urban environments concentrate and combine resources, knowledge, and economic activity in a limited geographical area. Cities have the capability to supply the necessary inputs (e.g., waste, byproducts) to develop circularity, while simultaneously implementing strategies that close the loop by recycling such materials and waste [13][52].
There is, therefore, a case to make concerning cities’ role in implementing C-E strategies [51][52][53] and UA part in fostering the transition from linear to circular systems [54].
UA systems can be designed considering regenerative cycles [5]. UA has been found to contribute to resource-efficient food production through the application of circularity strategies such as reduced transport of food products, reduced food waste, reuse of nutrients, use of underutilized spaces, and smart water use [55][56][57]. Transformative processes in UA systems can also enable circular resource flows, reincorporating resources that would otherwise be wasted [12][28][56]. However, despite the apparent interconnections and interdependencies between UA and the implementation of circularity strategies at the city level, a limited overall debate, along with conflicting perspectives, exists on the practical realization of these ideas [5][12][58][59]. The literature points out that, as market forces are the primary driver of land ownership in cities, UA is regarded as a low priority due to preference given to the “highest and best use” that rules land-use planning [60]. UA tends to be viewed by planners as “a placeholder or interim use”. Therefore, embedding agriculture within the fabric of the city on a long-term basis is likely to be limited without specific planning provisions that safeguard the land for its operation, consequently restricting its capacity to adopt circular practices.
Furthermore, the economic potential of UA still lacks robust evidence, jeopardizing its acceptance as a desirable function in cities [61] as well as its impact on the development of circular business models.
Also, the literature has seldom addressed UA’s social externalities, although some studies have pointed out problems such as vandalism [62] and green gentrification [63]. Horst et al. (2017) [61] pinpoint, for instance, that the associated benefits of UA for health, skill-building and jobs, contribution to community development, and food security should be considered with caution as UA may benefit privileged communities, as well as contribute to marginalization and even displacement of socioeconomically disadvantaged households. These shortcomings relate and contrast with the recent imperative for C-E to address the human dimension to achieve significant social objectives, such as enhanced health, improved working conditions, and reduced inequality [64]. Therefore, the conditions that hamper the implementation of CE strategies within UA approaches have been little explored [5][12][59], reinforcing the need to identify obstacles and propose strategies to overcome them to optimize the use of UA to achieve more circularity in cities. A roadmap that uses UA to achieve more circularity in cities needs to identify obstacles of transition.

References

  1. Paiho, S.; Mäki, E.; Wessberg, N.; Paavola, M.; Tuominen, P.; Antikainen, M.; Heikkilä, J.; Rozado, C.A.; Jung, N. Towards Circular Cities—Conceptualizing Core Aspects. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 59, 102143.
  2. United Nations UN. DESA News. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html (accessed on 26 October 2022).
  3. IRP. The Weight of Cities: Resource Requirements of Future Urbanization; Report by the International Resource Panel; United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2018.
  4. Kaufmann, L.; Mayer, A.; Matej, S.; Kalt, G.; Lauk, C.; Theurl, M.C.; Erb, K.-H. Regional Self-Sufficiency: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis Relating Agricultural Production and Consumption in the European Union. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022, 34, 12–25.
  5. Pascucci, S. Building Natural Resource Networks: Urban Agriculture and the Circular Economy. In Achieving Sustainable Urban Agriculture; Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing: London, UK, 2020; pp. 101–120.
  6. Dantas, T.E.T.; de-Souza, E.D.; Destro, I.R.; Hammes, G.; Rodriguez, C.M.T.; Soares, S.R. How the Combination of Circular Economy and Industry 4.0 Can Contribute towards Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021, 26, 213–227.
  7. Garcia-Saravia Ortiz-de-Montellano, C.; Samani, P.; van der Meer, Y. How Can the Circular Economy Support the Advancement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)? A Comprehensive Analysis. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2023, 40, 352–362.
  8. Davies, J.; Hannah, C.; Guido, Z.; Zimmer, A.; McCann, L.; Battersby, J.; Evans, T. Barriers to Urban Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa. Food Policy 2021, 103, 101999.
  9. Pradhan, P.; Callaghan, M.; Hu, Y.; Dahal, K.; Hunecke, C.; Reusswig, F.; Lotze-Campen, H.; Kropp, J.P. A Systematic Review Highlights That There Are Multiple Benefits of Urban Agriculture besides Food. Glob. Food Secur. 2023, 38, 100700.
  10. Abdoellah, O.S.; Suparman, Y.; Safitri, K.I.; Mubarak, A.Z.; Milani, M.; Margareth; Surya, L. Between Food Fulfillment and Income: Can Urban Agriculture Contribute to Both? Geogr. Sustain. 2023, 4, 127–137.
  11. Menconi, M.E.; Borghi, P.; Grohmann, D. Urban Agriculture, Cui Prodest? Seattle’s Picardo Farm as Seen by Its Gardeners. Lect. Notes Civ. Eng. 2020, 67, 163–168.
  12. Brown, S.; Butman, D.; Kurtz, K. Steps to Circularity: Impact of Resource Recovery and Urban Agriculture in Seattle and Tacoma, Washington. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 345, 118648.
  13. International Resource Panel. Urban Agriculture’s Potential to Advance Multiple Sustainability Goals: An International Resource Panel Think Piece; Ayuk, E.T., Ramaswami, A., Teixeira, I., Akpalu, W., Eckart, E., Ferreira, J., Kirti, D., de Souza Leao, V., Eds.; A Think Piece of the International Resource Panel; Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2021; Available online: https://www.unep.org/resources/publication/urban-agricultures-potential-advance-multiple-sustainability-goals (accessed on 23 September 2023).
  14. De Jesus, A.; Antunes, P.; Santos, R.; Mendonça, S. Eco-Innovation Pathways to a Circular Economy: Envisioning Priorities through a Delphi Approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 228, 1494–1513.
  15. De Jesus, A.; Antunes, P.; Santos, R.; Mendonça, S. Eco-Innovation in the Transition to a Circular Economy: An Analytical Literature Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 2999–3018.
  16. D’Ostuni, M.; Zaffi, L. Nurturing Cities: Pathways towards a Circular Urban Agriculture. In Proceedings of the World Heritage and Desing for Health XIX International Forum, Naples/Capri, Italy, 12 August 2021.
  17. Royer, H.; Yengue, J.L.; Bech, N. Urban Agriculture and Its Biodiversity: What Is It and What Lives in It? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2023, 346, 108342.
  18. Borges, L.A.; Berlina, A.; Wang, S. Baseline Study Including Key Indicators and Development of a Typology, Deliverable D1.2, (Sino-European Innovative Green and Smart Cities). 2019. Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/774233/results (accessed on 23 September 2023).
  19. DRAXIS. Market Analysis III, Deliverable D5.3, Sino-European Innovative Green and Smart Cities. 2021. Available online: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/774233/results (accessed on 23 September 2023).
  20. Langemeyer, J.; Madrid-Lopez, C.; Beltran, A.M.; Mendez, G.V. Urban Agriculture—A Necessary Pathway towards Urban Resilience and Global Sustainability? Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 210, 104055.
  21. Armanda, D.T.; Guinée, J.B.; Tukker, A. The Second Green Revolution: Innovative Urban Agriculture’s Contribution to Food Security and Sustainability—A Review. Glob. Food Secur. 2019, 22, 13–24.
  22. Bennedetti, L.V.; de Almeida Sinisgalli, P.A.; Ferreira, M.L.; Lemes de Oliveira, F. Challenges to Promote Sustainability in Urban Agriculture Models: A Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 2110.
  23. Poulsen, M.N.; McNab, P.R.; Clayton, M.L.; Neff, R.A. A Systematic Review of Urban Agriculture and Food Security Impacts in Low-Income Countries. Food Policy 2015, 55, 131–146.
  24. Gulyas, B.Z.; Edmondson, J.L. Increasing City Resilience through Urban Agriculture: Challenges and Solutions in the Global North. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1465.
  25. Dalla Marta, A.; Baldi, A.; Lenzi, A.; Lupia, F.; Pulighe, G.; Santini, E.; Orlandini, S.; Altobelli, F. A Methodological Approach for Assessing the Impact of Urban Agriculture on Water Resources: A Case Study for Community Gardens in Rome (Italy). Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst. 2019, 43, 228–240.
  26. Harada, Y.; Whitlow, T.H.; Templer, P.H.; Howarth, R.W.; Todd Walter, M.; Bassuk, N.L.; Russell-Anelli, J. Nitrogen Biogeochemistry of an Urban Rooftop Farm. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 6, 153.
  27. Nadal, A.; Pons, O.; Cuerva, E.; Rieradevall, J.; Josa, A. Rooftop Greenhouses in Educational Centers: A Sustainability Assessment of Urban Agriculture in Compact Cities. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 626, 1319–1331.
  28. Ferreira, A.J.D.; Guilherme, R.I.M.M.; Ferreira, C.S.S.; de Fatima Martins Lorena de Oliveira, M. Urban Agriculture, a Tool towards More Resilient Urban Communities? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2018, 5, 93–97.
  29. Rao, N.; Patil, S.; Singh, C.; Roy, P.; Pryor, C.; Poonacha, P.; Genes, M. Cultivating Sustainable and Healthy Cities: A Systematic Literature Review of the Outcomes of Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 85, 104063.
  30. Skar, S.L.G.; Pineda-Martos, R.; Timpe, A.; Pölling, B.; Bohn, K.; Külvik, M.; Delgado, C.; Pedras, C.M.G.; Paço, T.A.; Ćujić, M.; et al. Urban Agriculture as a Keystone Contribution towards Securing Sustainable and Healthy Development for Cities in the Future. Blue-Green Syst. 2019, 2, 1–27.
  31. Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232.
  32. Kirchherr, J.; Yang, N.-H.N.; Schulze-Spüntrup, F.; Heerink, M.J.; Hartley, K. Conceptualizing the Circular Economy (Revisited): An Analysis of 221 Definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2023, 194, 107001.
  33. Hobson, K.; Lynch, N. Diversifying and De-Growing the Circular Economy: Radical Social Transformation in a Resource-Scarce World. Futures 2016, 82, 15–25.
  34. Skene, K.R. The Circular Economy: A Critique of the Concept. In Towards a Circular Economy: Transdisciplinary Approach for Business; Alvarez-Risco, A., Rosen, M.A., Del-Aguila-Arcentales, S., Eds.; CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 99–116. ISBN 978-3-030-94293-9.
  35. Skene, K.R. Circles, Spirals, Pyramids and Cubes: Why the Circular Economy Cannot Work. Sustain. Sci. 2017, 13, 479–492.
  36. Korhonen, J.; Nuur, C.; Feldmann, A.; Birkie, S.E. Circular Economy as an Essentially Contested Concept. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 175, 544–552.
  37. EC Circular Economy Action Plan. Available online: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_en (accessed on 23 September 2023).
  38. Pinyol Alberich, J.; Pansera, M.; Hartley, S. Understanding the EU’s Circular Economy Policies through Futures of Circularity. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 385, 135723.
  39. Christis, M.; Athanassiadis, A.; Vercalsteren, A. Implementation at a City Level of Circular Economy Strategies and Climate Change Mitigation—The Case of Brussels. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 218, 511–520.
  40. EMF. Delivering the Circular Economy—A Toolkit for Policymakers; Denmark Case Study; Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF): Isle of Wight, UK, 2016.
  41. State of Green. Denmark as a Circular Economy Solution Hub; Confederation of Danish Industry: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2016.
  42. Reike, D.; Vermeulen, W.J.V.; Witjes, S. The Circular Economy: New or Refurbished as CE 3.0?—Exploring Controversies in the Conceptualization of the Circular Economy through a Focus on History and Resource Value Retention Options. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 135, 246–264.
  43. Schmitz, H.; Altenburg, T. Innovation Paths in Europe and Asia: Divergence or Convergence? Sci. Public Policy 2016, 43, 454–463.
  44. Van Berkel, R.; Fujita, T.; Hashimoto, S.; Geng, Y. Industrial and Urban Symbiosis in Japan: Analysis of the Eco-Town Program 1997–2006. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 1544–1556.
  45. EMF. A Circular Economy in Brazil: An Initial Exploration; Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF): Isle of Wight, UK, 2017.
  46. EMF. Circular Economy in India: Rethinking Growth for Long-Term Prosperity; Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF): Isle of Wight, UK, 2016.
  47. Mativenga, P.T.; Sultan, A.A.M.; Agwa-Ejon, J.; Mbohwa, C. Composites in a Circular Economy: A Study of United Kingdom and South Africa. Procedia CIRP 2017, 61, 691–696.
  48. Manríquez-Altamirano, A.; Sierra-Pérez, J.; Muñoz, P.; Gabarrell, X. Identifying Potential Applications for Residual Biomass from Urban Agriculture through Eco-Ideation: Tomato Stems from Rooftop Greenhouses. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 295, 126360.
  49. Bortolotti, A.; Verga, G.C.; Khan, A.Z. Which Circularity for Urban Design and Planning? A Compass to Navigate Circular Economy Research Knowledge and Methods. Plan. Pract. Res. 2023.
  50. Bote Alonso, I.; Sánchez-Rivero, M.V.; Montalbán Pozas, B. Mapping Sustainability and Circular Economy in Cities: Methodological Framework from Europe to the Spanish Case. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 357, 131870.
  51. Prendeville, S.; Cherim, E.; Bocken, N. Circular Cities: Mapping Six Cities in Transition. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2018, 26, 171–194.
  52. Ziskind, J.; Guna, D. Circular Economy in Cities Evolving the Model for a Sustainable Urban Future; White Paper World Economic Forum Cologny: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.
  53. Lakatos, E.S.; Yong, G.; Szilagyi, A.; Clinci, D.S.; Georgescu, L.; Iticescu, C.; Cioca, L.-I. Conceptualizing Core Aspects on Circular Economy in Cities. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7549.
  54. Riaño-Herrera, D.A.; Romero-Perdomo, F.A.; Rodriguez-Urrego, L. Advances and Challenges Between Urban Agriculture and the Circular Economy to Promote Sustainable Cities. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE Colombian Conference on Communications and Computing (COLCOM), Bogotá, Colombia, 26 July 2023; pp. 1–6.
  55. Artmann, M.; Sartison, K. The Role of Urban Agriculture as a Nature-Based Solution: A Review for Developing a Systemic Assessment Framework. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1937.
  56. Ddiba, D.; Ekener, E.; Lindkvist, M.; Finnveden, G. Sustainability Assessment of Increased Circularity of Urban Organic Waste Streams. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022, 34, 114–129.
  57. Thomaier, S.; Specht, K.; Henckel, D.; Dierich, A.; Siebert, R.; Freisinger, U.; Sawicka, M. Farming in and on Urban Buildings: Present Practice and Specific Novelties of Zero-Acreage Farming (ZFarming). Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2014, 30, 43–54.
  58. Javan, K.; Altaee, A.; BaniHashemi, S.; Darestani, M.; Zhou, J.; Pignatta, G. A Review of Interconnected Challenges in the Water–Energy–Food Nexus: Urban Pollution Perspective towards Sustainable Development. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 912, 169319.
  59. Simon, S. The Role of Design Thinking to Promote a Sustainability Transition within Participatory Urban Governance: Insights from Urban Agriculture Initiatives in Lisbon. Urban Gov. 2023, 3, 189–199.
  60. Fernandez Andres, J. Can Urban Agriculture Become a Planning Strategy to Address Social-Ecological Justice? KTH Royal Institute of Technology: Stockholm, Sweden, 2017.
  61. Horst, M.; McClintock, N.; Hoey, L. The Intersection of Planning, Urban Agriculture, and Food Justice: A Review of the Literature. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 2017, 83, 277–295.
  62. Lee, T.-I.; Chou, Y.-H.; Huang, T.-N. Users’ Perceptions and Attitudes towards Edible Campus. Int. J. Des. Nat. Ecodyn. 2019, 14, 30–40.
  63. Sbicca, J. Urban Agriculture, Revalorization, and GreenGentrification in Denver, Colorado. Politics Land 2019, 26, 149–170.
  64. Schröder, P. Promoting a Just Transition to an Inclusive Circular Economy; Environment and Resources Programme Research Paper; Chatham House: Oslo, Norway, 2020.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Environmental Studies
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Ana De Jesus
,
Luciane Aguiar Borges
View Times: 62
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 21 Feb 2024
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Feedback