Next Article in Journal
Adopting Environmentally Friendly Farming Practices and the Role of Quality Labels and Producer Organisations: A Qualitative Analysis Based on Two European Case Studies
Next Article in Special Issue
Design and Social Factors Affecting the Formation of Social Capital in Chinese Community Garden
Previous Article in Journal
Is Teamwork Different Online Versus Face-to-Face? A Case in Engineering Education
Previous Article in Special Issue
Food Provision, Social Interaction or Relaxation: Which Drivers Are Vital to Being a Member of Community Gardens in Czech Cities?
Article

Ecosystem Services of Urban Agriculture: Perceptions of Project Leaders, Stakeholders and the General Public

1
Research Centre in Urban Environment for Agriculture and Biodiversity (ResCUE-AB), Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences (Distal), University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
2
ILS—Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development, 44135 Dortmund, Germany
3
Department of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany
4
Faculty of Social and Economic Studies, Jan Evangelista Purkyně University in Ústí nad Labem, 400 96 Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic
5
Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development, 01217 Dresden, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors equally contributed to this work.
Sustainability 2020, 12(24), 10446; https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410446
Received: 30 October 2020 / Revised: 4 December 2020 / Accepted: 8 December 2020 / Published: 14 December 2020
Within the scholarly debate, Urban Agriculture (UA) has been widely acknowledged to provide diverse environmental and socio-cultural ecosystem services (ESs) for cities. However, the question of whether these potential benefits are also recognized as such by the involved societal groups on the ground has not yet been investigated. This paper aims at (1) assessing the perceived ESs of UA, comparing the views of different societal groups in the city of Bologna, Italy (namely: UA project leaders, stakeholders and the general public) and (2) to identify differences in the evaluation of specific UA types (indoor farming, high-tech greenhouses, peri-urban farms, community-supported agriculture, community rooftop garden and urban co-op). In total, 406 individuals evaluated 25 ESs via a standardized Likert-scale survey. The study unveiled similarities and divergences of perceptions among the different societal groups. The statistical analysis indicated that the general public and UA stakeholders agree on the high relevance of socio-cultural ESs, while provisioning ESs was considered as less significant. UA types focusing on social innovation were expected to provide higher socio-cultural ESs whereas peri-urban activities were more closely linked to habitat ESs. We assume that involvement and knowledge of UA are determining factors for valuing the provision of ESs through UA, which needs to be considered for ES valuation, particularly in a policymaking context. View Full-Text
Keywords: ES valuation; urban food system; urban sustainability; urban farm; urban food supply; multifunctionality; natural capital ES valuation; urban food system; urban sustainability; urban farm; urban food supply; multifunctionality; natural capital
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Sanyé-Mengual, E.; Specht, K.; Vávra, J.; Artmann, M.; Orsini, F.; Gianquinto, G. Ecosystem Services of Urban Agriculture: Perceptions of Project Leaders, Stakeholders and the General Public. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10446. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410446

AMA Style

Sanyé-Mengual E, Specht K, Vávra J, Artmann M, Orsini F, Gianquinto G. Ecosystem Services of Urban Agriculture: Perceptions of Project Leaders, Stakeholders and the General Public. Sustainability. 2020; 12(24):10446. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410446

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sanyé-Mengual, Esther, Kathrin Specht, Jan Vávra, Martina Artmann, Francesco Orsini, and Giorgio Gianquinto. 2020. "Ecosystem Services of Urban Agriculture: Perceptions of Project Leaders, Stakeholders and the General Public" Sustainability 12, no. 24: 10446. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410446

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

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop