Next Article in Journal
Innovation, Mark-Up and Firm Growth: Evidence from China’s New Generation IT Industry
Previous Article in Journal
Cropland Use Transitions and Their Driving Factors in Poverty-Stricken Counties of Western Hubei Province, China
Article Menu
Issue 7 (April-1) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle

Socio-Economic Viability of Urban Agriculture—A Comparative Analysis of Success Factors in Germany

1
Department of Agricultural and Food Marketing, Faculty of Organic Agricultural Sciences, University of Kassel, 37213 Witzenhausen, Germany
2
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), 15374 Müncheberg, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(7), 1999; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11071999
Received: 5 March 2019 / Revised: 25 March 2019 / Accepted: 29 March 2019 / Published: 4 April 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Urban and Rural Development)
  |  
PDF [658 KB, uploaded 4 April 2019]
  |  

Abstract

Socio-economic viability of urban agriculture (UA) is, especially regarding non-commercially oriented initiatives, at most a generically treated issue in scientific literature. Given a lack of data on yields, labor input, or saved expenditures, only a few studies have described it either from a cost-avoidance or a specific benefit generation perspective. Our hypothesis is that hybrid roles of consumers and producers in urban agriculture challenge the appraisal of socio-economic viability. This paper presents an empirical study from three prevalent urban agriculture models: self-harvesting gardens, intercultural gardens, and community gardens, combining qualitative and quantitative survey data. A multi-value qualitative comparative analysis was applied to grasp the perception of socio-economic viability and its success factors. This allowed us to identify necessary and sufficient conditions for economic and social success. Results give an indication of the existence of different value systems and cost–benefit considerations in different urban agriculture models. A service-focused business relationship between farmers and consumers ensuring self-reliance is important for success for self-harvesting gardens, while self-reliance and sharing components are relevant for intercultural gardens. Community gardening builds upon self-governance ambitions and a rather individually determined success and failure factor pattern beyond explicit production output orientation. It is shown here for the first time with a quantitative approach that participants of urban agriculture models seem to go beyond traditional trade-off considerations and rather adopt a post-productive perception, focusing more on benefits than costs. View Full-Text
Keywords: urban agriculture; qualitative comparative analysis; community gardens; self-harvesting-gardens; intercultural gardens; cost–benefit considerations urban agriculture; qualitative comparative analysis; community gardens; self-harvesting-gardens; intercultural gardens; cost–benefit considerations
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Krikser, T.; Zasada, I.; Piorr, A. Socio-Economic Viability of Urban Agriculture—A Comparative Analysis of Success Factors in Germany. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1999.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top