How is climate change risk perception shaped? The role of risk framing, external incentives, and personal norms in agriculture
DOCUMENT
Urban Agriculture (UA) is a highly dynamic phenomenon, which is evolving constantly through space and time. Whilst previous typologies emphasised the distinctions between urban gardening and urban farming, the increasingly complex nature of the discipline has meant that these typologies no longer reflect the full diversity of Urban Agriculture. The typology presented here reflects a multidimensional approach for describingand classifying UA projects and is based upon a robust body of empirical data. It can be considered as the foundation for the work of the European Forum on Urban Agriculture (EFUA), which is a 4-year project funded under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme.
LINK
Purpose: This study analyses how weather shocks influence agricultural entrepreneurs’ risk perception and how they manage these risks. It explores what risks agricultural entrepreneurs perceive as important, and how they face climate change and related weather shock risks compared to the multiple risks of the enterprise. Design/methodology: This paper uses qualitative data from several sources: eight semi-structured interviews with experts in agriculture, three focus groups with experts and entrepreneurs, and 32 semi-structured interviews with agricultural entrepreneurs. Findings: not published yet Originality and value: This study contributes to the literature about risk management by small- and medium-sized agricultural enterprises: it studies factors that shape perceptions about weather shocks and about climate change and how these perceptions affect actions to manage related risks, and it identifies factors that motivate agricultural entrepreneurs to adapt to climate change and changing weather shock risks. Practical implications can lay the foundation for concrete actions and policies to improve the resilience and sustainability of the sector, by adjusting risk management strategies, collaboration, knowledge sharing, and climate adaptation policy support.
DOCUMENT
Urban Agriculture (UA) is rapidly evolving and changing and often entails more than the production of food. EFUA’s Working Package 3 therefore aims to identify the types and benefits of UA in the European context. This report is an update of the typology as described in the COST Action UAE. As existing typologies are often based on subjective observation rather than on empirical data and are also one-dimensional, this study is based on a systematic literature review about characteristics and existing typologies of UA, interviews with sixteen experts in the field representing eleven European countries and a questionnaire about specific UA initiatives amongst 112 respondents.
DOCUMENT
Although urban agriculture as a way to come to sustainable urban food systems can be questioned and we have to be aware not falling into a ‘local trap’ regarding its benefits (Born & Purcell, 2006), initiatives for urban agriculture emerge all over the world. Some of these primarily focus on achieving social and educational goals while others try to become an (high tech) alternative to existing food supply chains. Whichever the goals of urban agriculture, in practice many of these initiatives have difficulties in their (logistics) operations. Research on urban agriculture and local‐for‐local food supply chains mainly focuses on environmental and economic benefits, alternative production techniques, short food supply chains (logistics infrastructure) or socio‐economic benefits of urban agriculture. So far, the alignment of urban agriculture goals with the chosen logistics concept – which includes more aspects than only infrastructure – has not gained much attention. This paper tries to fill this gap through an exploration of urban agriculture projects – both low and high tech – from around the world by using the integrated logistics concept (Van Goor et al., 2003). The main question to be answered in this paper is: to what extend can the integrated logistics concept contribute to understanding logistics drivers and barriers of urban agriculture projects? To answer this question, different urban agriculture projects were studied through information on their websites and an internet based questionnaire with key players in these projects. Our exploration shows that the ILC is a useful tool for determining logistics drivers and barriers and that there is much potential in using this concept when planning for successful urban agriculture projects.
MULTIFILE
Presentation held at the National Conference ADT Baramati, India on the 6th February 2024
DOCUMENT
Today, many cities in Europe have rediscovered urban and peri-urban agriculture (UA) as a contributor to a more healthy and sustainable urban environment. However, UA has not yet unfolded its potential due to gaps in knowledge, expertise, and advocacy. A clear typology is instrumental in identifying, understanding, and acknowledging the potential of UA at different levels of policy making. Although a number of typologies are used in practice and in literature, an overarching typology that steps beyond the local and national perspective, and that includes promising innovations like vertical farming, is lacking. The aim of this paper is to offer such a typology of urban agriculture in Europe. This paper proposes a new typology of (peri-) urban agriculture in Europe, which consists of six different types of (peri-) urban agriculture.
LINK
A growing group of cities feels responsible to feed urban populations sustainably. This has stimulated cities to embrace urban agriculture as an alternative in their food system orientation. However, while urban agriculture in all its diversity has arrived in the urban fabric and at planners’ desks, it largely remains an outsider to urban planning practices of peri-urban zones. How could city’s planning practices transform into practices that include urban agriculture in peri-urban zones? This paper reflects at this question with the analyses of the becoming of planning practices of the Dutch city of Almere that fully integrate urban agriculture in a new urban area: Oosterwold.
LINK
Societal actors across scales and geographies increasingly demand visual applications of systems thinking – the process of understanding and changing the reality of a system by considering its whole set of interdependencies – to address complex problems affecting food and agriculture. Yet, despite the wide offer of systems mapping tools, there is still little guidance for managers, policy-makers, civil society and changemakers in food and agriculture on how to choose, combine and use these tools on the basis of a sufficiently deep understanding of socio-ecological systems. Unfortunately, actors seeking to address complex problems with inadequate understandings of systems often have limited influence on the socio-ecological systems they inhabit, and sometimes even generate unintended negative consequences. Hence, we first review, discuss and exemplify seven key features of systems that should be – but rarely have been – incorporated in strategic decisions in the agri-food sector: interdependency, level-multiplicity, dynamism, path dependency, self-organization, non-linearity and complex causality. Second, on the basis of these features, we propose a collective process to systems mapping that grounds on the notion that the configuration of problems (i.e., how multiple issues entangle with each other) and the configuration of actors (i.e., how multiple actors relate to each other and share resources) represent two sides of the same coin. Third, we provide implications for societal actors - including decision-makers, trainers and facilitators - using systems mapping to trigger or accelerate systems change in five purposive ways: targeting multiple goals; generating ripple effects; mitigating unintended consequences; tackling systemic constraints, and collaborating with unconventional partners.
MULTIFILE
