300
K. Specht et al.
value; social benefits are gained by way of integration and community-building;
health effects are produced due to exercise, nutrition and recreation; and environmental advantages are achieved by improving the urban climate (Berges et al. 2014;
BMUB 2015). These are just a few of the positive impacts of UA discussed in the
scientific literature. The above-mentioned benefits do not apply in equal measure
to all types of UA. Moreover, the actors involved differ, as do the motivations for
undertaking UA activities, ranging from subsistence and socio-cultural motivations
to commercial intentions (Berges et al. 2014). Although most of the effects attributed
to UA are positive, there are also critical aspects and concerns. For example, doubts
have been raised about the quality of the products grown, considering the prevalence
of air pollution and contaminated soils; and there are doubts about the contribution
that urban agriculture makes to feeding urban populations, owing to the small quantities produced. Moreover, there are conflicts surrounding land use, especially in big
cities; and in some cases, agricultural activities are undertaken in the city without the
necessary landuse and building approvals. Urban green spaces are under tremendous
pressure: population growth and economic developments lead to a growing need for
settlement areas, particularly in conurbations.
It is recognised that collaboration and sharing can be regarded as key elements of
UA. The strong role that UA may play with regard to urban networking and interaction
between a wide variety of actors can primarily be explained by the special forms of
organisation and marketing that are geared towards the urban setting.
In order to be able to make a real contribution to sustainable land management, it
is important for UA to overcome the boundaries and obstacles relating to agricultural
production in cities. This includes seeing existing competitive usages as an opportunity by further developing unused areas for multifunctional uses. For example, many
unused roofs are suitable for creating rooftop gardens. Also allotments, which have
come under pressure in many places, could be made available for use as green spaces
by a wider public, by testing new approaches and demonstrating greater openness
towards non-gardeners, ensuring their continued existence as green oases in the heart
of the city.
Particularly the notion of multifunctionality, which also includes social and
ecological benefits that are hard to quantify (Schulz et al. 2013), may become an
important guiding principle for sustainable land management in the future, in which
UA may be acknowledged as a “multifunctional service”.
References
Appel, I., Grebe, C., & Spitthöver, M. (2011). Aktuelle Garteninitiativen. Kleingärten und Gärten
in deutschen Großstädten. Kassel: kassel university press.
Artmann, M., & Sartison, K. (2018). The role of urban agriculture as a nature-based solution: A
review for developing a systemic assessment framework. Sustainability, 10(6), 1937. https://doi.
org/10.3390/su10061937
BBSR (Ed.). (2015). Gemeinschaftsgärten im Quartier. BBSR-Online-Publikation. No. 12/2015.
Bonn.
K. Specht et al.
value; social benefits are gained by way of integration and community-building;
health effects are produced due to exercise, nutrition and recreation; and environmental advantages are achieved by improving the urban climate (Berges et al. 2014;
BMUB 2015). These are just a few of the positive impacts of UA discussed in the
scientific literature. The above-mentioned benefits do not apply in equal measure
to all types of UA. Moreover, the actors involved differ, as do the motivations for
undertaking UA activities, ranging from subsistence and socio-cultural motivations
to commercial intentions (Berges et al. 2014). Although most of the effects attributed
to UA are positive, there are also critical aspects and concerns. For example, doubts
have been raised about the quality of the products grown, considering the prevalence
of air pollution and contaminated soils; and there are doubts about the contribution
that urban agriculture makes to feeding urban populations, owing to the small quantities produced. Moreover, there are conflicts surrounding land use, especially in big
cities; and in some cases, agricultural activities are undertaken in the city without the
necessary landuse and building approvals. Urban green spaces are under tremendous
pressure: population growth and economic developments lead to a growing need for
settlement areas, particularly in conurbations.
It is recognised that collaboration and sharing can be regarded as key elements of
UA. The strong role that UA may play with regard to urban networking and interaction
between a wide variety of actors can primarily be explained by the special forms of
organisation and marketing that are geared towards the urban setting.
In order to be able to make a real contribution to sustainable land management, it
is important for UA to overcome the boundaries and obstacles relating to agricultural
production in cities. This includes seeing existing competitive usages as an opportunity by further developing unused areas for multifunctional uses. For example, many
unused roofs are suitable for creating rooftop gardens. Also allotments, which have
come under pressure in many places, could be made available for use as green spaces
by a wider public, by testing new approaches and demonstrating greater openness
towards non-gardeners, ensuring their continued existence as green oases in the heart
of the city.
Particularly the notion of multifunctionality, which also includes social and
ecological benefits that are hard to quantify (Schulz et al. 2013), may become an
important guiding principle for sustainable land management in the future, in which
UA may be acknowledged as a “multifunctional service”.
References
Appel, I., Grebe, C., & Spitthöver, M. (2011). Aktuelle Garteninitiativen. Kleingärten und Gärten
in deutschen Großstädten. Kassel: kassel university press.
Artmann, M., & Sartison, K. (2018). The role of urban agriculture as a nature-based solution: A
review for developing a systemic assessment framework. Sustainability, 10(6), 1937. https://doi.
org/10.3390/su10061937
BBSR (Ed.). (2015). Gemeinschaftsgärten im Quartier. BBSR-Online-Publikation. No. 12/2015.
Bonn.