research articles urban agriculture

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Advance articles
• Editor's Choice
• Special Collections
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Reasons to submit
• About BioScience
• Journals Career Network
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Potentially Offensive Content
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Sociological impact, economic impact, public health impact, conservation impact, conclusions, acknowledgments, references cited.

• < Previous

The Role of Urban Agriculture in a Secure, Healthy, and Sustainable Food System

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Theresa Nogeire-McRae, Elizabeth P Ryan, Becca B R Jablonski, Michael Carolan, H S Arathi, Cynthia S Brown, Hairik Honarchian Saki, Starin McKeen, Erin Lapansky, Meagan E Schipanski, The Role of Urban Agriculture in a Secure, Healthy, and Sustainable Food System, BioScience , Volume 68, Issue 10, October 2018, Pages 748–759, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy071

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Investments in urban agriculture (UA) initiatives have been increasing in the United States, but the costs and benefits to society are poorly understood. Urban agriculture can link socioeconomic and health systems, support education and societal engagement, and contribute to a range of conservation goals, including nutrient recycling and biodiversity conservation. Urban agriculture is spatially dispersed and small scale, creating opportunities to redirect underutilized land, water, and nutrient resources. Urban agriculture reduces water and carbon footprints when it replaces lawns. Labor and time requirements, potential for environmental and nutrient pollution, and scarce water resources are challenges that UA must address. Based on our review of the literature, it is unclear whether UA provides economic or nutritional benefits to urbanites, but our case study shows that UA can provide some benefits when replacing other land uses.

Investment in urban food production systems has increased with growing consumer interest in where and how food is produced and increasing pressure on agricultural lands to provide food with fewer environmental impacts. Urban agriculture (UA) may play an important role in sustainable food systems through a diverse array of potential benefits. Although UA is unlikely to provide most of the world's food, food systems that include some production in urban areas may help achieve society's health, economic, and conservation goals. Urban gardens can produce a substantial amount of food (e.g., Ghosh 2014 , Eigenbrod and Gruda 2015 ), and indeed, during the Second World War, households produced approximately 40% of the United States’ demand for fresh vegetables as part of the Victory Garden movement (Brown and Jameton 2000 ).

The US government shapes food systems today as it did during the Victory Garden movement. Government policies and subsidies have far-reaching impacts on the type of agriculture we practice in both urban, periurban, and rural areas. For example, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) provided almost $57 billion in subsidized crop insurance payments between 2009 and 2015 that primarily supported the production of major commodity crops (USDA RMA 2016 ). In this same period, the USDA also invested more than $1 billion in activities related to local food systems, including UA initiatives (Vilsack 2016 ). Most recently, Senator Debbie Stabenow introduced the Urban Agriculture Act of 2016. The program extends the availability of support from many existing USDA programs into urban areas and is purported to create new economic opportunities for urban communities, provide new financial tools and support for urban farmers and gardeners, increase urban consumer's access to healthy food, and create a healthier environment.

Despite growing interest in UA, its impacts are poorly understood. There is a need to assess the potential for UA to provide the multiple food production, community development, and societal benefits that these investments and community initiatives seek. In this article, we discuss the benefits and challenges of UA as part of a broader food system. Our definition of UA includes community, home, and market gardens located within urban areas and includes the production of vegetables, fruits, and livestock (most commonly, chickens kept for eggs; figure 1 ). We take a multidisciplinary approach, highlighting the economic, sociological, human health, and conservation impacts of UA (table 1 ). Using a case study and spatial analysis, we quantify the potential impacts of UA in a midsized city of Fort Collins, Colorado, on nutritional, land-use, and economic outcomes and also quantify the potential for rainwater collection in different climatic regions to support UA without supplemental irrigation.

An illustration of the variety of food production activities included under the broad umbrella of urban agriculture (from Santo et al. 2016 ). Figure courtesy of John Hopkins Center for a Livable Future.

Total water required to be added to garden from January to June (a) and from January to December (b). Only the western United States is shown because no water in addition to precipitation is needed in the rest 
of the country.

Change in stored water for 4 example months. Orange indicates negative balance, yellow is slightly positive, green is strongly positive. For example, in July in the southwestern United States, water would be removed from the rainwater barrel each day, whereas in the eastern United States, water would be added to the barrel each day.

Potential benefits and challenges for urban agriculture as part of sustainable food systems.

Urban agriculture has received attention from planners, policymakers, practitioners, institutions, activists, and community residents as a way to improve urban communities, as well as their connection to broader social and natural processes. As a result, UA is a component of many urban community development efforts, commonly with a focus on fruit and vegetable production for urban dwellers. In addition, UA efforts can educate urban dwellers about food while encouraging civic engagement and increasing social involvement, all of which contribute to overall societal health and well-being (Hale et al. 2011 , Carolan 2016 ).

Emerging evidence from studies approaching UA with a more critical lens reveals that some projects perpetuate inequality and cultural insensitivities. For example, UA may unfairly burden farmers and farm labor (Jarosz 2008 ) and may not grow culturally appropriate food (Guthman 2008 ). Alkon and Mares ( 2012 ) showed that many local food efforts relied heavily on creating alternative food markets rather than engaging in direct efforts to build civil society and civic capacity. Differing objectives of various municipal agencies and supporting partners also create challenges for UA. City officials often prioritize economic viability, but UA initiatives frequently rely on grants from government and local foundations, donations, and typically low-paid, young, and enthusiastic workers.

Time can be either a barrier or a social network benefit of UA. Issues of food access and poverty are important for understanding who participates in UA. The tacit skills needed to garden, raise chickens, and prepare fresh fruits and vegetables are no longer widely held among average households and cannot be simply conveyed via “how to” documents and instructional videos. Acquiring skills for UA requires hands-on training (Carolan 2011 ), and it is difficult to convey this knowledge among populations that are time poor and as such requires careful thought and well-directed policy. Conversely, time spent gardening is identified as helping to build social networks and pass on cultural practices (Calvet-Mir et al. 2012 ).

Urban agriculture affects local economies when it (a) creates jobs; (b) strengthens local economic linkages, including attracting new capital and opportunities for business development; and (c) improves property values and therefore the local tax base. However, there are very few studies that rigorously assess the economic impacts of UA (Hodgson et al. 2011 ).

Part of the challenge is that the overall volume and value of food produced in urban regions is unclear. USDA data are based on metropolitan areas, which include suburban and exurban as well as urban areas. Although over one-half of all farms with local food sales were located in metropolitan counties in 2008 compared with only one-third of all US farms, the extent to which these farms are located in urbanized environments is unknown (Low and Vogel 2011 , Johnson et al. 2013 , Jablonski and Schmit 2016 ).

Studies of economic impacts of UA show mixed results. Dimitri and colleagues (2016) provided the most comprehensive, peer-reviewed national study of UA operations that includes financial information. In total, 370 farmers responded to their 2015 survey, with 315 self-reporting operating an urban or periurban farm, 89 operating a community garden, and 34 operating both an urban farm and community garden. The respondents were located all across the country and reported average farm sales of $54,000 (although the median was $5000, indicating the small nature of the majority of the operations). The study asked about the type of structures used on the farm (greenhouse, high tunnels, raised beds, containers, rooftop, aquaponics, hydronic, and vertical farm). Of these structures, raised beds were the most common (64%), but hydroponic operations had the highest on average farm sales ($112,071), although they may also have the highest expenses. Only 28% of the respondents reported that the primary farmer earns a living from the farm. Importantly, the authors also note that the majority of the survey respondents cited prioritizing social rather than financial objectives. In fact, only 26% of the respondents stated that the main goal of the UA operation was “for market.”

One case study revealed that the presence of urban gardens raised property values by as much as 9.4% within 5 years of establishment and tax revenues from these property increases were estimated at half a million dollars per garden over 20 years, making initial investments from ­government agencies for community garden and farm projects cost productive (Voicu and Been 2008 ). In contrast, Vitiello and Wolf-Powers ( 2014 ) found limited economic impacts of UA on job creation, capital attraction, and ­adjacent property values through in-depth case studies across six US cities in the Northeast and Midwest.

Proponents of UA point to the potential positive financial impact to households from growing and consuming food. Data from the USDA (National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey, FoodAPS) show that six% of households acquired food from gardening, hunting, and fishing, with increased likelihood of acquisitions in rural areas and decreased acquisitions in low-income households (Todd and Scharadin 2016 ). Given the small amount of production by urban households, relatively high land costs in urban areas, and costs and time associated with gardening, UA is unlikely in the current environment to have a significant financial impact to individual households (see box 1 ).

We conducted a case study of home gardening impacts in Fort Collins, Colorado, USA. We utilized gardening trend data (CoDyre et al. 2015 ) to design a typical 3.05 by 3.05 meter (10 by 10 feet; 9.3 square meter) raised bed garden. We then estimated productivity, yield, and nutritional value. We also estimated the capacity for land within city limits to supply residents’ entire fresh vegetable and egg intake.

Fort Collins has a population of 161,000 and a total of 36,222 single-family homes. Our example garden used common spacing guidelines (Rabin et al. 2012 ) and crop varieties predicted to have the best yield in Fort Collins (Shonle 2014 ). The crops selected were tomato, cucumber, musk melon, cabbage, potato, sweet potato, squash, peppers, bush peas, lettuce, spinach, kale, carrots, onions, and beets. High and low costs for seeds were approximated using prices listed by a major retail store and seed supplier (Home Depot and www.Burpee.com ). The high and low costs of raised bed construction were calculated using information from Alabama Extension fact sheet no. ANR-1345 (supplemental table S1; Harris et al. 2012 ). The value of crops produced was gathered from the US Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service (Todd and Scharadin 2016 ), which tends to quote the lower end of price ranges, and multiplied by the estimated approximate yield for each crop grown in a home garden (Rabin et al. 2012 ). We did not include labor requirements in our economic estimates.

Our estimates suggest that the small garden plot could yield 18 kilograms of produce per season, or 16% of the recommended minimum of 110 kilograms of annual fruit and vegetable for a single person (Martellozzo et al. 2014 , citing FAO/WHO). This quantity of produce translated to approximately $70 saved per year by not purchasing this produce at the supermarket (table 3 ). The cost of setting up a raised bed varied from (a) only the price of seeds if a homeowner used existing garden soil, homemade compost, and scrap building material to (b) $270 if basic materials were purchased new. Using our estimated yield of 2.8 kilograms per square meter, 100% of each Fort Collins resident's minimum recommended vegetables could be met if 18% of the total unimproved land area of all the single-family residential home lots (34 million square meters) in the city were to be cultivated.

A single garden plot and a few hens contributed to an individual's annual nutritional needs, providing 9.2% of protein, 23% of vitamin K, 20% of vitamin C, and smaller amounts of other nutrients and vitamins (see table 2 ). A family keeping a small flock of chickens could easily produce all their egg needs. To supply all of Fort Collins’ egg needs, each of the single-family residential homes in Fort Collins would need to keep approximately 5 laying hens. Including chickens in our calculations not only improved the potential for household gardens to provide nutritional benefits, it did so economically. We calculated initial purchase cost of a 6-month-old laying hen, replacement costs to ensure highest productivity, bedding, and feed costs, resulting in a cost of producing a dozen eggs to $2.75 and $3.92 for non-organic and organic varieties respectively (table 3 ; supplemental material). A survey of local retailers and farmers’ markets revealed prices for a dozen eggs from $1.25 for concentrated egg operations to as high as $8 for free-range organic. Although backyard chicken keepers could sometimes save money producing their own eggs, they typically choose to keep chickens for other reasons, such as to “establish sustainable backyard agro-ecosystems, build sociability, resist consumerism, and work simultaneously to improve the life and health of animals, humans, and the urban environment” (Blecha and Leitner 2014 ).

Nutritional contribution of a 9.3-square-meter garden and 264 eggs for an average adult with a daily recommended intake of 2000 calories per day. See complete nutritional contributions in the supplemental material.

Potential costs, savings, and quantity produced in home gardens.

Urban agriculture has the potential to influence human health both directly and indirectly. For example, the experience of growing food locally is positively correlated with consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables (Patel 1996 ). Urban agriculture also supports health by contributing to safe, healthy, and green environments in neighborhoods, schools, and abandoned areas (McGuinn and Relf 2001 ). In developing countries, an association exists between UA and dietary adequacy and increased dietary diversity (Zezza and Tasciotti 2010 ). However, in limited-income households throughout the world, a focus may be placed on buying foods that will be satiating rather than just nutritious or healthful. Therefore, urban farming can help households save food dollars spent on produce, but how they promote nutritional security is unclear because families need to spend cash on staple, nongarden foods (e.g., whole grains). Increasing fruit and vegetable consumption is important for meeting public health nutrition guidelines, and our case study suggests that UA can contribute to meeting these guidelines at a household level (box 1 ). However, recent evidence supports that daily total fiber intakes from staple foods such as whole grains and legumes are also critical indicators of overall health when compared with fiber that is primarily derived from fruits and vegetables (Park et al. 2011 ). Methods used for receiving and assessing nutritional intakes across the spectrum of UA activities warrant continued attention in public health because of potential inaccuracies and recall bias, including heavy reliance on self-reporting. Finally, there is a lack of reliable data on overall macronutrient (i.e., carbohydrates, protein, and fat) and micronutrient (e.g., iron, zinc, calcium, and phosphorus) intake from vegetables grown under different agricultural practices.

Environmental health is another facet of public health that can include but is not limited to measures of food safety (i.e., microbial and chemical contaminants). An emerging body of literature highlights the importance of comonitoring emerging environmental chemicals of concern, both agrochemicals and heavy metals such as lead (Pb) and cadmium (Cd). Determining the soil levels for Pb has raised concerns in multiple settings to date, and that could pose health risks, particularly if ingested by young children. Although growing garden crops in contaminated soils may increase dietary metals, the specific claims about health risks from urban soil concentrations for growing food are not always accurate because various chemical forms may have limited bioavailability and uptake by plants (Brown et al 2016 ). In a study of 96 samples of produce from seven urban farms, three suburban farms, and three grocery stores in the San Francisco Bay Area in 2011–2012 (Kohrman and Chamberlain 2014 ), Cd and Pb concentrations in produce from urban farms were not significantly different from produce from suburban farms or grocery stores. Although many urban garden soils may not have high levels of heavy metals and other toxins (Hough et al. 2004 ), the installation of raised beds with imported soils could be considered a limited exposure reduction method (Clark et al. 2008 ). Although raised beds may be a common strategy in areas with contaminated soils to avoid human health risks, this is not classified as a remediation technique. Testing soils for contaminants prior to establishing urban gardens or measuring toxicant loads in food can be expensive, leading to increased consumer costs. Practitioners of UA must balance the need for assessments of macronutrient and micronutrient quality (i.e., protein, vitamins, or minerals) and food safety (i.e., pathogen screening and contaminants).

Food safety measures, including postharvest processing and handling, can pose unintentional risks to public health and vary by food types in different urban locations. Producer education has gained increased attention over enforcing regulations. Practices to enhance food safety for fruits and vegetables, which are the most common food products from UA, may become more complicated if livestock rearing is integrated into the system. Given that food recalls are generally on the rise, cost-effective precautions and guidelines for UA are needed.

The public health impacts of UA, such as physical activity, overall dietary caloric intakes, socioeconomic status, and underlying chronic and infectious disease risk factors, also merit attention as integral players in overall human health outcomes. For example, behavioral and mental health assessments have been conducted for various individuals and groups related to UA practices (Ober Allen et al. 2008 ) but are usually separated from nutritional assessments and food diaries that reveal sources of all foods consumed in the daily diet. Finally, assessing and reporting the level of community engagement that can lead to physical and mental health rewards related to UA are equally important aspects of public health impacts.

A number of studies have investigated the impact of urban gardening on food security (e.g., Kortright and Wakefield 2011 , Eigenbrod and Gruda 2015 ), but few have included gardener preference and nutritional impact. Urban areas have enough land to provide a large proportion of city residents’ vegetable, poultry, and egg needs (box 1 ; Grewal and Grewal 2012 ). Researchers have suggested that for food security in urban areas, emphasis should be placed on productivity in cities with low population density because they have potential to become self-sufficient (Ghosh et al. 2008 ), especially regarding contributions of home gardens (Taylor and Lovell 2014 ).

Urban agriculture, in aggregate, has potentially large impacts, both positive and negative, on the conservation of biodiversity, water, and land. Agriculture (i.e., the land area and resources allocated to food and fiber production) contributes between 20% and 33% of global greenhouse gases (GHGs; IPCC 2007 , Vermeulen et al. 2012 ), uses 70% of global freshwater supplies (FAO 2015 ) and 90% of mined phosphorus (Jasinski 2006 ), and is a major contributor to the more than 400 marine hypoxic zones worldwide (Diaz and Rosenberg 2008 ). These effects, in turn, have large impacts on biodiversity (Green et al. 2005 ). Urban agriculture could have an impact on carbon and water footprints, climate resilience, nutrient recycling and loading into surface waters, habitat value of urban landscapes for pollinators and other wildlife, and demand for land for food production elsewhere. These effects will depend on the location and methods of production. Despite these myriad effects, UA has been widely ignored by the conservation community.

Climate change and urban agriculture

Projected changes in climate, especially extreme weather events, threaten food security. Specifically, climate change can disrupt food availability, access, processing, storage, and consumption, especially for time-poor populations (Brown et al. 2015 ). Urban agriculture provides an alternative production source and diversifying food sourcing options can serve as a buffer to climate change variability that may disrupt trade and global food markets (Ostrom 2010 ).

In a thorough life cycle assessment of GHG emissions of urban household gardens, Cleveland and colleagues (2017) found that although producing vegetables in home gardens does create some GHG emissions, these emissions are more than offset by reducing the GHG footprint of consumers buying produce through the conventional agribusiness system. In addition, further GHG savings were realized when researchers accounted for lawn replacement, recycling gray water, and recycling organic household waste. However, home composting can produce methane and nitrous oxide, which are strong GHGs (Cleveland et al. 2017 ). Other studies that performed similar analyses for urban community farms also demonstrated reductions in GHG emissions compared with conventional systems, especially when vegetable production replaced lawns (Kulak et al. 2013 , Fisher and Karunanithi 2014 ). In developed countries, postproduction processes such as storing, refrigerating, and transporting produce over long distances can contribute as much to the GHG emissions as do the actual production processes (Vermeulen et al. 2012 ). These postproduction emissions are reduced or eliminated when vegetables are grown where they are consumed, as in the case of UA.

Water impact

Agriculture accounts for the majority of current freshwater withdrawals (Scanlon et al. 2007 , FAO 2015 ). The immense demands for water by agriculture impacts freshwater biodiversity through many mechanisms, including dam construction, dewatering of wetlands and rivers, reduced river flow to coastal areas, changes in the timing and intensity of flows, and aquifer depletion (Gordon et al. 2010 ). In dry climates, local agricultural production could have significant negative impacts on limited local water resources, thereby arguing for importing water-intensive produce from wetter regions. Irrigation needs for conventional agriculture will only continue to grow, whereas UA has the potential to depend largely on collected rainwater in some regions (see box 2 below) and, furthermore, to reduce the use of water for processing, packaging, and transporting food. Collected rainwater, although generally of high quality (Bakacs et al. 2013 ), has some potential for introducing pollutants into the food supply (Lye 2009 ).

Growing food locally is often touted as ecologically friendly, but how much water does a home garden require? We mapped the amount of additional water needed by a 9.3-square-meter vegetable garden if the owner collected rainwater and used it to water the crops. We determined the potential capacity of rainwater collection barrels to water a home garden on the basis of spatially explicit precipitation and evapotranspiration data. Using the Simplified Landscape Irrigation Demand Estimation method developed by the University of California Extension (Kjelgren et al. 2016 ) to determine the water need of a typical 9.3-square-meter home vegetable garden, we modeled the amount of supplemental water that would be needed by that garden using daily time steps. We used a water recharge model with a 0.42-cubic-meter (110-gallon) storage capacity (2 typical, home-use rainwater collection barrels) and a modest roof collection area of 93 square meters (1000 square feet). We used monthly precipitation (PRISM 2004 ) and evapotranspiration (IWMI 2016 ) data at daily time steps for 1 year.

Nutrient conservation and pollution

Phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) fertilizer use has increased dramatically in the past century and is predicted to continue to do so (Tilman et al. 2001 ). The global nature of agricultural trade means that some soils are becoming P depleted, whereas excess P and N application is polluting water bodies in other regions. There is therefore a need to increase the recycling of nutrients to contain them within the systems in which they occur, thereby closing nutrient loops (Schipanski and Bennett 2011 ). The feasibility of food waste recycling is highly dependent on the distance between production and consumption activities because of the logistics and cost of transporting heavy food waste or composted materials. Urban agriculture can contribute to closing nutrient loops by composting and feeding vegetable wastes to animals and then applying animal (e.g., chicken) manures back to garden areas. Household food waste recycling also prevents such wastes from entering landfills. Distributed UA with chickens could improve nutrient recycling efficiencies relative to concentrated poultry operations that are often too far from a sufficient land base to economically distribute chicken manure at recommended rates to avoid nutrient pollution (Ribaudo et al. 2003 ).

The environmental impact of nutrient management practices in home gardens has not been extensively studied. Fertility management was rated as the most important management challenge for urban gardeners in New York City (Gregory et al. 2016 ), highlighting the need for collaborative research and education on urban garden nutrient management practices. Home garden effects on nutrient recycling and nutrient losses to the surrounding environment depend on the quantity, quality, and timing of manure and compost applications. Urban gardens and lawns can be a net sink of nutrients and carbon, particularly during early conversion from more degraded soils (Kaye et al. 2005 ). However, urban gardens can also become a nutrient pollution source if compost, manure, and other fertilizer applications exceed nutrient removal in harvested produce resulting in elevated soil P levels and N leaching losses (Dewaelheyns et al. 2013 , Cameira et al. 2014 ). For example, average annual household food waste in the St. Paul–Minneapolis region of Minnesota contained approximately 300 grams of N and 36 grams of P (Baker et al. 2007 ). Applied to a 3-meter-by-3-meter raised garden bed as used in our case study (box 1 ), this would represent annual application rates of 337 kilograms of N per hectare and 39 kilograms of P per hectare, which would far exceed nutrient removal by harvested produce. Home gardens are often considered to have minimal impact on overall urban nutrient cycling and losses because of their limited spatial extent (Lin et al. 2014 ); however, this could shift with increased conversion of urban areas to fertilized gardens. Consequently, urban food waste nutrient recycling would benefit from (a) increased infrastructure, awareness, and education to reduce food waste, as well as (b) municipal recycling programs that then distribute compost to urban landscaping, gardens, golf courses, and other facilities to apply at rates that balance removals.

Biodiversity

Urban food gardens could contribute positively to conservation of biological diversity by increasing and improving habitat within urban areas, averting habitat loss elsewhere, contributing to crop diversity, and reducing pollution and nutrient loading. Replacing lawns with gardens increases habitat heterogeneity, which would be expected to increase wildlife diversity (Benton et al. 2003 ). These green spaces also provide seminatural habitats in the extensive human altered landscapes (Lin et al. 2015 ), especially for pollinators and species that benefit from small, patchy resources. For successful and sustainable UA, it is vital to maintain essential ecological processes such as pollination, nutrient acquisition and flow, and biological control of pests. Although leveraging the habitat value of large numbers of small plots can be a challenge, this can be overcome with effective, coordinated management (Goddard et al. 2010 ).

Home gardens in developing countries have long been considered hotbeds of crop diversity, with known links to dietary diversity and quality, but less is known about the contributions of urban gardens in more developed countries (Taylor and Lovell 2014 ). Widespread availability of stable cultivars in small seed packs removes the need to save seed from year to year or experiment with novel crosses. Despite the lack of incentive, novelty is a coveted trait in home garden products, and amateur plant breeders have formed organized groups and seed exchanges. Immigrant populations contribute to a unique form of germplasm conservation; for example, novel crosses between grocery store varieties of sweet corn and landrace maize cultivars have been found in the home gardens of Mexican immigrants residing in southern California (Heraty and Ellstrand 2016 ).

The problem of hunger is more one of poverty and access than of sufficient food produced (Schipanski et al. 2016 ). In addition, we do not efficiently use the food that we currently grow: One-third is wasted, and one-third becomes animal feed (Tscharntke et al. 2012 ). But a growing world population will necessitate additional land be converted to agriculture (Tilman et al. 2001 ), and converting lawns in urban areas rather than biodiverse habitat in developing nations could reduce agriculture's negative impact on biodiversity. Researchers predict that large amounts of land will be converted to agricultural uses from 2001 to 2050, a net projected increase of 5.4 × 10 8 hectares for pasture and 3.5 × 10 8 hectares for cropland (Tilman et al. 2001 ). Most of the associated habitat loss (10 9 hectares by 2050) will be in developing countries, whereas 1.4 × 10 8 hectares of land is projected to be removed from agriculture in developed nations (Tilman et al. 2001 ). Much of the food demand by developed nations results in losses to biodiversity in developing nations (Lenzen et al. 2012 ), with each dollar spent on agricultural products estimated to displace between 0.1–1 individual birds or mammals (Kitzes et al. 2016 ).

Furthermore, analyses suggest that many developed nations have enough land within urban areas to meet much of their food needs; for example, Martellozzo and colleagues (2014) found that the United States would need to use less than 10% of its urban land to meet all vegetable needs, and see our case study (box 1 ). Growing more food in urban areas of developed countries is also positively correlated with increased awareness of the environmental impacts of food production (Martinez et al. 2010 ).

This review indicates that UA could serve as part of a sustainable food system despite challenges and knowledge gaps. Carefully designed UA can provide conservation benefits, especially when it replaces lawns (e.g., box 2 ), but other conservation impacts are poorly understood and require more research. Although our Fort Collins case study (box 1 ) demonstrates that home gardens provide limited contributions to nutrition and money saving, the majority of farmers engaged in UA are motivated by social goals in addition to food production (Dimitri et al. 2016 ). Barriers to UA include access to suitable land for growing and gardening knowledge (Kortright and Wakefield 2011 ), time, and expense. Urban agriculture can also contribute to food security and encourage dietary intake of nutritious foods and strong social networks (Kortright and Wakefield 2011 ). Urban agriculture designed by diverse social, economic, and ethnic groups would likely have greater multifunctional societal benefits and potentially greater economic benefits. Improved public education could decrease UA public health risks in food safety and facilitate improved soil fertility management.

The question remains: Is UA an activity that society should encourage, through government subsidies, planning, nonprofit activities, and education? Both research and promotion of UA suffer from the “local trap,” which assumes that there is something inherently good about local-scale agriculture: that UA will promote ecological sustainability, social justice, nutrition, food security, and food quality (Born and Purcell 2006 ). In reality, the context of the system determines its benefits or downfalls, and importantly, who benefits and who does not (Born and Purcell 2006 ).

Conventional wisdom tells us that large-scale agriculture will benefit from efficiencies of scale, but our interdisciplinary perspective points to the need for an assessment of multifunctional efficiency. That is, a system that can function to provide benefits across a variety of economic, societal, health, and environmental benefits while using currently underutilized resources can play a role in furthering societal goals. Urban home gardens use resources (land, water, nutrients, and human energy) that would otherwise be either unused, underutilized, or (in the case of waste) become pollutants or that produce positive externalities (using human energy in the garden in place of carbon energy in conventional systems produces health benefits and happiness from being outdoors). But other resources, such as tools and infrastructure, might end up costing more in terms of both money and resources for home production systems. The benefits are clearer when water, carbon, and human resources that have traditionally been directed toward lawns are instead directed toward food production: In these cases, we are producing additional food while still lowering the environmental impact of these lands.

The benefits of home gardens, in terms of food security, health, and income, have been well documented in developing countries (Taylor and Lovell 2014 ), but the impact of home and urban gardens in developed countries is underexplored. Further research is needed to determine how to maximize the positive and minimize the negative impacts of UA. A lack of data on small home gardens is a particular challenge for researchers and policymakers. In light of current pressures on food systems and successful examples such as Victory Gardens, when civilian populations were encouraged to produce food at home, the potential for home gardens to improve human health and nutrition, conserve or improve biological diversity, and reduce or mitigate food waste and pollution merits further evaluation.

Thanks for support from Colorado State University's School of Global Environmental Sustainability for funding a course and working group that directly resulted in this article. Also thanks to the American Association for University Women American Fellowship for funding TN-M while working on this project. John Sheehan, Ragan Adams, Dawn Thilmany, Brad McRae, and Rod Adams provided valuable insights.

Alkon A , Mares T . 2012 . Food sovereignty in US food movements: Radical visions and neoliberal constraints . Agriculture and Human Values 29 : 347 – 359 .

Google Scholar

Bakacs M , Haberland M , Yergeau S . 2013 . Rain Barrels Part IV: Testing and Applying Harvested Water to Irrigate a Vegetable Garden . Rutgers University . Cooperative Extension Fact Sheet no. FS1218 .

Google Preview

Baker LA et al.  2007 . Effect of consumption choices on fluxes of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus through households . Urban Ecosystems 10 : 97 – 117 .

Benton TG , Vickery JA , Wilson JD . 2003 . Farmland biodiversity: Is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18 : 182 – 188 .

Blecha J , Leitner H . 2014 . Reimagining the food system, the economy, and urban life: New urban chicken-keepers in US cities . Urban Geography 35 : 86 – 108 .

Born B , Purcell M . 2006 . Avoiding the local trap: Scale and food systems in planning research . Journal of Planning Education and Research 26 : 195 – 207 .

Brown KH , Jameton AL . 2000 . Public health implications or urban agriculture . Journal of Public Health Policy 21 : 20 – 39 .

Brown ME et al.  2015 . Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the US Food System . US Department of Agriculture . (22 June 2018; www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/FoodSecurity2015Assessment/FullAssessment.pdf) .

Brown SL , Chaney RL , Hettiarachchi G . 2016 . Lead in urban soils: A real or perceived concern for urban agriculture . Journal of Environmental Quality 45 : 26 – 36

Calvet-Mir L , Gómez-Baggethun E , Reyes-García V . 2012 . Beyond food production: Ecosystem services provided by home gardens . A case study in Vall Fosca, Catalan Pyrenees, Northeastern Spain. Ecological Economics 74 : 153 – 160 .

Cameira MR , Tedesco S , Leitão TE . 2014 . Water and nitrogen budgets under different production systems in Lisbon urban farming . Biosystems Engineering 125 : 65 – 79 .

Carolan M. 2011 . Embodied Food Politics . Ashgate .

Carolan M. 2016 . More-than-active food citizens: A longitudinal and comparative study of alternative and conventional eaters . Rural Sociology 82 : 197 – 225 .

Clark HF , Hausladen DM , Brabander DJ . 2008 . Urban gardens: Lead exposure, recontamination mechanisms, and implications for remediation design . Environmental Research 107 : 312 – 319 .

Cleveland DA et al.  2017 . The potential for urban household vegetable gardens to reduce greenhouse gas emissions . Landscape and Urban Planning 157 : 365 – 374 .

CoDyre M , Fraser EDG , Landman K . 2015 . How does your garden grow? An empirical evaluation of the costs and potential of urban gardening . Urban Forestry and Urban Greenery 14 : 72 – 79 .

Dewaelheyns V , Elsen A , Vandendriessche H , Gulinck H . 2013 . Garden management and soil fertility in Flemish domestic gardens . Landscape and Urban Planning 116 : 25 – 35 .

Diaz R , Rosenberg R . 2008 . Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems . Science 321 : 926 – 929 .

Dimitri C , Oberholtzer L , Pressman A . 2016 . Urban agriculture: Connecting producers with consumers . British Food Journal 118 : 603 – 617 .

Eigenbrod C , Gruda N . 2015 . Urban vegetable for food security in cities: A review . Agronomy for Sustainable Development 35 : 483 – 498 .

[FAO] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations . 2015 . AQUASTAT . FAO . (5 June 2018; www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/water_use/index.stm )

Fisher S , Karunanithi A . 2014 . Contemporary comparative LCA of commercial farming and urban agriculture for selected fresh vegetables consumed in Denver, Colorado . 405 – 414 in Schenck R , Huizenga D , eds. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in the Agri-Food Sector . American Center for Life Cycle Assessment .

Ghosh S. 2014 . Measuring sustainability performance of local food production in home gardens . Local Environment 19 : 33 – 55 .

Ghosh S , Vale R , Vale B . 2008 . Local food production in home gardens: Measuring on-site sustainability potential of residential development . International Journal of Environment and Sustainainable Development 7 : 430 – 451 .

Goddard MA , Dougill AJ , Benton TG . 2010 . Scaling up from gardens: Biodiversity conservation in urban environments . Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25 : 90 – 98 .

Gordon LJ , Finlayson CM , Falkenmark M . 2010 . Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services . Agricultural Water Management 97 : 512 – 519 .

Green RE , Cornell SJ , Scharlemann JPW , Balmford A . 2005 . Farming and the fate of wild nature . Science 307 : 550 – 555 .

Gregory MM , Leslie TW , Drinkwater LE . 2016 . Agroecological and social characteristics of New York City community gardens: Contributions to urban food security, ecosystem services, and environmental education . Urban Ecosystems 19 : 763 – 794 .

Grewal SS , Grewal PS . 2012 . Can cities become self-reliant in food? Cities 29 : 1 – 11 .

Guthman J. 2008 . Bringing good food to others: Investigating the subjects of alternative food practice . Cultural Geogrraphies 15 : 431 – 447 .

Hale J et al.  2011 . Connecting food environments and health through the relational nature of aesthetics: Gaining insight through the community gardening experience . Social Science and Medicine 72 : 1853 – 1863 .

Harris S , Mitchell C , Patton D , Upham W . 2012 . Raised Bed Gardening . Alabama Cooperative Extension System . Report no. ANR-1345. (5 June 2018 ; www.aces.edu/pubs/docs/A/ANR-1345/ANR-1345.pdf )

Heraty JM , Ellstrand NC . 2016 . Maize germplasm conservation in Southern California's urban gardens: Introduced diversity beyond ex situ and in situ management . Economic Botany 70 : 37 – 48 .

Hodgson K , Caton Campbell M , Bailkey M . 2011 . Urban Agriculture: Growing Healthy, Sustainable Places . American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service .

Hough RL , Breward N , Young SD , Crout NMJ , Tye AM , Moir AM , Thornton I . 2004 . Assessing potential risk of heavy metal exposure from consumption of home-produced vegetables by urban populations . Environmental Health Perspectives 112 : 215 – 221 .

[IPCC] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . 2007 . Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis . Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC . Cambridge University Press .

[IWMI] International Water Management Institute . 2016 . World Water and Climate Atlas . IWMI . (18 April 2016; www.iwmi.cgiar.org )

Jablonski BBR , Schmit TM . 2016 . Food hubs: Expanding food to urban consumers . 179 – 190 in Dawnson JC , Morales A , eds. Cities of Farmers: Urban Agricultural Practices and Processes . University of Iowa Press .

Jarosz L. 2008 . The city in the country: Growing alternative food networks in Metropolitan areas . Journal of Rural Studies 24 : 231 – 244 .

Jasinski SM. 2006 . Phosphate Rock: Statistics and Information . US Geological Survey .

Johnson R , Aussenberg RA , Cowan T . 2013 . The Role of Local Food Systems in US Farm Policy . Congressional Research Service . Report for Congress no. 7–5700 .

Kaye JP , McCulley RL , Burke IC . 2005 . Carbon fluxes, nitrogen cycling, and soil microbial communities in adjacent urban, native and agricultural ecosystems . Global Change Biology 11 : 575 – 587 .

Kitzes J et al.  2016 . Consumption-based conservation targeting: Linking biodiversity loss to upstream demand through a global wildlife footprint . Conservation Letters 10 : 531 – 538 .

Kjelgren R et al.  2016 . Simplified Landscape Irrigation Demand Estimation: SLIDE Rules . Applied Engineering in Agriculture 32 : 363 – 378 .

Kohrman H , Chamberlain CP . 2014 . Heavy metals in produce from urban farms in the San Francisco Bay Area . Food Additives and Contaminants B 7 : 127 – 134 .

Kortright R , Wakefield S . 2011 . Edible backyards: A qualitative study of household food growing and its contributions to food security . Agriculture and Human Values 28 : 39 – 53 .

Kulak M , Graves A , Chatterton J . 2013 . Reducing greenhouse gas emissions with urban agriculture: A Life Cycle Assessment perspective . Landscape and Urban Planning 111 : 68 – 78 .

Lenzen M et al.  2012 . International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations . Nature 486 : 109 – 112 .

Lin BB , Philpott SM , Jha S . 2015 . The future of urban agriculture and biodiversity–ecosystem services: Challenges and next steps . Basic and Applied Ecology 16 : 189 – 201 .

Lin T et al.  2014 . Managing urban nutrient biogeochemistry for sustainable urbanization . Environmental Pollution 192 : 244 – 250 .

Low SA , Vogel S . 2011 . Direct and intermediated marketing of local foods in the United States . US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service . Economic Research Report no. (ERR-128) .

Lye DJ. 2009 . Rooftop runoff as a source of contamination: A review . Science of the Total Environment 407 : 5429 – 5434 .

Martellozzo F et al.  2014 . Urban agriculture: A global analysis of the space constraint to meet urban vegetable demand . Environmental Research Letters 9 (art. 64025).

Martinez M et al.  2010 . Local Food Systems: Concepts, Impacts, and Issues . US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service . Report no. ERR-97 .

McGuinn C , Relf PD . 2001 . A profile of juvenile offenders in a vocational horticulture curriculum . HortTechnology 11 : 427 – 433 .

[NCSL] National Conference of State Legislatures . 2016 . State Rainwater Harvesting Laws and Legislation . NCSL . (5 June 2018; www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/rainwater-harvesting.aspx )

Ober Allen J , Alaimo K , Elam D , Perry E . 2008 . Growing vegetables and values: Benefits of neighborhood-based community gardens for youth development and nutrition . Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition 3 : 418 – 439 .

Orsini F et al.  2014 . Exploring the production capacity of rooftop gardens (RTGs) in urban agriculture: The potential impact on food and nutrition security, biodiversity and other ecosystem services in the city of Bologna . Food Security 6 : 781 – 792 .

Ostrom E. 2010 Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change . Global Environmental Change 20 : 550 – 557 .

Park Y , Subar A , Hollenbeck A . 2011 . Dietary fiber intake and mortality in the NIH–AARP diet and health study . Archives of Internal Medicine 171 : 1061 – 1068 .

Patel IC. 1996 . Rutgers urban gardening: A case study in urban agriculture . Journal of Agricultural and Food Information 3 : 35 – 46 .

[PRISM] PRISM Climate Group Oregon State University . 2004 . (18 April 2016; http://prism.oregonstate.edu )

Rabin J , Zinati G , Nitzsche P . 2012 . Yield expectations for mixed, small-scale agriculture . Sustainable Farming on the Urban Fringe . (5 June 2018; https://sustainable-farming.rutgers.edu/yield-expectations-for-mixed-stand-small-scale-agriculture )

Ribaudo M et al.  2003 . Manure Management forWater Quality: Costs to Animal Feeding Operations of Applying Manure Nutrients to Land . US Department of Agriculture . Economic Research Service. Report no. AER-824.

Santo R , Palmer A , Kim B . 2016 . Vacant Lots to Vibrant Plots: A Review of the Benefits and Limitations of Urban Agriculture . Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future .

Scanlon BR , Jolly I , Sophocleous M , Zhang L . 2007 . Global impacts of conversions from natural to agricultural ecosystems on water resources: Quantity versus quality . Water Resources Research 43 (art. W03437).

Schipanski ME , Bennett EM . 2011 . The influence of agricultural trade and livestock production on the global phosphorus cycle . Ecosystems 15 : 256 – 268 .

Schipanski ME et al.  2016 . Realizing resilient food systems . BioScience 66 : 600 – 610 .

Shonle I. 2014 . Vegetable Gardening in the Mountains . Colorado State University Extension. Fact Sheet no. 7 . 248 .

Taylor JR , Lovell ST . 2014 . Urban home food gardens in the Global North: research traditions and future directions . Agriculture and Human Values 31 : 285 – 305 .

Tilman D et al.  2001 . Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change . Science 292 : 281 – 284 .

Todd J , Scharadin B . 2016 . Where Households Get Food in a Typical Week: Findings from USDA’s FoodAPS . US Department of Agriculture Report no. EIB-156 .

Tscharntke T et al.  2012 . Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification . Biological Conservation 151 : 53 – 59 .

[USDA RMA] US Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency . 2016 . FCIC Fiscal Year 2015 Financial Statements and Summary of Business Reports . US Office of the Inspector General . Audit Report no. 05401-0007-11 .

Vermeulen SJ , Campbell BM , Ingram JSI . 2012 . Climate Change and Food Systems . Annual Review of Environment and Resources 37 : 195 – 222 .

Vilsack T. 2016 . New markets, new opportunities: Strengthening local food systems and organic agriculture . Medium . (4 June 2018; https://medium.com/usda-results/new-markets-new-opportunities-strengthening-local-food-systems-and-organic-agriculture-17b529c5ea90#.rk658vsm9 )

Vitiello D , Wolf-Powers L . 2014 . Growing food to grow cities? The potential of agriculture for economic and community development in the urban United States . Community Development Journal 49 : 508 – 523 .

Voicu I , Been V . 2008 . The effect of community gardens on neighboring property values . Real Estate Economics 36 : 241 – 283 .

Zezza A , Tasciotti L . 2010 . Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security: Empirical evidence from a sample of developing countries . Food Policy 35 : 265 – 273 .

Supplementary data

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1525-3244
• Copyright © 2024 American Institute of Biological Sciences
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Urban agriculture isn’t as climate-friendly as it seems, but these best practices can transform gardens and city farms

Ph.D. Candidate in Resource Policy and Behavior, University of Michigan

Assistant Professor of Sustainable Systems, University of Michigan

Professor of Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan

Disclosure statement

Benjamin Goldstein receives funding from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Jason Hawes and Joshua Newell do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Michigan provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation US.

View all partners

Urban agriculture is expected to be an important feature of 21st century sustainability and can have many benefits for communities and cities, including providing fresh produce in neighborhoods with few other options.

Among those benefits, growing food in backyards, community gardens or urban farms can shrink the distance fruits and vegetables have to travel between producers and consumers – what’s known as the “food mile” problem . With transportation’s greenhouse gas emissions eliminated, it’s a small leap to assume that urban agriculture is a simple climate solution.

But is urban agriculture really as climate-friendly as many people think?

Our team of researchers partnered with individual gardeners, community garden volunteers and urban farm managers at 73 sites across five countries in North America and Europe to test this assumption.

We found that urban agriculture, while it has many community benefits, isn’t always better for the climate than conventional agriculture over the life cycle, even with transportation factored in. In fact, on average, the urban agriculture sites we studied were six times more carbon intensive per serving of fruit or vegetables than conventional farming.

However, we also found several practices that stood out for how effectively they can make fruits and vegetables grown in cities more climate-friendly.

What makes urban ag more carbon-intensive?

Most research on urban agriculture has focused on a single type of urban farming, often high-tech projects, such as aquaponic tanks, rooftop greenhouses or vertical farms. Electricity consumption often means the food grown in these high-tech environments has a big carbon footprint.

We looked instead at the life cycle emissions of more common low-tech urban agriculture – the kind found in urban backyards, vacant lots and urban farms.

Our study, published Jan. 22, 2024 , modeled carbon emissions from farming activities like watering and fertilizing crops and from building and maintaining the farms. Surprisingly, from a life cycle emissions perspective, the most common source at these sites turned out to be infrastructure. From raised beds to sheds and concrete pathways, this gardening infrastructure means more carbon emissions per serving of produce than the average wide-open fields on conventional farms.

However, among the 73 sites in cities including New York, London and Paris, 17 had lower emissions than conventional farms. By exploring what set these sites apart, we identified some best practices for shrinking the carbon footprint of urban food production.

1) Make use of recycled materials, including food waste and water

Using old building materials for constructing farm infrastructure, such as raised beds, can cut out the climate impacts of new lumber, cement and glass, among other materials. We found that upcycling building materials could cut a site’s emissions 50% or more.

On average, our sites used compost to replace 95% of synthetic nutrients. Using food waste as compost can avoid both the methane emissions from food scraps buried in landfills and the need for synthetic fertilizers made from fossil fuels. We found that careful compost management could cut greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 40%.

Capturing rainwater or using greywater from shower drains or sinks can reduce the need for pumping water, water treatment and water distribution. Yet we found that few sites used those techniques for most of their water.

2) Grow crops that are carbon-intensive when grown by conventional methods

Tomatoes are a great example of crops that can cut emissions when grown with low-tech urban agriculture. Commercially, they are often grown in large-scale greenhouses that can be particularly energy-intensive . Asparagus and other produce that must be transported by airplane because they spoil quickly are another example with a large carbon footprint.

By growing these crops instead of buying them in stores, low-tech urban growers can reduce their net carbon impact.

3) Keep urban gardens going long term

Cities are constantly changing, and community gardens can be vulnerable to development pressures . But if urban agriculture sites can remain in place for many years, they can avoid the need for new infrastructure and keep providing other benefits to their communities.

Urban agriculture sites provide ecosystem services and social benefits, such as fresh produce , community building and education. Urban farms also create homes for bees and urban wildlife , while offering some protection from the urban heat island effect .

The practice of growing food in cities is expected to continue expanding in the coming years, and many cities are looking to it as a key tool for climate adaptation and environmental justice.

We believe that with careful site design and improved land use policy, urban farmers and gardeners can boost their benefit both to people nearby and the planet as a whole.

• Agriculture
• Climate change
• Community gardens
• Urban agriculture
• Life cycle assessment (LCA)
• Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG)

Service Centre Senior Consultant

Director of STEM

Community member - Training Delivery and Development Committee (Volunteer part-time)

Chief Executive Officer

Head of Evidence to Action

Urban Agriculture: Opportunities and Challenges for Sustainable Development

• Reference work entry
• First Online: 01 January 2020
• Cite this reference work entry

• Nicole Josiane Kennard 6 &
• Robert Hugh Bamford 7  

Part of the book series: Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals ((ENUNSDG))

373 Accesses

4 Citations

1 Altmetric

City farming ; Urban farming

Definitions

The definition of food security arose from the 1996 World Food Summit and is as follows: “Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life” (FAO 2008 ). Thus, as from this definition, there are four dimensions of food security that must be met: the physical availability of food, economic and physical access to food, food utilization (pertaining to utilizing the food to meet nutritional needs), and the stability of these three dimensions over time (FAO 2008 ). The second Sustainable Development Goal from the United Nations (UN), “Zero Hunger,” supports this definition of food security by aiming to end hunger and ensure access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food for all people year-round by 2030 (UN 2019 ).

Urban agriculture (UA) can be used as a mechanism to contribute to food...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Ackerman K (2012) The potential for urban agriculture in New York City: growing capacity, food security, and green infrastructure. Urban Design Lab, Columbia University, New York City

Google Scholar  

Ackerman K, Conard M, Culligan P et al (2014) Sustainable food systems for future cities: the potential of urban agriculture. Econ Soc Rev (Irel) 45:189–206

Adams D, Hardman M (2014) Observing guerrillas in the wild: reinterpreting practices of urban guerrilla gardening. Urban Stud 51:1103–1119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098013497410

Article   Google Scholar  

Altieri MA (2009) Agroecology, small farms, and food sovereignty. Mon Rev 61:102–113

Altieri MA, Nicholls CI (2018) Urban agroecology: designing biodiverse, productive and resilient city farms. Agro Sur 46:49–60. https://doi.org/10.4206/agrosur.2018.v46n2-07

Altieri MA, Companioni N, Cañizares K et al (1999) The greening of the “barrios”: urban agriculture for food security in Cuba. Agric Hum Values 16:131–140. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007545304561

Altieri MA, Pallud C, Arnold J et al (2014) An agroecological survey of urban agriculture sites in the East Bay, California: A report to the Berkeley Food Institute. Berkeley Food Institute, Berkeley

Amoah P, Drechsel P, Abaidoo RC, Ntow WJ (2006) Pesticide and pathogen contamination of vegetables in Ghana’s urban markets. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 50:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-004-0054-8

Armar-Klemesu M (2000) Urban agriculture and food security, nutrition and health. In: Bakker N, Dubbeling M, Guendel S et al (eds) Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Deutsche Stiftung fur internationale Entwicklung (DSE), Feldafing, pp 99–118

Armstrong D (2000) A survey of community gardens in upstate New York: implications for health promotion and community development. Health Place 6:319–327

Bai ZG, Dent DL, Olsson L, Schaepman ME (2008) Proxy global assessment of land degradation. Soil Use Manag 24:223–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00169.x

Baker LE (2010) Tending cultural landscapes and food citizenship in Toronto’s community gardens. Geogr Rev 94:305–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1931-0846.2004.tb00175.x

Barthel S, Isendahl C (2013) Urban gardens, agriculture, and water management: sources of resilience for long-term food security in cities. Ecol Econ 86:224–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.06.018

Barthel S, Parker J, Ernstson H (2015) Food and green space in cities: a resilience Lens on gardens and urban environmental movements. Urban Stud 52:1321–1338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012472744

Bassett TJ (1981) Reaping on the margins: a century of community gardening in America. Landscape 25:1–8

Beniston J, Lal R (2012) Improving soil quality for urban agriculture in the North Central U.S. In: Lal R, Augustin B (eds) Carbon sequestration in urban ecosystems. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 279–313

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bernard B, Lux A (2017) How to feed the world sustainably: an overview of the discourse on agroecology and sustainable intensification. Reg Environ Chang 17:1279–1290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1027-y

Biewener C (2016) Paid work, unpaid work, and economic viability in alternative food initiatives: reflections from three Boston urban agriculture endeavors. J Agric Food Syst Community Dev 6:1–19. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2016.062.019

Blaine TW, Grewal PS, Dawes A, Snider D (2010) Profiling community gardeners. J Ext 48:6

Block JP, Scribner RA, Desalvo KB (2004) Fast food, race/ethnicity, and income: a geographic analysis. Am J Prev Med 27:211–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.06.007

Block DR, Chávez N, Allen E, Ramirez D (2012) Food sovereignty, urban food access, and food activism: contemplating the connections through examples from Chicago. Agric Hum Values 29:203–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-011-9336-8

Bridges EM, Oldeman LR (1999) Global assessment of human-induced soil degradation. Arid Soil Res Rehabil 13:319–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/089030699263212

Brown K, Carter A (2003) Urban agriculture and community food security in the United States: farming from the City Center to the Urban Fringe. Community Food Security Coalition’s North American Urban Agriculture Committee

Cavailhes J, Wavresky P (2003) Urban influences on periurban farmland prices. Eur Rev Agric Econ 30:333–357

Clapp J (2017) Food self-sufficiency: making sense of it, and when it makes sense. Food Policy 66:88–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.12.001

Clinton N, Stuhlmacher M, Miles A et al (2018) A global geospatial ecosystem services estimate of urban agriculture. Earth’s Futur 6:40–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000536

Cofie OO, Kranjac-Berisavljevic G, Dreschsel P (2005) The use of human water for peri-urban agriculture in northern Ghana. Renew Agric Food Syst 20:73–80. https://doi.org/10.1079/RAF200491

Colasanti K, Hamm MW (2010) Assessing the local food supply capacity of Detroit, Michigan. J Agric Food Syst Community Dev 1:41–58. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2010.012.002

Companioni N, Rodríguez-Nodals R, Sardiñas J (2016) Capítulo 14: Agricultura urbana, suburbana y familiar. In: Funes F, Vázquez L (eds) Avances de la Agroecología en Cuba. Estación Experimental de Pastos y Forrajes Indio Hatuey, Matanzas, pp 233–246

Daftary-Steel S, Herrera H, Porter C (2015) The unattainable trifecta of urban agriculture. J Agric Food Syst Community Dev 6:19–32. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2015.061.014

Dalin C, Wada Y, Kastner T, Puma MJ (2017) Groundwater depletion embedded in international food trade. Nature 543:700–704. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21403

Despommier D (2011) The vertical farm: controlled environment agriculture carried out in tall buildings would create greater food safety and security for large urban populations. J Consum Prot Food Saf 6:233–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00003-010-0654-3

Duchemin E, Wegmuller F, Legault AM (2008) Urban agriculture: multi-dimensional tools for social development in poor neighbourhoods. Field Actions Sci Rep 1:43–52. https://doi.org/10.5194/facts-2-1-2009

Eigenbrod C, Gruda N (2015) Urban vegetable for food security in cities. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 35:483–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-014-0273-y

Erickson DL, Lovell ST, Méndez VE (2013) Identifying, quantifying and classifying agricultural opportunities for land use planning. Landsc Urban Plan 118:29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.05.004

Eriksen-Hamel N, Danso G (2010) Agronomic considerations for urban agriculture in southern cities. Int J Agric Sustain 8:86–93. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2009.0452

FAO (2007) Profitability and sustainability of urban and peri-urban agriculture. Agricultural management, marketing and finance occasional paper 19. FAO, Rome

FAO (2008) An introduction to the basic concepts of food security. FAO, Rome

FAO (2011) The place of urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA) in national food security programmes. FAO, Rome

FAO (2014) State of food insecurity in the world. FAO, Rome

FAO (2015) Status of the World’s soil resources. FAO, Rome

FAO (2017) The state of food and agriculture. Leveraging food systems for inclusive rural transformation. FAO, Rome

Fernandez M, Williams J, Figueroa G et al (2018) New opportunities, new challenges: harnessing Cuba’s advances in agroecology and sustainable agriculture in the context of changing relations with the United States. Elem Sci Anthr 6:76. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.337

Food Well Alliance (2017) Atlanta’s local food baseline report

Food Well Alliance (2018) Case study: fresh MARTA Market. http://www.foodwellalliance.org/casestudy-freshmarta . Accessed 30 Jul 2019

Funes F, Vázquez L (2016) Avances de la Agroecología en Cuba. Estación Experimental de Pastos y Forrajes Indio Hatuey, Matanzas

Galluzzi G, Eyzaguirre P, Negri V (2010) Home gardens: neglected hotspots of agro-biodiversity and cultural diversity. Biodivers Conserv 19:3635–3654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9919-5

Godfray HCJ, Beddington JR, Crute IR et al (2010) The challenge of food security. Science 327:812–818. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857939388

Goldstein B, Hauschild M, Fernández J, Birkved M (2016) Urban versus conventional agriculture, taxonomy of resource profiles: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 36:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-015-0348-4

Goucher L, Bruce R, Cameron DD et al (2017) The environmental impact of fertilizer embodied in a wheat-to-bread supply chain. Nat Plants 3. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2017.12

Grewal SS, Grewal PS (2012) Can cities become self-reliant in food? Cities 29:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.06.003

Hamilton AJ, Burry K, Mok HF et al (2014) Give peas a chance? Urban agriculture in developing countries. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 34:45–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-013-0155-8

Hancock T (2001) People, partnerships and human progress: building community capital. Health Promot Int 16:275–280. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/16.3.275

Holt-Giménez E, Altieri MA (2013) Agroecology, food sovereignty, and the new green revolution. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 37:90–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2012.716388

Horton P (2017) We need radical change in how we produce and consume food. Food Secur 9:1323–1327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-017-0740-9

Jacobi P, Amend J, Kiango S (2000) Urban agriculture in Dar-es-Salaam: providing an indispensable part of the diet. In: Bakker N, Dubbeling M, Gundel S et al (eds) Growing cities, growing food: urban agriculture on the policy agenda. Deutsche Stiftung fur internationale Entwicklung (DSE), Feldafing, pp 257–283

Kennard NJ (2019) Food waste management. In: Leal Filho W, Azul A, Brandli L et al (eds) Zero hunger. Encyclopedia of the UN sustainable development goals. Springer, Cham

Kironde JML (1992) Received concepts and theories in African urbanisation and management strategies: the struggle continues. Urban Stud 29:1277–1292. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420989220081271

Klinkenberg E, McCall PJ, Hastings IM et al (2005) Malaria and irrigated crops, Accra, Ghana. Emerg Infect Dis 11:1290–1293. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1108.041095

Klinkenberg E, McCall PJ, Wilson MD et al (2008) Impact of urban agriculture on malaria vectors in Accra. Ghana Malar J 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-7-151

Koont S (2008) A Cuban success story: urban agriculture. Rev Radic Polit Econ 40:285–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0486613408320016

Kortright R, Wakefield S (2011) Edible backyards: a qualitative study of household food growing and its contributions to food security. Agric Hum Values 28:39–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-009-9254-1

Kremer P, DeLiberty TL (2011) Local food practices and growing potential: mapping the case of Philadelphia. Appl Geogr 31:1252–1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.01.007

Kulak M, Graves A, Chatterton J (2013) Reducing greenhouse gas emissions with urban agriculture: a life cycle assessment perspective. Landsc Urban Plan 111:68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.11.007

Lang T (2010) Crisis? What crisis? The normality of the current food crisis. J Agrar Chang 10:87–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2009.00250.x

Lang G, Miao B (2013) Food security for China’s cities. Int Plan Stud 18:5–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2013.750940

Larson NI, Story MT, Nelson MC (2009) Neighborhood environments: disparities in access to healthy foods in the U.S. Am J Prev Med 36:74–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.09.025

Lin BB, Philpott SM, Jha S (2015) The future of urban agriculture and biodiversity-ecosystem services: challenges and next steps. Basic Appl Ecol 16:189–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2015.01.005

Lovell ST, Taylor JR (2013) Supplying urban ecosystem services through multifunctional green infrastructure in the United States. Landsc Ecol 28:1447–1463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9912-y

Mack EA, Tong D, Credit K (2017) Gardening in the desert: a spatial optimization approach to locating gardens in rapidly expanding urban environments. Int J Health Geogr 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-017-0110-z

MacRae R, Gallant E, Patel S et al (2010) Could Toronto provide 10% of its fresh vegetable requirements from within its own boundaries? Matching consumption requirements with growing spaces. J Agric Food Syst Community Dev 1:105–127. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2010.012.008

Mariola MJ (2008) The local industrial complex? Questioning the link between local foods and energy use. Agric Hum Values 25:193–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9115-3

Martellozzo F, Landry JS, Plouffe D et al (2014) Urban agriculture: a global analysis of the space constraint to meet urban vegetable demand. Environ Res Lett 9. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/6/064025

Matthys B, Vounatsou P, Raso G et al (2006) Urban farming and malaria risk factors in a medium-sized town in Côte d’Ivoire. Am J Trop Med Hyg 75:1223–1231

McClintock N (2014) Radical, reformist, and garden-variety neoliberal: coming to terms with urban agriculture’s contradictions. Local Environ 19:147–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2012.752797

McClintock N, Cooper J, Khandeshi S (2013) Assessing the potential contribution of vacant land to urban vegetable production and consumption in Oakland, California. Landsc Urban Plan 111:46–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.12.009

McDougall R, Kristiansen P, Rader R (2018) Small-scale urban agriculture results in high yields but requires judicious management of inputs to achieve sustainability. Proc Natl Acad Sci 116:129–134. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1809707115

Ministerio de Agricultura (2002) VII National Meeting of urban agriculture and XV National Encounter of Organopónicos and intensive orchards - central report. Grupo Nacional de Agricultura Urbana. Ministerio de Agricultura, Havana

Mok HF, Williamson VG, Grove JR et al (2014) Strawberry fields forever? Urban agriculture in developed countries: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 34:21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-013-0156-7

Morland K, Wing S, Diez Roux A, Poole C (2002) Neighborhood characteristics associated with the location of food stores and food service places. Am J Prev Med 22:23–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(01)00403-2

Mougeot LJA (2005) Agropolis: the social, political, and environmental dimensions of urban agriculture. Earthscan, International Development Research Centre, London

Newbold T, Hudson LN, Hill SLL et al (2015) Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520:45–50. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14324

Ng M, Fleming T, Robinson M et al (2014) Global, regional and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults 1980–2013: a systematic analysis. Lancet 384:766–781. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60460-8.Global

Oberndorfer E, Lundholm J, Bass B et al (2007) Green roofs as urban ecosystems: ecological structures, functions, and services. Bioscience 57:823–833. https://doi.org/10.1641/B571005

Opitz I, Berges R, Piorr A, Krikser T (2016) Contributing to food security in urban areas: differences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the global north. Agric Hum Values 33:341–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9610-2

Pearson LJ, Pearson L, Pearson CJ (2010) Sustainable urban agriculture: stocktake and opportunities. Int J Agric Sustain 8:7–19. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2009.0468

Poe MR, McLain RJ, Emery M, Hurley PT (2013) Urban forest justice and the rights to wild foods, medicines, and materials in the city. Hum Ecol 41:409–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-013-9572-1

Pourias J, Duchemin E, Aubry C (2015) Products from urban collective gardens: food for thought or for consumption? J Agric Food Syst Community Dev 5:175–199. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2015.052.005

Proksch G (2017) Creating urban agricultural systems – an integrated approach to design. Taylor & Francis, New York City

Sage C (2013) The interconnected challenges for food security from a food regimes perspective: energy, climate and malconsumption. J Rural Stud 29:71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.02.005

Saha M, Eckelman MJ (2017) Growing fresh fruits and vegetables in an urban landscape: a geospatial assessment of ground level and rooftop urban agriculture potential in Boston, USA. Landsc Urban Plan 165:130–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.04.015

Sánchez-Bayo F, Wyckhuys KAG (2019) Worldwide decline of the entomofauna: a review of its drivers. Biol Conserv 232:8–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.01.020

Siegner A, Sowerwine J, Acey C (2018) Does urban agriculture improve food security? Examining the nexus of food access and distribution of urban produced foods in the United States: a systematic review. Sustainability 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10092988

Smith V, Harrington J (2014) Community food production as food security: resource and economic valuation in Madison, Wisconsin (USA). J Agric Food Syst Community Dev 4:61–80. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2014.042.006

Statistics Canada (2016) Census Program. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/index-eng.cfm . Accessed 29 May 2019

Taylor JR, Lovell ST (2012) Mapping public and private spaces of urban agriculture in Chicago through the analysis of high-resolution aerial images in Google Earth. Landsc Urban Plan 108:57–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.08.001

Thaman RR (1995) Urban food gardening in the Pacific Islands: a basis for food security in rapidly urbanising small-island states. Habitat Int 19:209–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-3975(94)00067-C

The Royal Society (2009) Reaping the benefits: science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture. The Royal Society, London

Thomson A, Metz M (1998) Implications of economic policy for food security: a training manual. FAO, Rome

Tomlinson I (2013) Doubling food production to feed the 9 billion: a critical perspective on a key discourse of food security in the UK. J Rural Stud 29:81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.09.001

Turner B (2011) Embodied connections: sustainability, food systems and community gardens. Local Environ 16:509–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2011.569537

Twiss J, Dickinson J, Duma S et al (2003) Community gardens: lessons learned from California Healthy Cities and Communities. Am J Public Health 93:1435–1438. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080775

Tzoulas K, Korpela K, Venn S et al (2007) Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using green infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc Urban Plan 81:167–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.001

UN (2019) Goal 2: Zero Hunger. Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/hunger/ . Accessed 24 Sep 2019

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2018) Urbanization prospects: the 2018 revision. United Nations, New York City

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2019) World population prospects 2019. United Nations, Rome

UNDP (1996) Urban agriculture: food, jobs, and sustainable cities. United Nations Development Programme, New York City

United States Census Bureau (2018) QuickFacts. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/ . Accessed 29 May 2019

United States Department of Agriculture (2017) Food access research atlas - documentation. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-access-research-atlas/documentation/ . Accessed 13 Jun 2019

van der Ploeg JD (2010) The food crisis, industrialized farming and the imperial regime. J Agrar Chang 10:98–106

Vermeulen SJ, Campbell B, Ingram JS (2012) Climate change and food systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 37:195–222. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-020411-130608

Vitiello D, Nairn M (2009) Community gardening in Philadelphia: 2008 harvest report. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Vitiello D, Nairn M, Grisso JA, Swistak N (2010) Community gardening in Camden, NJ harvest report: summer 2009. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

Wakefield S, Yeudall F, Taron C et al (2007) Growing urban health: community gardening in South-East Toronto. Health Promot Int 22:92–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dam001

Wholesome Wave (2019) Georgia fresh for less. https://www.wholesomewavegeorgia.org/georgia-fresh-for-less . Accessed 30 Jul 2019

Wilhelm JA, Smith RG (2018) Ecosystem services and land sparing potential of urban and peri-urban agriculture: a review. Renew Agric Food Syst 33:481–494. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742170517000205

Witzling L, Wander M, Phillips E (2011) Testing and educating on urban soil lead: a case of Chicago community gardens. J Agric Food Syst Community Dev 1:167–185. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2010.012.015

Woodhouse P (2010) Beyond industrial agriculture? Some questions about farm size, productivity and sustainability. J Agrar Chang 10:437–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2010.00278.x

Wrigley N (2002) “Food deserts” in British cities: policy, context, and research priorities. Urban Stud 39:2029–2040

Zenk SN, Odoms-Young AM, Dallas C et al (2011) “You have to hunt for the fruits, the vegetables”: environmental barriers and adaptive strategies to acquire food in a low-income African American neighborhood. Health Educ Behav 38:282–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198110372877

Zezza A, Tasciotti L (2010) Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security: empirical evidence from a sample of developing countries. Food Policy 35:265–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.04.007

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Chemistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Nicole Josiane Kennard

School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Robert Hugh Bamford

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole Josiane Kennard .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

European School of Sustainability Science and Research, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany

Walter Leal Filho

Center for Neuroscience and Cell Biology, Institute for Interdisciplinary Research, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Anabela Marisa Azul

Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, The University of Passo Fundo, Passo Fundo, Brazil

Luciana Brandli

Istinye University, Istanbul, Turkey

Pinar Gökçin Özuyar

International Centre for Thriving, University of Chester, Chester, UK

Section Editor information

African Forest Forum, C/o World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Nairobi, Kenya

Vincent Onguso Oeba

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Kennard, N.J., Bamford, R.H. (2020). Urban Agriculture: Opportunities and Challenges for Sustainable Development. In: Leal Filho, W., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Özuyar, P.G., Wall, T. (eds) Zero Hunger. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95675-6_102

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95675-6_102

Published : 04 June 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-95674-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-95675-6

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science Reference Module Physical and Materials Science Reference Module Earth and Environmental Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Consumers' perception of urban farming—an exploratory study.

• 1 Morrison School of Agribusiness, W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States
• 2 School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment, Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States
• 3 School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States

Urban agriculture offers the opportunity to provide fresh, local food to urban communities. However, urban agriculture can only be successfully embedded in urban areas if consumers perceive urban farming positively and accept urban farms in their community. Success of urban agriculture is rooted in positive perception of those living close by, and the perception strongly affects acceptance of farming within individuals' direct proximity. This research investigates perception and acceptance of urban agriculture through a qualitative, exploratory field study with N = 19 residents from a major metropolitan area in the southwest U.S. Specifically, in this exploratory research we implement the method of concept mapping testing its use in the field of Agroecology and Ecosystem Services. In the concept mapping procedure, respondents are free to write down all the associations that come to mind when presented with a stimulus, such as, “urban farming.” When applying concept mapping, participants are asked to recall associations and then directly link them to each other displaying their knowledge structure, i.e., perception. Data were analyzed using content analysis and semantic network analysis. Consumers' perception of urban farming is related to the following categories: environment, society, economy, and food and attributes. The number of positive associations is much higher than the number of negative associations signaling that consumers would be likely to accept farming close to where they live. Furthermore, our findings show that individuals' perceptions can differ greatly in terms of what they associate with urban farming and how they evaluate it. While some only think of a few things, others have well-developed knowledge structures. Overall, investigating consumers' perception helps designing strategies for the successful adoption of urban farming.

Introduction

At present, the number of people living in urban areas worldwide is over three billion, or 55% of the world population, and it is projected that 68% of the world's population will be living in urban areas by 2050 ( United Nations, 2018 ). In the United States alone, 82% of the population currently lives in urban areas ( World Bank, 2016 ). The continued expansion of cities nationwide places a heavy toll on the demand for resources, such as sustainable infrastructure and affordable food retail options, to meet the basic needs of households living within city limits. Within the food sector, the accelerating rate of migration into cities coupled with a growing population imposes the challenge of producing sufficient quantities of food ( Satterthwaite et al., 2010 ). This challenge needs to be addressed to ensure everyone has access to high-quality, nutrient-dense food. Simultaneously, it raises the question of how to provide satisfactory nourishment while consumers are increasingly asking for fresh and local foods ( Grebitus et al., 2017 ).

With urbanization on the rise, one solution to this challenge is the development and expansion of urban agriculture 1 . Figure 1 below shows the replacement of agricultural areas (yellow) by urban areas (red) in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. Urban agriculture is a growing sector within the farming industry that aims to increase overall food production in urban and peri-urban areas through the conversion of available land into agricultural farms. As reported in Smith et al. (2017) , there are 67,032 vacant parcels (19,592 hectares) potentially suitable for urban agriculture in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area.

Figure 1 . Land use map showing the replacement of agricultural areas (yellow) by urban areas (red). Data from the 2006 and 2016 USGS National Land Cover Dataset.

Cities across the United States have already begun to integrate food production, such as commercial urban farms and private or community gardens, into communities ( Hughes and Boys, 2015 ; Printezis and Grebitus, 2018 ). To predict whether urban farming will be successful and to influence its longevity, it is important to understand consumer perception ( Grebitus and Bruhn, 2008 ). Hence, the objective of this research is to investigate how consumers perceive urban farming and to evaluate whether they would accept this form of commercial agriculture close to their residence.

Food produced in urban and peri-urban communities has various implications. For example, for small- to mid-size farmers, the profitability of urban farmers can be dependent on producing local foods that can be (exclusively) sold through direct channels, such as farmers markets. Urban agriculture also has an effect on societal health. Direct access to local produce through direct-to-consumer marketing channels affects the dietary quality and diversity of food choices of urban consumers. Unlike large agricultural production facilities that occupy 75% of the land in the U.S. and predominantly grow commodity crops used for animal feed, biofuels, and industrial inputs ( DeHaan, 2015 ), outputs from urban agricultural production are largely specialty crops, which require comparatively minimal processing before consumption. Specialty crops, which include most fruits, vegetables, and tree nuts, are rich in nutrients, vitamins, and minerals and are constituents of an optimal diet ( WHO, 2018 ). In this way, both the increased consumption of fruits and vegetables along with the diversity of produce consumed is closely linked with positive human health outcomes and serves as a measure of societal health. Finally, urban agriculture affects environmental quality through changes in urban-vegetation-atmosphere interactions, e.g., the reduction in food miles and the mitigation effects of urban heat islands, as a result of urban agriculture practices. Overall, urban agriculture has the potential to provide a number of benefits, for instance, improving sustainability, and local ecology ( Wakefield et al., 2007 ), assisting with food security ( Dimitri et al., 2016 ; Freedman et al., 2016 ; Sadler, 2016 ), and contributing to healthy dietary patterns ( Zezza and Tasciotti, 2010 ; Warren et al., 2015 ).

Alternatively, urban agriculture may produce negative externalities ( Brown and Jameton, 2000 ; Wortman and Lovell, 2013 ). For example, a farmer growing food in a city might encounter pushback by the people living next to the farm who might be bothered by dirt and noise from machinery, odors from organic fertilizers, or they might be afraid that pesticides and fertilizers are polluting the air they breathe and the water they drink. A recent study by Wielemaker et al. (2019) showed urban farmers apply fertilizers in excess of crop needs by 450–600%, potentially leading to negative public perceptions. At the same time, urban farms might be preferred due to access to fresh, local, nutrient-dense food which enhance positive perceptions. This suggests that consumers' perception and acceptance of urban farms is vital to ensure that urban agriculture can be successful ( Grebitus et al., 2017 ).

Previous empirical research on urban agriculture has focused on investigating the relationship between urban agriculture and nutrition (variety, food security, and nutrition status), with a particular emphasis on its role in developing countries [see Warren et al. (2015) for a broad review of previous studies]. Mougeot (2005) compiles case studies of development strategies used by developing countries and pays specific attention to the potential that urban agriculture has in meeting development goals (e.g., increased food availability, decreased poverty, increased health status) in each respective country. Studies focused on developed countries highlight the social context of urban agriculture. They assess how community gardens affect communities ( Armstrong, 2000 ; Wakefield et al., 2007 ; Firth et al., 2011 ), analyze what urban farmers need when only limited resources are available ( Surls et al., 2015 ), and examine success factors of urban agriculture, such as positive consumer attitudes and increased knowledge regarding local food production ( Grebitus et al., 2017 ).

Recently, Grebitus et al. (2017) found in a quantitative online consumer survey that consumers perceive urban agriculture positively based on food quality characteristics, such as food safety and health. More generally, related to perception, they find the three sustainability pillars (economy, society, and environment) are important with regards to consumer perception. Nevertheless, the authors state that consumers' perception is sometimes conflicting. For example, some consumers perceive produce from urban farms as less expensive while others perceive it as more expensive. Our research builds on the study by Grebitus et al. (2017) by investigating the in-depth perception of urban farming using qualitative, exploratory methods in a face-to-face study. While Grebitus et al. (2017) used a word association test, we employ the method of concept mapping. Concept maps can uncover cognitive structures related to urban farming and show differences between individuals regarding their knowledge structures.

The implications of our findings will offer several insights to those charged with designing and implementing food and agricultural policy. Such policies have the potential to affect new and emerging trends in urban communities, stimulate the growth of direct-to-consumer marketing channels where small- to mid-size farmers sell their products and address the effects of urban agriculture on the environment. Our results will provide insight into how urban farming is perceived by individuals to ensure that incorporating farms in urban areas is accepted by those living there. For example, if our analysis shows that consumers are apprehensive and afraid, e.g., of pesticides or fertilizer run-off, targeted communication can be used to alleviate such tensions.

In the following section, the methodological background is described covering concept mapping, counting, and content analysis. Section three presents the results and section four concludes.

Materials and Methods

Concept mapping.

In consumer behavior research, perception is defined as subjective and selective information processing ( Kroeber-Riel et al., 2009 ). Whether something is positively or negatively perceived by consumers is determined by cognitive structures, i.e., semantic networks, which capture a part of the knowledge (associations/concepts) in memory ( Martin, 1985 ; Joiner, 1998 ). A semantic network is composed of nodes, which represent concepts and units of information, and links, connecting the concepts, which represent the type and the strength of the association between the concepts ( Cowley and Mitchell, 2003 ). To investigate perception toward urban farming we aim to provide insight into consumers' individual cognitive structures, i.e., semantic networks ( Kanwar et al., 1981 ; Jonassen et al., 1993 ).

Associative elicitation techniques are appropriate to analyze semantic networks ( Bonato, 1990 ). By presenting stimuli, spontaneous reactions and unconscious thoughts are evoked and enable us to analyze individual cognitive structures ( Grebitus and Bruhn, 2008 ). A great variety of associative elicitation techniques exists, ranging from the most qualitative techniques like word association technique ( Roininen et al., 2006 ; Ares et al., 2008 ) to more structured techniques such as repertory grid ( Sampson, 1972 ; Russell and Cox, 2004 ) or laddering ( Grunert and Bech-Larsen, 2005 ).

For this study, the qualitative graphing procedure concept mapping was chosen. Concept mapping is a method that produces a schematic representation of the relationships of stored units of information, which are activated by the stimulus ( Zsambok, 1993 ). The interviewees are asked to recall freely their associations concerning a certain stimulus ( Olson and Muderrisoglu, 1979 ). Additionally, they are asked to directly link the associations to each other, which allows the visualization of the semantic networks ( Bonato, 1990 ). The open setting of tasks optimizes the variety of associations of the interviewees ( Joiner, 1998 ). Concept map diagrams are two-dimensional and show relationships between units of information concerning a certain theme. The concepts are understood as terms, i.e., associations, which come to mind regarding the stimulus ( Jonassen et al., 1993 ).

Concept mapping is supported by semantic network theory and can be explained using the spreading activation network model ( Rye and Rubba, 1998 ). Retrieving stored knowledge can be explained by the spreading activation ( Collins and Loftus, 1975 ; Anderson, 1983a , b ). When consumers perceive/associate something with a stimulus, information-processing takes place and cognitive structures are activated for interpretation, assessment, and decision-making. The stored knowledge is retrieved by spreading activation from associations ( Anderson, 1983b ). In this context, existing networks are active cognitive units that can, once activated, influence behavior directly ( Olson, 1978 ). How much and what information is integrated into the information-processing depends on the construction of the semantic network ( Cowley and Mitchell, 2003 ).

The spread of activation constantly expands through the links to all connected nodes (associations) in the network, starting with the first activated concept. At first, it expands to all the nodes directly linked to the first node, and then to all the nodes linked to each of those nodes. This way, the activation is spreading through all nodes of the network, even through those nodes that are only indirectly associated with the “stimulus node” ( Collins and Loftus, 1975 ). The stronger the link between two nodes, the easier and faster the activation passes to the connected nodes ( Cowley and Mitchell, 2003 ). How far the activation spreads also depends on the distance from the stimulus node. Concepts that are closely related and directly linked will be activated faster and with higher intensity ( Henderson et al., 1998 ). See Figure 2 for an illustration of nodes and links in a semantic network.

Figure 2 . Illustrative figure of a semantic network.

The concept mapping technique elicits respondents to recall knowledge from long-term memory and to write down what they know, which stimulates the spread of activation in memory ( Rye and Rubba, 1998 ). The more linkages a semantic network contains, the higher is the dimensionality and complexity of cognitive structures. The higher the dimensionality of the cognitive structures, the larger the number of concepts that can be activated and the more differentiated and complex the networks ( Kanwar et al., 1981 ). Depending on personal relevance and involvement, consumers' semantic networks are more or less extensively structured ( Peter and Olson, 2008 ).

Concept Mapping Application to Urban Agriculture

To conduct the concept mapping procedure, we adapted the instructions used by Grebitus (2008) . Respondents received an instructions page. At the top of the page, the respondents read the following passage:

Researchers believe that our knowledge is stored in memory. The knowledge we have can be described through central concepts and the relationship between them. These concepts depict our belief of different knowledge domains such as food or vacation. These beliefs can also be related to each other. For example, when you think of a car, you may spontaneously think of “tires”, “white”, or “traffic”. If you then think further, “gas” and “expensive” may come to mind. These can also be related to each other and thus are indirectly related with a car. People have a lot of such associations. To find out yours is one objective of this study .

Respondents were then given a blank piece of paper and started by writing the term “Urban Farming” in the center of the paper. They were then instructed to start thinking of anything that comes to mind, related to the key concept and write it down. After writing down the concepts, the interviewees had to construct the concept map by connecting all the words that they believe, in their minds, are related to each other and belong to each other (i.e., drawing links). Then, they had to add a plus or minus to associations they thought to be positive or negative.

To investigate how many associations and what kind of information is stored in memory concerning urban farming, the items were counted and aggregated ( Kanwar et al., 1981 ; Martin, 1985 ; Grebitus, 2008 ). Next, the individual associations were evaluated using qualitative content analysis following Mayring (2002) . This allowed us to make assumptions, and investigate intent and motivation regarding the topic in a formal way ( Stempel, 1981 ; Hsia, 1988 ). Content analysis is an objective and systematic way to apply quantitative measures to qualitative data ( Stempel, 1981 ; Wimmer and Dominick, 1983 ; Hsia, 1988 , p. 320).

The aim of this study is to provide meaning to the participants' associations. Hence, we classified the content according to categories. This offers a framework to assess the perception of urban farming. The associations written down by the respondents in the concept maps regarding the key stimulus, urban farming, were organized and categorized, then they were added up into frequencies ( Bonato, 1990 ; Lamnek, 1995 ). The categories are the core of the perception analysis. They are used to investigate the topic further ( Wimmer and Dominick, 1983 ). Therefore, the categories should be closely related to the research topic. They have to be practical, reliable, comprehensive (each word fits into one of the categories) and mutually exclusive (each word fits only one category) ( Stempel, 1981 ; Wimmer and Dominick, 1983 ). In this research, we used the categories provided by Grebitus et al. (2017) who used a word association test for the key concept: urban agriculture, a close proxy for the one used in our study “urban farming.” Accordingly, we used the three sustainability pillars Economy, Society, and Environment, as well as, Food and Attributes, and Others as categories to group the data for urban farming in a meaningful way.

Empirical Results

Design of the study and sample characteristics.

To investigate consumer perception of urban farming, exploratory, face-to-face interviews were conducted. The qualitative graphing procedure concept mapping was used to reveal consumers' associations regarding urban farming. In addition to concept mapping, participants filled out a survey to collect socio-demographic information. For detailed information on the data collected, refer to Table S1 in the Supplementary Material.

We collected data in Phoenix, AZ. We chose this location because the Phoenix metropolitan area is ideal for a case study as it is home to a large and growing urban population. Phoenix provides context that has many similar natural and social complexities and barriers (e.g., climate challenges, a lack of food access, rapidly growing, diverse, multi-cultural population), with a large variance in educational and economic levels of residents compared to other urban areas in the U.S. The Phoenix metropolitan area (i.e., Maricopa and Pinal Counties) is the eleventh largest metro area in the U.S. with Maricopa County identified as the fastest-growing county in the U.S. ( U.S. Census Bureau, 2019 ). This rapid population growth demonstrates an important need for sustainable urban farming practices, given the benefits of food security, economic stability, and environmental conservation. Phoenix has a climate where food can be grown all year round, with multiple growing seasons. The extended growing season allows harvest year-round and may affect consumer purchasing patterns and related dietary quality differently than when food is grown only during certain seasons. Meanwhile, Phoenix experiences unique climatic extremes: from being an urban heat island, experiencing short and long-term drought, while simultaneously dealing with seasonal monsoons that can bring rapid and devastating flooding. Hence, urban farming might have different environmental impacts compared to cities where this is not the case. Also, within urban planning and development, Phoenix has begun to recognize urban agriculture as an attractive fixture in revitalizing communities, especially since urban expansion has replaced nearby agriculture at a large rate ( Shrestha et al., 2012 ). Also, Phoenix has vacant land available that can potentially be used for urban farming ( Aragon et al., 2019 ).

We interviewed a total of 19 participants in the summer of 2019 at two locations. A total of 14 participants were interviewed at a large public farmers' market. Another five participants were interviewed at a second location near an open green space 2 . All interviews were carried out by one interviewer. The sample is a convenience sample. Participants were reimbursed for their time with $10 each.

In terms of sample characteristics, 47% of the sample were female, the average age was 38 years old. Household size was on average three persons in the household, with 26% having children in the household. 21% were graduate students and 21% were undergraduate students. In terms of the level of education, 26% had some college education, 32% a Bachelor's degree, and 42% a graduate degree.

Perception of Urban Farming: Results From Content Analysis

This paper aims to analyze consumers' perception of urban farming. This objective is based on the notion that for urban farming to be more fully and successfully integrated into urban and peri-urban communities, consumers need to perceive it positively.

Table 1 depicts the descriptive findings for the counting of the concepts of the two groups and the total over both samples. The results show a total of 333 associations were written down when considering all participants. The mean is 17.5 concepts with a standard deviation of 13.5. The lowest number of concepts associated with urban farming is eight, the highest 68. The farmers' market sample had a higher mean (18.4) than the second location ( M = 15). The standard deviation, however, was considerably smaller at the second location ( SD = 5.1) compared to the farmers' market sample ( SD = 15.5).

Table 1 . Descriptive statistics for the associated concepts.

Among the 333 concepts were single terms (e.g., community, convenience, microclimate) and whole phrases [e.g., “Creates ‘villages' (people work together)”]. Following Grebitus et al. (2017) , the concepts were grouped into five categories: Economy, Society, Environment, Food and Attributes, and Other shown in Table 2 . Note, Grebitus et al. (2017) had a sixth category, Point of Sale, but this did not apply to our data. Findings show that participants primarily think of environment-related associations (36%) followed by specific foods and attributes associated with urban farming (25%), and society (20%). The category economy ranks fourth with 11%.

Table 2 . Content categories.

Table 3 shows the associations that were organized in the categories. To reduce the large number of associations, concepts were merged based on similarity using content analysis. For example, “community,” “community centered,” and “community experience” were aggregated up to “community” (see the complete list of associations in Appendix A included in the Supplementary Material). The strongest category, “environment” is dominated by associations related to production (33% of category associations) and conservation (14% of category associations), as well as agriculture (8% of category associations) and waste (8% of category associations). “Sustainability,” “environment,” “beautification,” and “pollution” are also included in this category. The category “food and attributes,” is dominated by associations related to health (14% of category associations) and fresh (11% of category associations), as well as convenience (10% of category associations) and food security (10% of category associations). “Local,” “plant,” and “produce” are also mentioned, as well as, “location” and “organic.” The category “society” is dominated by associations related to community building (39% of category associations), education (27% of category associations), family (9% of category associations) and municipality (8%). “Advocacy,” “research,” “migration trends,” and “youth” also fit this category. The category “economy” is dominated by associations related to cost (35% of category associations) and labor (16% of category associations), as well as economics (14% of category associations) and externalities (14% of category associations). “Policy,” “benefits,” and “vocation” are the remaining associations in this category. The category “other” entails associations, such as “positive feelings” and “gratitude,” that did not fit in the other established categories. Out of all associations, community and sustainability are among those associated most with urban farms. The result that these two concepts are the most prevalent among our responses suggests the importance of environmentally sustainable farms in urban communities.

Table 3 . Results of concept mapping and content analysis.

Overall, findings show that consumers mainly associate production and environmentally related concepts with urban farming. Many food attribute associations can be considered as generally positive, such as “fresh,” “healthy,” “convenient,” “organic,” and “local.” Participants also associate sustainability and conservation with urban farming. They think of social aspects, such as “flourishing neighborhood,” “friend development,” and “meet other gardeners,” when asked about urban farming. Furthermore, urban farming evokes thoughts of “the economy,” “saving money,” “reducing grocery cost,” and “cost effectiveness.” In this regard, we find some differing opinions with some participants believing that they can save money while others consider urban farming is expensive. This is an indicator that urban farming most likely will not be perceived positively by everyone. Some citizens will be in favor of urban farming and others not. This could be resolved using educational measures given that previous studies have shown that individuals do not feel very knowledgeable with regards to urban agriculture ( Grebitus et al., 2017 ).

To get a better understanding of consumer acceptance of urban farming and whether they perceive urban farming as predominantly positive or negative, they were asked to indicate with a plus (+) those associations they think are positive, and with a minus (–) those they consider to be negative. Table 4 summarizes the number of positive and negative evaluations that were given. Appendix A provides a complete list of all associations including the evaluations. As shown in Table 4 , urban farming is mainly perceived as positive. Seventy-three percent (73%) of all associations are evaluated positively while only 15% are evaluated as negative. Less than two percent (1.5%) of the associations fall in the category where individuals felt it could go either way. Except for ID 7, all participants that evaluated their associations have a larger share of positively perceived characteristics. ID 7 has 20% positive and 80% negative associations. Only a small share of associations was left unevaluated. Examples of positive associations are “community,” “environment,” “fresh,” “local,” “green,” “farmer's market,” “healthy,” “organic,” and “sustainability.” Meanwhile, “cost,” “expensive,” “pollution,” “smell,” “possible bacteria,” “disease,” and “pesticides” are examples of negative associations.

Table 4 . Evaluation of Urban farming.

Perception of Urban Farming: Results From Semantic Network Analysis

After considering what associations are stored in memory regarding urban farming, this section aims to give insight into how the information is stored and what relationships exist between the stated concepts described in the section Perception of urban farming: Results from content analysis. In this regard, figures 3 through 7 show five different concept maps as examples of semantic networks from five different participants, illustrated by the use of the software UCInet ( Borgatti et al., 2002 ). The concept maps differ in shape and complexity.

Figure 3 is a star-shaped semantic network ( Wasserman and Faust, 1994 ). Based on the spreading activation network theory, this pattern means that when “urban farming” is activated, i.e., the individual thinks about it all related associations will be activated and included in thoughts, evaluations and decision making. In this case, sustainability, jobs, information, livestock, possible pesticides, aesthetic and food. These associations can then lead to further associations if the activation is strong enough. For example, possible pesticides can lead to thoughts about runoff in public areas.

Figure 3 . Example of an individual network 1 (location 1, ID 10).

Figure 4 depicts a graph that contains three cycles but is also mainly in a star-shaped composition ( Wasserman and Faust, 1994 ). Here, urban farming is seen as family-oriented, providing fresh food with less pollution and less space, e.g., when using hydroponics.

Figure 4 . Example of an individual network 2 (location 2, ID 19).

Figure 5 depicts a graph in a tree-shaped composition ( Wasserman and Faust, 1994 ). In this case, more activation is needed to reach associations that are further away from the key stimulus. For example, self-sufficient adults might not be activated, and hence not be included in decisions unless the activation is strong. That said this individual has a semantic network that is more developed in terms of linking associations further. For example, the individual thinks that urban farming is a community experience that can lead to youth interaction, which then should ultimately lead to self-sufficient adults.

Figure 5 . Example of an individual network 3 (location 2, ID 16).

Figure 6 displays a more complex semantic network as displayed by the larger number of associations that are more connected to each other. This individual thinks urban farming can save money, land, and resources in general. The individual also associates organic and easy access, i.e., convenience with urban farming. Community is linked to urban farming and then has links to togetherness and beneficial. Togetherness, in turn, is linked to family and neighbors which are both connected to understanding. This suggests that urban farming could play a role in the communication of people living together, the family and the neighbors.

Figure 6 . Example of an individual network 4 (location 2, ID 17).

Figure 7 displays the most complex semantic network of the participants with over 60 associations. In this case, a lot of activation would be needed so that the individual would access all stored information regarding urban farming. For example, between intermittent fasting and urban farming, six other associations need to be activated and processed before intermittent fasting is accessed. This individual points out less favorable associations, such as “neighbor complaints,” which are related to “smell” and “noise.” Overall, this concept map is highly differentiated and complex.

Figure 7 . Example of an individual network 5 (location 1, ID 12).

These examples are by no means exhaustive. There is a wide variety of different network structures among the 19 individuals. However, there are few visual differences observed between the concept maps of the two groups in terms of shapes and structures. Each group varies in complexity. Some participants have complex cognitive structures using a great number of associations, while others hold simple cognitive structures, i.e., semantic networks, which can be explained by the use of key information. In this case, urban farming is related to several key associations, so that the activation of a lower amount of stored information is sufficient for its perception. The rather simple network structures can also result from low familiarity with urban farming or a potential lack of interest by some individuals.

Urban agriculture offers a promising opportunity to provide direct access to fresh produce close to urban residents. This may enhance dietary quality and food diversity while addressing consumers' preference for local food. However, urban agriculture will only be successful if it is accepted and perceived positively by those living in close proximity. Therefore, one must account for consumer perception. Hence, our research provides an exploratory analysis of consumer perception regarding urban farming catering to the success of urban agriculture.

To better evaluate consumers' perception, we employ the method of concept mapping in an exploratory and qualitative study of 19 participants from the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. This analysis provided 333 associations with urban farming. Using content analysis, five categories—Environment, Food and Attributes, Society, Economy and Other—were distinguished to group the concepts/associations in a meaningful way. Participants offered a great variety of perceptions, such as organic, local, community, family, agriculture, and sustainability. One of the overarching themes that emerged from our study was the myriad positive perceptions, e.g., fresh, local, and green. Though negative associations exist, e.g., expensive, possible disease, and pollution, these were fewer in comparison. From a marketing standpoint, highlighting those positive aspects of urban agriculture could incite a more favorable perception and willingness to accept urban agriculture. This could also present opportunities for cities to offer incentives to households who do perceive urban farming negatively. The negative associations also deserve further research as they have the potential to deter the further development of urban agriculture.

In terms of individual semantic networks concerning urban farming, we found that there are vast differences regarding how many associations individuals hold and how connected the associations are. Generally, the more associations and the more links in a network the greater the expertise and involvement. Investigating this more deeply could be used to infer educational strategies.

The use of concept mapping offers detailed insight into participants' semantic networks. It serves as an important, theoretically motivated tool to demonstrate what individuals think and how different concepts are related to each other. Individuals' evaluations of positive and negative associations enables the researcher to determine if the researched area (e.g., urban farming) is perceived favorably or not. That said, knowledge structures are complex, and, with increasing sample sizes, analysis on topics that induce many associations – both positive and negative – can quickly become computationally intensive.

This research is not without limitations. While our findings are encouraging toward acceptance of farming in the city, it should be kept in mind that this is an exploratory study. The present study analyzes stored information, i.e., semantic networks regarding urban farming using qualitative methods for a small sample size from only two study locations, so the results might be dependent on the study area. A more robust approach would be sampling from different regions in the U.S. Future research should include a larger number of participants and expand to more study sites. In doing so, recommendations to stakeholders can be made for the successful integration of sustainable urban agriculture. Garnering an understanding of regional perceptions is of importance, as minimizing the length of the supply chain is associated with a number of benefits, especially in resource-limited environments like the Southwest, and improved well-being at the individual level. Future research could examine the multi-scalar dynamics of urban agriculture, shedding light on market opportunities for agricultural producers and regulators, while simultaneously identifying those factors that could lead to market rejection, e.g., consumer reactance, or practices that may reduce the long-term environmental sustainability of the urban farm. Ultimately, there is a need for interdisciplinary research, for instance, between social scientists, economists, and agroecologists to provide insight into different perspectives that underscore the future success and adoption of urban agriculture.

Data Availability Statement

All datasets generated for this study are included in the article/ Supplementary Material .

Ethics Statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Arizona State University IRB, Study Number STUDY00010463. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author Contributions

CG contributed to conception and design of the study, organized the database, performed the analysis, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. LC served as secondary writer of the manuscript and contributed to study design. LC and RM contributed to initial discussions of methods and the review of the concept categorization. RM reviewed and revised the draft for important intellectual content and created Figure 1 . AM contributed to conception and design of the study. All authors contributed to manuscript revision, read, and approved the submitted version.

This work was supported by EASM-3: Collaborative Research: Physics-Based Predictive Modeling for Integrated Agricultural and Urban Applications, USDA-NIFA (Grant Number: 2015-67003-23508), NSF-MPS-DMS (Award Number: 1419593), and by the Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems, Arizona State University.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00079/full#supplementary-material

1. ^ The FAO defines urban agriculture as “a dynamic concept that comprises a variety of livelihood systems ranging from subsistence production and processing at the household level to more commercialized agriculture. It takes place in different locations and under varying socioeconomic conditions and political regimes” ( FAO, 2007 , p. 5).

2. ^ Note the relatively small sample size in this study. While this would be a drawback for a quantitative study targeting to be representative, our objective is to provide an exploratory study on the perception of urban farming. The aim is not to uncover the perception of the whole population. In that case, a method such as concept mapping would not be well-suited, rather one would use free elicitation technique. That said, free elicitation technique does not allow for a depiction of cognitive structures. This could be tackled by future research. In this research, we set out to conduct qualitative research. The sample size for qualitative studies often ranges from 5 to 50 participants, as pointed out by Dworkin (2012) : “An extremely large number of articles, book chapters, and books recommend guidance and suggest anywhere from 5 to 50 participants as adequate.” Participant numbers are similarly small, for example in studies by Sonneville et al. (2009) ; Lachal et al. (2012) ; Bennett et al. (2013) ; Van Gilder and Abdi (2014) ; Takahashi et al. (2016) ; Hunold et al. (2017) , and Mitter et al. (2019) ranging from 12 to 21.

Anderson, J. R. (1983a). Retrieval of information from long-term memory. Science 220, 25–30. doi: 10.1126/science.6828877

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Anderson, J. R. (1983b). A spreading activation theory of memory. J. Verb. Learn. Verb. Behav. 22, 261–295. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90201-3

Aragon, N. U., Stuhlmacher, M., Smith, J. P., Clinton, N., and Georgescu, M. (2019). Urban agriculture's bounty: contributions to phoenix's sustainability goals. Environ. Res. Lett. 14:105001. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ab428f

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ares, G., Gámbaro, A., and Giménez, A. (2008). Understanding consumers' perception of conventional and functional yoghurts using word association and hard laddering. Food Qual. Prefer . 19, 636–643. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.05.005

Armstrong, D. (2000). A survey of community gardens in upstate New York: implications for health promotion and community development. Health Place 6, 319–327. doi: 10.1016/S1353-8292(00)00013-7

Bennett, J., Greene, G., and Schwartz-Barcott, D. (2013). Perceptions of emotional eating behavior. A qualitative study of college students. Appetite 60, 187–192. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2012.09.023

Bonato, M. (1990). Wissensstrukturierung mittels struktur-lege-techniken, eine graphentheoretische analyse von wissensnetzen, europäische hochschulschriften. Psychologie 6:297.

Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., and Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis . Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.

Brown, K. H., and Jameton, A. L. (2000). Public health implications of urban agriculture. J. Public Health Policy 21, 20–39. doi: 10.2307/3343472

Collins, A. M., and Loftus, E. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychol. Rev . 82, 407–428. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.82.6.407

Cowley, E., and Mitchell, A. (2003). The moderating effect of product knowledge on the learning and organization of product information. J. Consum. Res . 30, 443–454. doi: 10.1086/378620

DeHaan, L. R. (2015). “Perennial crops are a key to sustainably productive agriculture,” in Food Security: Production and Sustainability . Institute on Science for Global Policy, ISGP Academic Partnership with Eckerd College. Available online at: https://www.scienceforglobalpolicy.org (accessed May, 2020).

Google Scholar

Dimitri, C., Oberholtzer, L., and Pressman, A. (2016). Urban agriculture: connecting producers with consumers. Br. Food J. 118, 603–617. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-06-2015-0200

Dworkin, S. L. (2012). Sample size policy for qualitative studies using in-depth interviews. Arch. Sex. Behav. 41, 1319–1320. doi: 10.1007/s10508-012-0016-6

FAO (2007). Profitability and Sustainability of Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture . Agricultural Management, Marketing and Finance Occasional Paper 19.

Firth, C., Maye, D., and Pearson, D. (2011). Developing “community” in community gardens. Local Environ. 16, 555–568. doi: 10.1080/13549839.2011.586025

Freedman, D. A., Vaudrin, N., Schneider, C., Trapl, E., Ohri-Vachaspati, P., and Taggart, M‘. (2016). Systematic review of factors influencing farmers' market use overall and among low-income populations. J. Acad. Nutr. Dietetics 116, 1136–1155. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2016.02.010

Grebitus, C. (2008): Food Quality from the Consumer's Perspective - An Empirical Analysis of Perceived Pork Quality . Göttingen: Cuvillier Publisher.

Grebitus, C., and Bruhn, M. (2008). Analysing semantic networks of pork quality by means of concept mapping. Food Qual. Prefer. 19, 86–96. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2007.07.007

Grebitus, C., Printezis, I., and Printezis, A. (2017). Relationship between consumer behavior and success of urban agriculture. Ecol. Econ. 136, 189–200. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.02.010

Grunert, K. G., and Bech-Larsen, T. (2005). Explaining choice option attractiveness by beliefs elicited by the laddering method. J. Econ. Psychol. 26, 223–241. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2004.04.002

Henderson, G. R., Iacobucci, D., and Calder, B. J. (1998). Brand diagnostics: mapping branding effects using consumer associative networks. Eur. J. Operat . Res. 111, 306–327. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00151-9

Hsia, H. J. (1988). “Mass communications research methods: a step-by-step approach,” in Communication Textbook Series. Mass Communication , eds J. Bryant and A. M. Rubin (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.).

Hughes, D.W., and Boys, K. A. (2015). What we know and don't know about the economic development benefits of local food systems . Choices 1–6 . Available online at: http://choicesmagazine.org/choices-magazine/theme-articles/community-economics-of-local-foods/what-we-know-and-dont-know-about-the-economic-development-benefits-of-local-food-systems (accessed May, 2020).

Hunold, C., Sorunmu, Y., Lindy, R., Spatari, S., and Gurian, P. (2017). Is urban agriculture financially sustainable? An exploratory study of small-scale market farming in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. J. Agric. Food Syst. Commun. Dev. 7, 51–67. doi: 10.5304/jafscd.2017.072.012

Joiner, C. (1998). Concept mapping in marketing: a research tool for uncovering consumers' knowledge structure associations. Adv. Consum. Res. 25, 311–317.

Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., and Yacci, M. (1993). Structural Knowledge: Techniques for Representing, Conveying and Acquiring Structural Knowledge . Hillsdale, NJ: Routledge.

Kanwar, R., Olson, J. C., and Sims, L. S. (1981). Toward conceptualizing and measuring cognitive structures. Adv. Consum. Res. 8, 122–127.

Kroeber-Riel, W., Weinberg, P., and Gröppel-Klein, A. (2009). Konsumentenverhalten, 9th Edn . München: Vahlen.

Lachal, J., Speranza, M., Taïeb, O., Falissard, B., Lefèvre, H., Moro, M. R., and Revah-Levy, A. Q. (2012). Qualitative research using photo-elicitation to explore the role of food in family relationships among obese adolescents. Appetite 58, 1099–1105. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2012.02.045

Lamnek, S. (1995). Qualitative Sozialforschung. Band 2: Methoden und Techniken, 3rd Edn. Weinheim Verlag.

Martin, J. (1985). Measuring clients' cognitive competence in research on counseling. J. Couns. Dev. 63, 556–560. doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6676.1985.tb00680.x

Mayring, P. (2002). Einführung in die Qualitative Sozialforschung. Eine Anleitung zu Qualitativem Denken, 5th Edn . Weinheim: Beltz Studium.

Mitter, H., Larcher, M., Schönhart, M., Stöttinger, M., and Schmid, E. (2019). Exploring farmers' climate change perceptions and adaptation intentions: empirical evidence from Austria. Environ. Manag. 63, 804–821. doi: 10.1007/s00267-019-01158-7

Mougeot, L. J. (Ed.). (2005). Agropolis: The Social, Political, and Environmental Dimensions of Urban Agriculture . London: IDRC.

Olson, J. C. (1978). Inferential belief formation in the cue utilization process. Adv. Consum. Res . 5, 706–713.

Olson, J. C., and Muderrisoglu, A. (1979). The stability of responses obtained by free elicitation: implications for measuring attribute salience and memory structures. Adv. Consum . Res. 6, 269–275.

Peter, J. P., and Olson, J. C. (2008). Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy, 8th Edn. New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill/Irwin Series in Marketing.

Printezis, I., and Grebitus, C. (2018). Marketing channels for local food. Ecol. Econ. 152, 161–171. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.05.021

Roininen, K., Arvola, A., and Lähteenmäki, L. (2006). Exploring consumers' perceptions of local food with two different qualitative techniques: laddering and word association. Food Qual. Prefer. 17, 20–30. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.04.012

Russell, C., and Cox, D. (2004). Understanding middle-aged consumers' perception of meat using repertory grid methodology. Food Qual. Prefer. 15, 317–329. doi: 10.1016/S0950-3293(03)00073-9

Rye, J. A., and Rubba, P. A. (1998). An exploration of the concept map as an interview tool to facilitate the externalization of students' understandings about global atmospheric change. J. Res. Sci. Teach . 35, 521–546. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199805)35:5<521::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO2-R

Sadler, R. C. (2016). Strengthening the core, improving access: bringing healthy food downtown via a farmers' market move. Appl. Geogr. 67, 119–128. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.12.010

Sampson, P. (1972). Using the repertory grid test. J. Market. Res . 9, 78–81. doi: 10.1177/002224377200900117

Satterthwaite, D., McGranahan, G., and Tacoli, C. (2010). Urbanization and its implications for food and farming. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Series B Biol. Sci. 365, 2809–2820. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0136

Shrestha, M. K., York, A. M., Boone, C. G., and Zhang, S. (2012). Land fragmentation due to rapid urbanization in the phoenix metropolitan area: analyzing the spatiotemporal patterns and drivers. Appl. Geogr. 32, 522–531. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.04.004

Smith, J. P., Li, X., and Turner, B. L. (2017). Lots for greening: identification of metropolitan vacant land and its potential use for cooling and agriculture in phoenix, AZ, USA. Appl. Geogr. 85, 139–151. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.06.005

Sonneville, K. R., La Pelle, N., Taveras, E. M., Gillman, M. W., and Prosser, L. A. (2009). Economic and other barriers to adopting recommendations to prevent childhood obesity: results of a focus group study with parents. BMC Pediatr 9:81. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-9-81

Stempel, G. H. III. (1981). “Content analysis,” in Research Methods in Mass Communication , eds G. H. Stempel III and B. H. Westley (New Jersey, NY: Prentice-Hall, Inc.).

Surls, R., Feenstra, G., Golden, S., Galt, R., Hardesty, S., Napawan, C., et al. (2015). Gearing up to support urban farming in California: preliminary results of a needs assessment. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 30, 33–42. doi: 10.1017/S1742170514000052

Takahashi, B., Burnham, M., Terracina-Hartman, C., Sopchak, A. R., and Selfa, T. (2016). Climate change perceptions of NY state farmers: the role of risk perceptions and adaptive capacity. Environ. Manag. 58, 946–957. doi: 10.1007/s00267-016-0742-y

U.S. Census Bureau (2019). Annual Estimates of the Resident Population. American FactFinder . Available online at: https://www.factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.%20xhtml?src=CF (accessed February 10, 2019).

United Nations (2018). 68% of the World Population Projected to live in Urban Areas by 2050, Says UN. Available online at: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html (accessed April 12, 2019).

Van Gilder, B., and Abdi, S. (2014). Identity management and the fostering of network ignorance: accounts of queer Iranian women in the United States. J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 43, 151–170. doi: 10.1080/17475759.2014.892895

Wakefield, S., Yeudall, F., Taron, C., Reynolds, J., and Skinner, A. (2007). Growing urban health: community gardening in South-East Toronto. Health Promot. Int. 22, 92–101. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dam001

Warren, E., Hawkesworth, S., and Knai, C. (2015). Investigating the association between urban agriculture and food security, dietary diversity, and nutritional status: a systematic literature review. Food Policy 53, 54–66. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.03.004

Wasserman, S., and Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511815478

WHO (2018). WHO . Available online at: http://www.who.int/elena/titles/fruit_vegetables_ncds/en/ (accessed August 23, 2018).

Wielemaker, R., Oenema, O., Zeeman, G., and Weijma, J. (2019). Fertile cities: nutrient management practices in urban agriculture. Sci. Total Environ. 668, 1277–1288. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.424

Wimmer, R. D., and Dominick, J. R. (1983). “Mass media research. An introduction,” in Wadsworth Series in Mass Communication , ed R. Hayden (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company).

World Bank (2016). Urban Population (% of total) . Available online at: https://www.data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS (accessed January 15, 2017).

Wortman, S. E., and Lovell, S. T. (2013). Environmental challenges threatening the growth of urban agriculture in the United States. J. Environ. Qual. 42, 1283–1294. doi: 10.2134/jeq2013.01.0031

Zezza, A., and Tasciotti, L. (2010). Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security: empirical evidence from a sample of developing countries. Food Policy 35, 265–273. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.04.007

Zsambok, C. E. (1993). Implications of a recognitional decision model for consumer behavior. Adv. Consum. Res. 20, 239–244.

Keywords: cognitive structures, concept mapping, exploratory, semantic network, urban agriculture

Citation: Grebitus C, Chenarides L, Muenich R and Mahalov A (2020) Consumers' Perception of Urban Farming—An Exploratory Study. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4:79. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2020.00079

Received: 22 December 2019; Accepted: 01 May 2020; Published: 12 June 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Grebitus, Chenarides, Muenich and Mahalov. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Carola Grebitus, carola.grebitus@asu.edu

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

About Grants

The lifecycle of grants and cooperative agreements consists of four phases: Pre-Award, Award, Post-Award, and Close Out.

Access to Data

The National Institute of Food and Agriculture is committed to serving its stakeholders, Congress, and the public by using new technologies to advance greater openness.

Access Data Gateway

The Data Gateway enables users to find funding data, metrics, and information about research, education, and Extension projects that have received grant awards from NIFA.

View Resources Page

This website houses a large volume of supporting materials. In this section, you can search the wide range of documents, videos, and other resources.

Featured Webinar

Second annual virtual grants support technical assistance workshop.

Check out this five-day workshop in March 2024 workshop, designed to help you learn about NIFA grants and resources for grants development and management.

The National Institute of Food and Agriculture provides leadership and funding for programs that advance agriculture-related sciences.

Urban, Indoor, and Emerging Agriculture

The Urban, Indoor, and other Emerging Agricultural Production Research, Education, and Extension Initiative (UIE) is a NIFA competitive grant program implemented in 2022 to support research, education, and extension activities that facilitate development of urban, indoor, and other emerging agricultural production systems.

The UIE emphasizes activities on several segments of the value chain, including production, harvesting, transportation aggregation, packaging, distribution, and marketing needs.

Input on the most urgent program priorities was obtained through public input solicited in Federal Register Notice 2020-08402 and consultation with the Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) for Urban Agriculture.

• Access the most recent UIE Request for Proposals (RFP)
• Watch the Webinar about the UIE Program

Other Urban, Indoor, and Emerging Agriculture Programs

In addition to the Urban, Indoor, and other Emerging Agricultural Production Research, Education and Extension Initiative (UIE), NIFA invests in urban and indoor agriculture research, extension, and education through multiple authorities and funded programs. These include formula (Hatch and Smith-Lever) and competitive programs. Links to these programs are provided below. If you are providing stakeholder input to this new initiative please consider what NIFA currently supports when providing comment on most urgent unmet research, education, and extension needs.  

Examples of current NIFA competitive programs that support urban agriculture:

Beginning Farmers and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP) BFRDP is a competitive grant program that funds projects that provide education, mentoring, and technical assistance to people entering farming and those in the first 10 years of managing a farming operation (beginning farmers, or BFRs), where “farming” includes farming, ranching, and nonindustrial private forestry.

Sustainable Agricultural Research and Education (SARE) The SARE program provides technical assistance as well as regional grant funding for research and education projects in sustainable agriculture, including urban agriculture.

Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) SCRI program works to solve the needs of the various specialty crop industries through the promotion of collaboration, open communication, exchange of information, and development of resources that accelerate the application of scientific discovery and technology. SCRI supports the integration of research and extension activities that use systems-based, trans-disciplinary approaches within five focus areas. 

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) Foundational and Applied Science Program

• AFRI-Foundational Knowledge of Agricultural Production Systems (A1102): The program was launched in 2016 and supports integrated research/education/extension projects and conference projects in all production systems, including Urban Agriculture. Awards range from $50,000 to $500,000.
• AFRI-Foundational Knowledge of Agricultural Systems and Technology (A1521): The program supports integrated research/education/extension projects and conference projects in Engineering for Agricultural Production Systems. Applications must have a significant engineering component. Awards range from $50,000 to $500,000.
• AFRI-AERC Small and Medium-Sized Farms (A1601):  The Agricultural Economics and Rural Communities program area of the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI-AERC) program on Small and Medium-Sized Farms (A1601) funds integrated research/education/extension projects that benefit small and medium-sized farms and ranches.

Community Food Projects Competitive Grant Program (CFPCGP)

Supports the development of projects with a one-time infusion of federal dollars to make such projects self-sustaining.  CFPs should be designed to create community-based food projects with objectives, activities, and outcomes that are in alignment with CFPCGP primary goals. 

Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) The purpose of this program is to fund projects that will enhance the ability of producers and processors who have already adopted organic standards to grow and market high quality organic agricultural products. Priority concerns include biological, physical, and social sciences, including economics.

Other USDA Urban and Community Agriculture Programs:

NIFA is also part of USDA’s Urban and Community Agriculture Working Group, which consists of 14 USDA agencies and various offices within the Office of the Secretary. The working group supports efforts that study, support and strengthen local and regional food systems, and urban and community agricultural systems.  USDA has an Urban Agriculture Tool Kit that lays out potential operational elements for urban farmers, and identifies technical, financial, and Federal resources and programs that can support a variety of activities related to urban farming. There is an Urban Agriculture Grants and Engagement Opportunities page listing deadlines to apply for funding from grant programs.

Your feedback is important to us.

Monitoring Agricultural Land Changes in Peri-Urban Oran, Algeria: A Mixed Methods Analysis

• Tarik Ghodbani EGEAT – Laboratory for Geographic Space and Regional Planning, University of Oran 2 Mohammed Ben Ahmed, Algeria E-mail: [email protected]

The dynamics of agricultural land change in peri-urban areas are critical due to their significant impacts on agricultural productivity, food security, sustainable development, and socio-economic dynamics. These intricate processes require a robust methodological approach that can effectively identify, quantify, and analyze the drivers behind land-use changes. In the peri-urban areas of Oran, Algeria, the rapid conversion of agricultural land, particularly along the main highways in the south and southwest regions, underscores the urgent need for focused research. This study aims to map and analyze agricultural land changes between 1998 and 2019, exploring the underlying factors contributing to these shifts. Employing a mixed methods approach, the study integrates both quantitative and qualitative data to provide a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon. The methodology encompasses five main tasks: (1) data collection and identification of significant temporal markers, (2) implementation of a Random Forest classification using medium resolution Landsat imagery, (3) assessment of the extent and patterns of agricultural land changes, (4) Evaluation of relevant planning documents, (5) field work, including stakeholders interviews and focus groups. The results reveal a persistent increase in built-up areas over the study period, leading to a corresponding decline in agricultural land. This pattern highlights emerging land-use conflicts among stakeholders. The study offers valuable insights for policymakers, suggesting strategies for more effective land use management, and the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices.

How to Cite

• Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

Copyright (c) 2024 The Journal of Engineering and Exact Sciences

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

Avaliação Qualis Capes - Quadriênio 2017-2020

• Português (Brasil)
• Español (España)
• Français (France)

The Journal of Engineering and Exact Sciences

J. Eng. Exact Sci.

eISSN 2527-1075

eISSN 2446-9416

Email:  [email protected]

Crossref Membership

DOI prefix: 10.18540/jcec

Cover Page for Authors Form

Review Form

Announcements

Information.

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

Developed By

Make a submission.

Editorial Team/Corpo editorial - jCEC, https://periodicos.ufv.br/jcec eISSN 2527-1075 - The Journal of Engineering and Exact Sciences

ISSN 2446-9416 - Journal of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry (Previous name)

Av. P. H. Rolfs, s/n Departamento de Química/UFV, 36570-900 Viçosa-MG/Brazil Email: [email protected]

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Quaternary treatment of urban wastewater for its reuse.

1. Introduction

2. filtration, 2.1. sand filtration, 2.2. membrane filtration, 2.3. applications of filtration for micropollutant removals.

• Microplastics
• Microbial pollution
• Pharmaceuticals and endocrine disruptors
• Heavy metals

3. Coagulation

3.1. mechanisms of coagulation.

• Simple charge neutralization
• Charge patching

3.2. Influencing Factors of Coagulation

• Coagulant type
• Coagulant dosage

3.3. Applications of Coagulation for Micropollutant Removals

• Disinfection by-products
• Pharmaceuticals

4. Adsorption

4.1. physisorption and chemisorption, 4.2. characterization of adsorbents and the adsorbent process, 4.3. adsorption as a method for removal of organic micropollutants, adsorption mechanism of organic pollutants, 4.4. heavy metal removal from wastewaters by adsorption, 4.4.1. effect of ph, 4.4.2. effect of temperature, 4.4.3. effect of contact time, 4.4.4. adsorption mechanisms of heavy metals, 4.5. control of disinfection byproducts contained in wastewaters with adsorption, 4.6. removal of micro/nanoplastics by adsorption, 5. advanced oxidation processes (aops), 5.1. chemical types of aops, 5.1.1. fenton’s reaction technique, 5.1.2. ozone-based processes, 5.2. photochemical types of aops, 5.2.1. photodecomposition technique, 5.2.2. photocatalysis technique, 5.3. electrochemical types of aops, 5.3.1. anodic oxidation technique, 5.3.2. electro-fenton technique, 5.4. sonochemical types of aops, sonocatalysis, 6. disinfection, 6.1. chemical disinfection, 6.1.1. sodium hypochlorite, 6.1.2. peracetic acid, 6.1.3. performic acid, 6.2. physical means of disinfection, 6.2.1. uv irradiation, 6.2.2. sonolysis, 6.3. use of aops as a disinfection method, 6.4. electrochemical disinfection, 7. assessment of reviewed treatment methods, 8. conclusions.

• The existing literature is dominated by water scarcity and water stress, which are caused by rapid urban expansion, development of the world economy, demographic changes, deforestation and climate change.
• According to the predictions, the water scarcity and drought events are likely to be more frequent in the future. Due to these facts, the missing water resources must be replaced by a suitable water source.
• Quaternary treated urban wastewater has been proposed as an alternative water source for irrigation in Europe. For quaternary treatment, various additional processes can be used, such as filtration, coagulation, adsorption, ozonation, advanced oxidation processes and disinfection. The choice of the specific process depends on various factors, including wastewater characteristics and treatment goals. According to the existing literature, we recommend for quaternary urban wastewater treatment, a combination of coagulation, membrane filtration (UF or NF) and UV disinfection. These processes are relatively well known and commercially available with high removal efficiencies of micropollutants and microorganisms.
• The quaternary treated wastewater reuse has the following innovativeness in the field of water management: an efficient use of water resources by citizens, industry and agriculture; promoting water saving and reuse; water-efficient technologies in all sectors; fitting in the context of the 2020 Circular Economy Action Plan; development of the huge potential for safe wastewater reuse in line with the new EU Regulation on water reuse; contribution to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; reduction the use of additional fertilizers resulting in savings for the environment, farmers and wastewater treatment; and the creation of green jobs in the water-related industry.
• Barriers to the reuse of quaternary treated urban wastewater are well characterized, and they mainly include concerns about microbial risk and presence of micropollutants; high investments for modernization of urban wastewater treatment plants; and a lack of financial incentives for quaternary treated wastewater reuse in agriculture.
• This review article serves as a basis for knowledge development, provides a comprehensive understanding of the current state of quaternary treatment of urban wastewater for its reuse, creates guidelines for practice, has the capacity to engender new ideas and serve as the grounds for future research directions. It helps researchers to identify key themes and concepts, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of previous studies and determine areas where further research is needed.

Author Contributions

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest, abbreviations.

• Khan, S.A.R.; Ponce, P.; Yu, Z.; Golpîra, H.; Mathew, M. Environmental technology and wastewater treatment: Strategies to achieve environmental sustainability. Chemosphere 2022 , 286 , 131532. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Falco, C.; Galeotti, M.; Olper, A. Climate change and migration: Is agriculture the main channel? Glob. Environ. Change 2019 , 59 , 101995. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• International Decade for Action: Water for Life—United Nations. Available online: http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/scarcity.shtml (accessed on 15 June 2024).
• The United Nations World Water Development Report 2020: Water and Climate Change—UNESCO. Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000372985 (accessed on 15 June 2024).
• Capocelli, M.; Piemonte, V. Technologies for Water Reuse: Current status and future challenges. Water 2021 , 13 , 832. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• The United Nations World Water Development Report 2017—UNESCO. Available online: https://www.unwater.org/publications/un-world-water-development-report-2017 (accessed on 15 June 2024).
• Water in Agriculture—World Bank Group. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/infographic/2023/07/26/water-in-agriculture (accessed on 15 June 2024).
• Kesari, K.K.; Soni, R.; Jamal, Q.M.S.; Tripathi, J.; Lal, J.A.; Jha, N.K.; Siddiqui, M.H.; Kumar, P.; Tripathi, V.; Ruokolainen, J. Wastewater treatment and Reuse: A review of its applications and health implications. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2021 , 232 , 208. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Proposal for a Revised Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive—European Commission. Available online: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-revised-urban-wastewater-treatment-directive_en (accessed on 15 June 2024).
• Wang, H.; Wang, J.; Yu, X. Wastewater irrigation and crop yield: A meta-analysis. J. Integr. Agric. 2022 , 21 , 1215–1224. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rizzo, L.; Gernjak, W.; Krzeminski, P.; Malato, S.; McArdell, C.S.; Perez, J.A.S.; Schaar, H.; Fatta-Kassinos, D. Best available technologies and treatment trains to address current challenges in urban wastewater reuse for irrigation of crops in EU countries. Sci. Total Environ. 2020 , 710 , 136312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hristov, J.; Barreiro-Hurle, J.; Salputra, G.; Blanco, M.; Witzke, P. Reuse of treated water in European agriculture: Potential to address water scarcity under climate change. Agric. Water Manag. 2021 , 251 , 106872. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Duckett, D.; Troldborg, M.; Hendry, S.; Cousin, H. Making waves: Promoting municipal water reuse without a prevailing scarcity driver. Water Res. 2024 , 249 , 120965. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bilal, M.; Ashraf, S.S.; Barceló, D.; Iqbal, H.M. Biocatalytic degradation/redefining removal fate of pharmaceutically active compounds and antibiotics in the aquatic environment. Sci. Total Environ. 2019 , 691 , 1190–1211. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bilal, M.; Iqbal, H.M.; Barceló, D. Persistence of pesticides-based contaminants inthe environment and their effective degradation using laccase-assisted biocatalytic systems. Sci. Total Environ. 2019 , 695 , 133896. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luo, Y.; Guo, W.; Ngo, H.H.; Nghiem, L.D.; Hai, F.I.; Zhang, J.; Liang, S.; Wang, X.C. A review on the occurrence of micropollutants in the aquatic environment and their fate and removal during wastewater treatment. Sci. Total Environ. 2014 , 473–474 , 619–641. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Deng, S.; Yan, X.; Zhu, Q.; Liao, C. The utilization of reclaimed water: Possible risks arising from waterborne contaminants. Env. Pollut 2019 , 254 , 113020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Vojtěchovská Šrámková, M.; Diaz-Sosa, V.; Wanner, J. Experimental verification of tertiary treatment process in achieving effluent quality required by wastewater reuse standards. J. Water Process Eng. 2018 , 22 , 41–45. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Regulation (EU) 2020/741 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 on Minimum Requirements for Water Reuse. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32020R0741 (accessed on 15 June 2024).
• The EU and the United Nations—Common Goals for a Sustainable Future. Available online: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/sustainable-development-goals/eu-and-united-nations-common-goals-sustainable-future_en (accessed on 15 June 2024).
• Faour-Klingbeil, D.; Todd, E.C.D. The impact of climate change on treated and untreated wastewater use for agriculture, especially in arid regions: A Review. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2018 , 15 , 61–72. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Gray, N.F. Filtration methods. In Microbiology of Waterborne Diseases ; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 631–650. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cescon, A.; Jiang, J.Q. Filtration process and alternative filter media material in water treatment. Water 2020 , 12 , 3377. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guchi, E. Review on slow sand filtration in removing microbial contamination and particles from drinking water. Am. J. Food Nutr. 2015 , 3 , 47–55. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jaeel, A.J.; Abdulkathum, S. Sustainable pollutants removal from wastewater using sand filter: A review. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Advance of Sustainable Engineering and its Application (ICASEA) IEEE, Wasit, Iraq, 14–15 March 2018; pp. 179–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Verma, S.; Daverey, A.; Sharma, A. Slow sand filtration for water and wastewater treatment—A review. Environ. Technol. Rev. 2017 , 6 , 47–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sabale, R.; Mujawar, S. Improved rapid sand filter for performance enhancement. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2014 , 3 , 1031–1033. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hakami, M.W.; Alkhudhiri, A.; Al-Batty, S.; Zacharof, M.P.; Maddy, J.; Hilal, N. Ceramic microfiltration membranes in wastewater treatment: Filtration behavior, fouling and prevention. Membranes 2020 , 10 , 248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cevallos-Mendoza, J.; Amorim, C.G.; Rodríguez-Díaz, J.M.; Montenegro, M.D.C.B. Removal of contaminants from water by membrane filtration: A review. Membranes 2022 , 12 , 570. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Melin, T.; Jefferson, B.; Bixio, D.; Thoeye, C.; De Wilde, W.; De Koning, J.; van der Graaf, J.; Wintgens, T. Membrane bioreactor technology for wastewater treatment and reuse. Desalination 2006 , 187 , 271–282. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al-Asheh, S.; Bagheri, M.; Aidan, A. Membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment: A review. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 2021 , 4 , 100109. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Goswami, L.; Kumar, R.V.; Borah, S.N.; Manikandan, N.A.; Pakshirajan, K.; Pugazhenthi, G. Membrane bioreactor and integrated membrane bioreactor systems for micropollutant removal from wastewater: A review. J. Water Process Eng. 2018 , 26 , 314–328. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rajbongshi, A.; Gogoi, S.B. Microfiltration, ultrafiltration and nanofiltration as a post-treatment of biological treatment process with references to oil field produced water of Moran oilfield of Assam. Pet. Res. 2024 , 9 , 143–154. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, J.; Cahyadi, A.; Wu, B.; Pee, W.; Fane, A.G.; Chew, J.W. The roles of particles in enhancing membrane filtration: A review. J. Membr. Sci. 2020 , 595 , 117570. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sembiring, E.; Fajar, M.; Handajani, M. Performance of rapid sand filter–single media to remove microplastics. Water Supply 2021 , 21 , 2273–2284. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wolff, S.; Weber, F.; Kerpen, J.; Winklhofer, M.; Engelhart, M.; Barkmann, L. Elimination of microplastics by downstream sand filters in wastewater treatment. Water 2020 , 13 , 33. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bayo, J.; López-Castellanos, J.; Olmos, S. Membrane bioreactor and rapid sand filtration for the removal of microplastics in an urban wastewater treatment plant. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020 , 156 , 111211. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Conesa, J.A.; Ortuño, N. Reuse of water contaminated by microplastics, the effectiveness of filtration processes: A review. Energies 2022 , 15 , 2432. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Goswami, K.P.; Pugazhenthi, G. Credibility of polymeric and ceramic membrane filtration in the removal of bacteria and virus from water: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2020 , 268 , 110583. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marsono, B.D.; Yuniarto, A.; Purnomo, A.; Soedjono, E.S. Comparison performances of microfiltration and rapid sand filter operated in water treatment plant. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022 , 1111 , 012048. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kacprzyńska-Gołacka, J.; Kowalik-Klimczak, A.; Woskowicz, E.; Wieciński, P.; Łożyńska, M.; Sowa, S.; Barszcz, W.; Kaźmierczak, B. Microfiltration Membranes Modified with Silver Oxide by Plasma Treatment. Membranes 2020 , 10 , 133. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Maryam, B.; Buscio, V.; Odabasi, S.U.; Buyukgungor, H. A study on behavior, interaction and rejection of Paracetamol, Diclofenac and Ibuprofen (PhACs) from wastewater by nanofiltration membranes. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2020 , 18 , 100641. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Couto, C.F.; Santos, A.V.; Amaral, M.C.S.; Lange, L.C.; de Andrade, L.H.; Foureaux, A.F.S.; Fernandes, B.S. Assessing potential of nanofiltration, reverse osmosis and membrane distillation drinking water treatment for pharmaceutically active compounds (PhACs) removal. J. Water Process Eng. 2020 , 33 , 101029. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vieira, W.T.; de Farias, M.B.; Spaolonzi, M.P.; da Silva, M.G.C.; Vieira, M.G.A. Removal of endocrine disruptors in waters by adsorption, membrane filtration and biodegradation. A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2020 , 18 , 1113–1143. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, J.; Nguyen, M.N.; Li, Y.; Yang, C.; Schäfer, A.I. Steroid hormone micropollutant removal from water with activated carbon fiber-ultrafiltration composite membranes. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020 , 391 , 122020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nakada, N.; Shinohara, H.; Murata, A.; Kiri, K.; Managaki, S.; Sato, N.; Takada, H. Removal of selected pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) and endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) during sand filtration and ozonation at a municipal sewage treatment plant. Water Res. 2007 , 41 , 4373–4382. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jatoi, A.S.; Hashmi, Z.; Adriyani, R.; Yuniarto, A.; Mazari, S.A.; Akhter, F.; Mubarak, N.M. Recent trends and future challenges of pesticide removal techniques—A comprehensive review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021 , 9 , 105571. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mukherjee, A.; Mehta, R.; Saha, S.; Bhattacharya, A.; Biswas, P.K.; Kole, R.K. Removal of multiple pesticide residues from water by low-pressure thin-film composite membrane. Appl. Water Sci. 2020 , 10 , 244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, Z.; Zhang, B.; Fang, C.; Liu, Z.; Fang, J.; Zhu, L. Macroporous membranes doped with micro-mesoporous β-cyclodextrin polymers for ultrafast removal of organic micropollutants from water. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019 , 222 , 114970. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qasem, N.A.A.; Mohammed, R.H.; Lawal, D.U. Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewater: A comprehensive and critical review. npj Clean Water 2021 , 4 , 36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qi, Y.; Zhu, L.; Shen, X.; Sotto, A.; Gao, C.; Shen, J. Polythyleneimine-modified original positive charged nanofiltration membrane: Removal of heavy metal ions and dyes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019 , 222 , 117–124. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moradi, G.; Zinadini, S.; Rajabi, L.; Derakhshan, A.A. Removal of heavy metal ions using a new high performance nanofiltration membrane modified with curcumin boehmite nanoparticles. Chem. Eng. J. 2020 , 390 , 124546. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rezaee, R.; Nasseri, S.; Mahvi, A.H.; Nabizadeh, R.; Mousavi, S.A.; Rashidi, A.; Jafari, A.; Nazmara, S. Fabrication and characterization of a polysulfone-graphene oxide nanocomposite membrane for arsenate rejection from water. J. Environ. Health Sci. Eng. 2015 , 13 , 61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Xiang, H.; Min, X.; Tang, C.J.; Sillanpää, M.; Zhao, F. Recent advances in membrane filtration for heavy metal removal from wastewater: A mini review. J. Water Process Eng. 2022 , 49 , 103023. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saleh, T.A.; Mustaqeem, M.; Khaled, M. Water treatment technologies in removing heavy metal ions from wastewater: A review. Environ. Nanotechnol. Monit. Manag. 2022 , 17 , 100617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• El-Taweel, R.M.; Mohamed, N.; Alrefaey, K.A.; Husien, S.; Abdel-Aziz, A.B.; Salim, A.I.; Mostafa, N.G.; Said, L.A.; Fahim, I.R.; Radwan, A.G. A review of coagulation explaining its definition, mechanism, coagulant types, and optimization models; RSM, and ANN. Curr. Res. Green Sustain. Chem. 2023 , 6 , 100358. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zahmatkesh, S.; Karimian, M.; Chen, Z.; Ni, B.J. Combination of coagulation and adsorption technologies for advanced wastewater treatment for potable water reuse: By ANN, NSGA-II, and RSM. J. Environ. Manag. 2024 , 349 , 119429. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gautam, S.; Saini, G. Use of natural coagulants for industrial wastewater treatment. Glob. J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 2020 , 6 , 553–578. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Precious Sibiya, N.; Rathilal, S.; Kweinor Tetteh, E. Coagulation treatment of wastewater: Kinetics and natural coagulant evaluation. Molecules 2021 , 26 , 698. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bahrodin, M.B.; Zaidi, N.S.; Hussein, N.; Sillanpää, M.; Prasetyo, D.D.; Syafiuddin, A. Recent advances on coagulation-based treatment of wastewater: Transition from chemical to natural coagulant. Curr. Pollut. Rep. 2021 , 7 , 379–391. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sonal, S.; Mishra, B.K. Role of coagulation/flocculation technology for the treatment of dye wastewater: Trend and future aspects. In Water Pollution and Management Practices ; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 303–331. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abujazar, M.S.S.; Karaağaç, S.U.; Amr, S.S.A.; Alazaiza, M.Y.; Bashir, M.J. Recent advancement in the application of hybrid coagulants in coagulation-flocculation of wastewater: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2022 , 345 , 131133. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, C.; Zhou, J.; Yan, Y.; Yang, L.; Xing, G.; Li, H.; Wu, P.; Wang, M.; Zheng, H. Application of coagulation/flocculation in oily wastewater treatment: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021 , 765 , 142795. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tang, W.; Li, H.; Fei, L.; Wei, B.; Zhou, T.; Zhang, H. The removal of microplastics from water by coagulation: A comprehensive review. Sci. Total Environ. 2022 , 851 , 158224. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hjorth, M.; Jørgensen, B.U. Polymer flocculation mechanism in animal slurry established by charge neutralization. Water Res. 2012 , 46 , 1045–1051. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sukmana, H.; Bellahsen, N.; Pantoja, F.; Hodur, C. Adsorption and coagulation in wastewater treatment–Review. Prog. Agric. Eng. Sci. 2021 , 17 , 49–68. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kurniawan, S.B.; Abdullah, S.R.S.; Imron, M.F.; Said, N.S.M.; Ismail, N.I.; Hasan, H.A.; Othman, A.R.; Purwanti, I.F. Challenges and opportunities of biocoagulant/bioflocculant application for drinking water and wastewater treatment and its potential for sludge recovery. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 , 17 , 9312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al-Sahari, M.; Al-Gheethi, A.A.S.; Radin Mohamed, R.M.S. Natural coagulates for wastewater treatment; A review for application and mechanism. In Prospects of Fresh Market Wastes Management in Developing Countries ; Springer: Cham, Germany, 2020; pp. 17–31. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Othmani, B.; Rasteiro, M.G.; Khadhraoui, M. Toward green technology: A review on some efficient model plant-based coagulants/flocculants for freshwater and wastewater remediation. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2020 , 22 , 1025–1040. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ang, W.L.; Mohammad, A.W. State of the art and sustainability of natural coagulants in water and wastewater treatment. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 262 , 121267. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Desta, W.M.; Bote, M.E. Wastewater treatment using a natural coagulant (Moringa oleifera seeds): Optimization through response surface methodology. Heliyon 2021 , 7 , e08451. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, L.; Liu, X.; Zhang, M.; Wang, T.; Tang, H.; Jia, Y. The effect of pH/PAC on the coagulation of anionic surfactant wastewater generated in the cosmetic production. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2023 , 11 , 109312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Iwuozor, K.O. Prospects and challenges of using coagulation-flocculation method in the treatment of effluents. Adv. J. Chem.-Sect. A 2019 , 2 , 105–127. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmad, T.; Ahmad, K.; Ahad, A.; Alam, M. Characterization of water treatment sludge and its reuse as coagulant. J. Environ. Manag. 2016 , 182 , 606–611. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Na, S.H.; Kim, M.J.; Kim, J.; Batool, R.; Cho, K.; Chung, J.; Lee, S.; Kim, E. J Fate and potential risks of microplastic fibers and fragments in water and wastewater treatment processes. J. Hazard. Mater. 2024 , 463 , 132938. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mao, Y.; Hu, Z.; Li, H.; Zheng, H.; Yang, S.; Yu, W.; Tang, B.; Yang, H.; He, R.; Guo, W.; et al. Recent advances in microplastic removal from drinking water by coagulation: Removal mechanisms and influencing factors. Environ. Pollut. 2024 , 349 , 123863. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ziembowicz, S.; Kida, M.; Koszelnik, P. Elimination of a Mixture of Microplastics Using Conventional and Detergent-Assisted Coagulation. Materials 2023 , 16 , 4070. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Li, B.; Zhao, J.; Ge, W.; Li, W.; Yuan, H. Coagulation-flocculation performance and floc properties for microplastics removal by magnesium hydroxide and PAM. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2022 , 10 , 107263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hu, P.; Ren, J.; Ren, W.; Sun, Y.; Yang, H. The feasibility and mechanism of poly-aluminum/titanium silicate composite coagulants for the efficient removal of nano-and micro-sized plastics. Chem. Eng. J. 2024 , 482 , 149095. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gong, Y.; Bai, Y.; Zhao, D.; Wang, Q. Aggregation of carboxyl-modified polystyrene nanoplastics in water with aluminum chloride: Structural characterization and theoretical calculation. Water Res. 2022 , 208 , 117884. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, P.; Ding, S.; Xiao, R.; An, G.; Fang, C.; Chu, W. Enhanced coagulation for mitigation of disinfection by-product precursors: A review. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2021 , 296 , 102518. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lin, J.L.; Ika, A.R. Minimization of halogenated DBP precursors by enhanced PACl coagulation: The impact of organic molecule fraction changes on DBP precursors destabilization with Al hydrates. Sci. Total Environ. 2020 , 703 , 134936. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, P.; Ding, S.; An, G.; Qu, R.; Liu, X.; Fang, C.; Chu, W. Removal of disinfection by-product precursors by Al-based coagulants: A comparative study on coagulation performance. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021 , 420 , 126558. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dahasahastra, A.V.; Balasundaram, K.; Latkar, M.V. Turbidity removal from synthetic turbid water using coagulant recovered from water treatment sludge: A potential method to recycle and conserve aluminium. Hydrometallurgy 2022 , 213 , 105939. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Okoro, B.U.; Sharifi, S.; Jesson, M.A.; Bridgeman, J. Natural organic matter (NOM) and turbidity removal by plant-based coagulants: A review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021 , 9 , 106588. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zedan, T.; Mossad, M.; Fouad, M.; Mahanna, H. Potential application of natural coagulant extraction from walnut seeds for water turbidity removal. Water Pract. Technol. 2022 , 17 , 684–698. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmad, A.; Abdullah, S.R.S.; Hasan, H.A.; Othman, A.R.; Ismail, N.I. Potential of local plant leaves as natural coagulant for turbidity removal. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022 , 29 , 2579–2587. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tahraoui, H.; Belhadj, A.E.; Triki, Z.; Boudellal, N.R.; Seder, S.; Amrane, A.; Zhang, J.; Moula, N.; Tifoura, A.; Ferhat, R.; et al. Mixed coagulant-flocculant optimization for pharmaceutical effluent pretreatment using response surface methodology and Gaussian process regression. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2023 , 169 , 909–927. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alazaiza, M.Y.; Albahnasawi, A.; Ali, G.A.; Bashir, M.J.; Nassani, D.E.; Al Maskari, T.; Amr, S.S.A.; Abujazar, M.S.S. Application of natural coagulants for pharmaceutical removal from water and wastewater: A review. Water 2022 , 14 , 140. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nonfodji, O.M.; Fatombi, J.K.; Ahoyo, T.A.; Osseni, S.A.; Aminou, T. Performance of Moringa oleifera seeds protein and Moringa oleifera seeds protein-polyaluminum chloride composite coagulant in removing organic matter and antibiotic resistant bacteria from hospital wastewater. J. Water Process Eng. 2020 , 33 , 101103. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Iloamaeke, I.M.; Julius, C.O. Treatment of pharmaceutical effluent using seed of phoenix dactylifera as a natural coagulant. J. Basic Phys. Res. 2019 , 9 , 91–100. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liao, Z.L.; Zhao, Z.C.; Zhu, J.C.; Chen, H.; Meng, D.Z. Complexing characteristics between Cu (Ⅱ) ions and dissolved organic matter in combined sewer overflows: Implications for the removal of heavy metals by enhanced coagulation. Chemosphere 2021 , 265 , 129023. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Johnson, P.D.; Girinathannair, P.; Ohlinger, K.N.; Ritchie, S.; Teuber, L.; Kirby, J. Enhanced removal of heavy metals in primary treatment using coagulation and flocculation. Water Environ. Res. 2008 , 80 , 472–479. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Skotta, A.; Jmiai, A.; Elhayaoui, W.; El-Asri, A.; Tamimi, M.; Assabbane, A.; El Issami, S. Suspended matter and heavy metals (Cu and Zn) removal from water by coagulation/flocculation process using a new Bio-flocculant: Lepidium sativum. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2023 , 145 , 104792. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shekho, M.S.; Hassan, N.E. A Review on Techniques for the Cleaning of Wastewater. GSC Adv. Res. Rev. 2024 , 18 , 118–128. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Manisalidis, I.; Stavropoulou, E.; Stavropoulos, A.; Bezirtzoglou, E. Environmental and Health Impacts of Air Pollution: A Review. Front. Public Health 2020 , 8 , 14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hasan, F.; Kandhan, K.; Liu, Y.; Ren, M.; Jaleel, A.; Abdul, M. Wastewater Irrigation: A Promising Way for Future Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security in the United Arab Emirates. Water 2023 , 15 , 2284. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ighalo, J.O.; Omoarukhe, F.O.; Ojukwu, V.E.; Iwuozor, K.O.; Igwegbe, C.A. Cost of Adsorbent Preparation and Usage in Wastewater Treatment: A Review. Clean. Chem. Eng. 2022 , 3 , 100042. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mahmoodi, N.M.; Oveisi, M.; Taghizadeh, A.; Taghizadeh, M. Novel Magnetic Amine Functionalized Carbon Nanotube/Metal-Organic Framework Nanocomposites: From Green Ultrasound-Assisted Synthesis to Detailed Selective Pollutant Removal Modelling from Binary Systems. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019 , 368 , 746–759. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Mahmoodi, N.M.; Oveisi, M.; Taghizadeh, A.; Taghizadeh, M. Synthesis of Pearl Necklace-like ZIF-8@Chitosan/PVA Nanofiber with Synergistic Effect for Recycling Aqueous Dye Removal. Carbohydr. Polym. 2020 , 227 , 115364. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mahmoodi, N.M.; Taghizadeh, M.; Taghizadeh, A. Mesoporous Activated Carbons of Low-Cost Agricultural Bio-Wastes with High Adsorption Capacity: Preparation and Artificial Neural Network Modeling of Dye Removal from Single and Multicomponent (Binary and Ternary) Systems. J. Mol. Liq. 2018 , 269 , 217–228. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sing, K.S.W.; Williams, R.T. Physisorption Hysteresis Loops and the Characterization of Nanoporous Materials. Adsorpt. Sci. Technol. 2004 , 22 , 773–782. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Verma, C.; Aslam, J.; Khan, M.E. Adsorption through Advanced Nanoscale Materials ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023; pp. 8–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xiong, Q.; Li, K.; Yang, D.; Yu, H.; Pan, Z.; Song, Y. Characterizing Coal Pore Space by Gas Adsorption, Mercury Intrusion, FIB–SEM and µ-CT. Environ. Earth Sci. 2020 , 79 , 209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, P.; Chen, Y.-P.; Guo, J.-S. SPR for Water Pollutant Detection and Water Process Analysis. In Comprehensive Analytical Chemistry ; Surface Plasmon Resonance in Bioanalysis; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; pp. 145–183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tseng, R.-L.; Tran, H.N.; Juang, R.-S. Revisiting Temperature Effect on the Kinetics of Liquid–Phase Adsorption by the Elovich Equation: A Simple Tool for Checking Data Reliability. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 2022 , 136 , 104403. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mudoi, M.P.; Sharma, P.; Khichi, A.S. A Review of Gas Adsorption on Shale and the Influencing Factors of CH 4 and CO 2 Adsorption. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2022 , 217 , 110897. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tien, C. Introduction to Adsorption ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 8–11. [ Google Scholar ]
• Markoš, J.; Steltenpohl, P. Separation Processes II ; Slovak Chemical Library: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2017; p. 25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shukla, V.; Kumar, N. Environmental Concerns and Sustainable Development. Volume 1, Air, Water and Energy Resources ; Springer: Singapore, 2020; p. 372. [ Google Scholar ]
• Iftekhar, S.; Srivastava, V.; Sillanpää, M. Synthesis of Hybrid Bionanocomposites and Their Application for the Removal of Rare-Earth Elements from Synthetic Wastewater. In Advanced Water Treatment ; Elsevier Ebooks; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 505–564. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chakhtouna, H.; Benzeid, H.; Zari, N.; Qaiss, A.e.K.; Bouhfid, R. Recent Advances in Eco-Friendly Composites Derived from Lignocellulosic Biomass for Wastewater Treatment. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2022 , 14 , 12085–12111. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Samadi, A.; Kong, L.; Guo, W.; Sillanpää, M.; Boztepe, I.; Song, C.; Zeng, Q.; Zhao, S. Standardized Methodology for Performance Evaluation in Using Polyaniline-Based Adsorbents to Remove Aqueous Contaminants. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2024 , 12 , 112650. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, J. Physical Insights into Kinetic Models of Adsorption. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019 , 229 , 115832. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alves, S.C.; Araújo, R.F.; Moura, T.A.; Sousa, H.; Beatriz, S.; Fregolente, L.G.; Ferreira, O.P.; Avelino, F. Coconut Shell-Based Biochars Produced by an Innovative Thermochemical Process for Obtaining Improved Lignocellulose-Based Adsorbents. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2024 , 275 , 133685. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharafian, A.; Bahrami, M. Assessment of Adsorber Bed Designs in Waste-Heat Driven Adsorption Cooling Systems for Vehicle Air Conditioning and Refrigeration. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014 , 30 , 440–451. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, Y.; Palomba, V.; Frazzica, A. Understanding the Effect of Materials, Design Criteria and Operational Parameters on the Adsorption Desalination Performance—A Review. Energy Convers. Manag. 2022 , 269 , 116072. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gutierrez, M.; Mutavdžić Pavlović, D.; Stipaničev, D.; Repec, S.; Avolio, F.; Zanella, M.; Verlicchi, P. A Thorough Analysis of the Occurrence, Removal and Environmental Risks of Organic Micropollutants in a Full-Scale Hybrid Membrane Bioreactor Fed by Hospital Wastewater. Sci. Total Environ. 2024 , 914 , 169848. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• van der Hoek, J.P.; Deng, T.; Spit, T.; Luimstra, V.; de Kreuk, M.; van Halem, D. Bromate Removal in an Ozone—Granular Activated Carbon Filtration Process for Organic Micropollutants Removal from Wastewater. J. Water Process Eng. 2024 , 58 , 104877. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qin, W.; Dong, Y.; Jiang, H.; Loh, W.H.; Imbrogno, J.; Swenson, T.M.; Garcia-Rodriguez, O.; Lefebvre, O. A New Approach of Simultaneous Adsorption and Regeneration of Activated Carbon to Address the Bottlenecks of Pharmaceutical Wastewater Treatment. Water Res. 2024 , 252 , 121180. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, W.; Weng, Y.; Luo, T.; Wang, Q.; Yang, G.; Jin, Y. Antimicrobial and the Resistances in the Environment: Ecological and Health Risks, Influencing Factors, and Mitigation Strategies. Toxics 2023 , 11 , 185. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deere, J.R.; Streets, S.; Jankowski, M.D.; Ferrey, M.L.; Chenaux-Ibrahim, Y.; Convertino, M.; Isaac, E.J.; Phelps, N.B.D.; Primus, A.; Servadio, J.L.; et al. A Chemical Prioritization Process: Applications to Contaminants of Emerging Concern in Freshwater Ecosystems (Phase I). Sci. Total Environ. 2021 , 772 , 146030. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tiedeken, E.J.; Tahar, A.; McHugh, B.; Rowan, N.J. Monitoring, Sources, Receptors, and Control Measures for Three European Union Watch List Substances of Emerging Concern in Receiving Waters—A 20 Year Systematic Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2017 , 574 , 1140–1163. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sousa, J.C.G.; Ribeiro, A.R.; Barbosa, M.O.; Pereira, M.F.R.; Silva, A.M.T. A Review on Environmental Monitoring of Water Organic Pollutants Identified by EU Guidelines. J. Hazard. Mater. 2018 , 344 , 146–162. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guarin, T.C.; Li, L.; Haak, L.; Teel, L.; Pagilla, K.R. Contaminants of Emerging Concern Reduction and Microbial Community Characterization across a Three-Barrier Advanced Water Treatment System. Sci. Total Environ. 2024 , 912 , 169637. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rizzo, L.; Fiorentino, A.; Grassi, M.; Attanasio, D.; Guida, M. Advanced Treatment of Urban Wastewater by Sand Filtration and Graphene Adsorption for Wastewater Reuse: Effect on a Mixture of Pharmaceuticals and Toxicity. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2015 , 3 , 122–128. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Emanuele, D.V.D.; Oliveira, M.G.; Spaolonzi, M.P.; Heloisa, P.S.C.; Thiago, L.S.; Melissa, G.A.V. Adsorption of Pharmaceutical Products from Aqueous Solutions on Functionalized Carbon Nanotubes by Conventional and Green Methods: A Critical Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2022 , 372 , 133743. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ambaye, T.G.; Vaccari, M.; van Hullebusch, E.D.; Amrane, A.; Rtimi, S. Mechanisms and Adsorption Capacities of Biochar for the Removal of Organic and Inorganic Pollutants from Industrial Wastewater. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021 , 18 , 3273–3294. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Briffa, J.; Sinagra, E.; Blundell, R. Heavy Metal Pollution in the Environment and Their Toxicological Effects on Humans. Heliyon 2020 , 6 , e04691. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Qiu, B.; Tao, X.; Wang, H.; Li, W.; Ding, X.; Chu, H. Biochar as a Low-Cost Adsorbent for Aqueous Heavy Metal Removal: A Review. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2021 , 155 , 105081. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ghasaq, A.A.; Salih, M.; Ghsoon, A.F.; Fahim, R. Adsorption Technique for the Removal of Heavy Metals from Wastewater Using Low-Cost Natural Adsorbent. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2023 , 1129 , 012012. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• ElSayed, E.E. Natural Diatomite as an Effective Adsorbent for Heavy Metals in Water and Wastewater Treatment (a Batch Study). Water Sci. 2018 , 32 , 32–43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chai, W.S.; Cheun, J.Y.; Kumar, P.S.; Mubashir, M.; Majeed, Z.; Banat, F.; Ho, S.-H.; Show, P.L. A Review on Conventional and Novel Materials towards Heavy Metal Adsorption in Wastewater Treatment Application. J. Clean. Prod. 2021 , 296 , 126589. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khushk, S.; Zhang, L.; Pirzada, A.M.; Irfan, M.; Li, A. Cr(VI) Heavy Metal Adsorption from Aqueous Solution by KOH Treated Hydrochar Derived from Agricultural Wastes. AIP Conf. Proc. 2019 , 2119 , 020003. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khanzada, A.K.; Al-Hazmi, H.E.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Majtacz, J.; Piechota, G.; Kumar, G.; Ezzati, P.; Saeb, M.R.; Rabiee, N.; Karimi-Maleh, H.; et al. Hydrochar as a Bio-Based Adsorbent for Heavy Metals Removal: A Review of Production Processes, Adsorption Mechanisms, Kinetic Models, Regeneration and Reusability. Sci. Total Environ. 2024 , 945 , 173972. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, W.; Hu, L.; Hu, S.; Liu, Y. Optimized Synthesis of Novel Hydrogel for the Adsorption of Copper and Cobalt Ions in Wastewater. RSC Adv. 2019 , 9 , 16058–16068. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al-Senani, G.M.; Al-Fawzan, F.F. Adsorption Study of Heavy Metal Ions from Aqueous Solution by Nanoparticle of Wild Herbs. Egypt. J. Aquat. Res. 2018 , 44 , 187–194. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, J.; Dong, X.; Liu, X.; Xu, X.; Duan, W.; Park, J.; Gao, L.; Lu, Y. Comparative Study on the Adsorption Characteristics of Heavy Metal Ions by Activated Carbon and Selected Natural Adsorbents. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 15579. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Teo, Y.S.; Jafari, I.; Liang, F.; Jung, Y.; Van der Hoek, J.P.; Ong, S.L.; Hu, J. Investigation of the Efficacy of the UV/Chlorine Process for the Removal of Trimethoprim: Effects of Operational Parameters and Artificial Neural Networks Modelling. Sci. Total Environ. 2022 , 812 , 152551. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhong, Y.; Chen, Y.; Ong, S.L.; Hu, J.; Balakrishnan, V.; Ang, W.S. Disinfection By-Products Control in Wastewater Effluents Treated with Ozone and Biological Activated Carbon Followed by UV/Chlor(Am)Ine Processes. Sci. Total Environ. 2024 , 922 , 171317. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shao, B.; Shen, L.; Liu, Z.; Tang, L.; Tan, X.; Wang, D.; Zeng, W.; Wu, T.; Pan, Y.; Zhang, X.; et al. Disinfection Byproducts Formation from Emerging Organic Micropollutants during Chlorine-Based Disinfection Processes. Chem. Eng. J. 2023 , 455 , 140476. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al Bsoul, A.; Hailat, M.; Abdelhay, A.; Tawalbeh, M.; Al-Othman, A.; Al-kharabsheh, I.N.; Al-Taani, A.A. Efficient Removal of Phenol Compounds from Water Environment Using Ziziphus Leaves Adsorbent. Sci. Total Environ. 2021 , 761 , 143229. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Vasseghian, Y.; Dragoi, E.-N.; Almomani, F.; Le, V.T. Graphene Derivatives in Bioplastic: A Comprehensive Review of Properties and Future Perspectives. Chemosphere 2022 , 286 , 131892. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, Z.; Sedighi, M.; Lea-Langton, A. Filtration of Microplastic Spheres by Biochar: Removal Efficiency and Immobilisation Mechanisms. Water Res. 2020 , 184 , 116165. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Singh, N.; Khandelwal, N.; Ganie, Z.A.; Tiwari, E.; Darbha, G.K. Eco-Friendly Magnetic Biochar: An Effective Trap for Nanoplastics of Varying Surface Functionality and Size in the Aqueous Environment. Chem. Eng. J. 2021 , 418 , 129405. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ji, G.; Xing, Y.; You, T. Biochar as Adsorbents for Environmental Microplastics and Nanoplastics Removal. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2024 , 12 , 113377. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Siipola, V.; Pflugmacher, S.; Romar, H.; Wendling, L.; Koukkari, P. Low-Cost Biochar Adsorbents for Water Purification Including Microplastics Removal. Appl. Sci. 2020 , 10 , 788. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Giannakis, S.; Rtimi, S.; Pulgarin, C. Light-Assisted Advanced Oxidation Processes for the Elimination of Chemical and Microbiological Pollution of Wastewaters in Developed and Developing Countries. Molecules 2017 , 22 , 1070. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Mukherjee, J.; Lodh, B.K.; Sharma, R.; Mahata, N.; Shah, M.P.; Mandal, S.; Ghanta, S.; Bhunia, B. Advanced Oxidation Process for the Treatment of Industrial Wastewater: A Review on Strategies, Mechanisms, Bottlenecks and Prospects. Chemosphere 2023 , 345 , 140473. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Mahbub, P.; Duke, M. Scalability of Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs) in Industrial Applications: A Review. J. Environ. Manag. 2023 , 345 , 118861. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kumari, P.; Kumar, A. Advanced oxidation process: A Remediation Technique for Organic and Non-Biodegradable Pollutant. Results Surf. Interfaces 2023 , 11 , 100122. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rayaroth, M.P.; Aravindakumar, C.T.; Shah, N.S.; Boczkaj, G. Advanced Oxidation Processes (AOPs) Based Wastewater Treatment—Unexpected Nitration Side Reactions—A Serious Environmental Issue: A Review. Chem. Eng. J. 2021 , 430 , 133002. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ghime, D.; Ghosh, P. Advanced Oxidation Processes: A Powerful Treatment Option for the Removal of Recalcitrant Organic Compounds. In Advanced Oxidation Processes—Applications, Trends, and Prospects ; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oturan, N.; Oturan, M.A. Electro-Fenton Process: Background, New Developments, and Applications. In Electrochemical Water and Wastewater Treatment ; Martínez-Huitle, C.A., Rodrigo, M.A., Scialdone, O., Eds.; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2018; pp. 193–221. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pliego, G.; Zazo, J.A.; Garcia-Muñoz, P.; Munoz, M.; Casas, J.A.; Rodriguez, J.J. Trends in the Intensification of the Fenton Process for Wastewater Treatment: An Overview. Crit. Rev. Env. Sci. Technol. 2015 , 45 , 2611–2692. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tang, J.; Wang, J. Metal Organic Framework with Coordinatively Unsaturated Sites as Efficient Fenton-like Catalyst for Enhanced Degradation of Sulfamethazine. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018 , 52 , 5367–5377. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, J.; Wang, S. Reactive Species in Advanced Oxidation Processes: Formation, Identification and Reaction Mechanism. Chem. Eng. J. 2020 , 401 , 126158. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, M.; Dong, H.; Zhao, L.; Wang, D.; Meng, D. A Review on Fenton Process for Organic Wastewater Treatment Based on Optimization Perspective. Sci. Total Environ. 2019 , 670 , 110–121. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, X.; Huang, Z.; Sun, H.; Zhao, Q.; Huang, Z.; Zhang, C.; Wang, Y.; Yang, C.; Zhou, Z. Comparison on Molecular Transformation of Dissolved Organic Matter during Fenton and Activated Carbon Adsorption Processes for Chemical Cleaning Wastewater Treatment. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2024 , 344 , 127226. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, X.; Dai, Y.; Li, Y.; Yin, L. Application of Advanced Oxidation Processes for the Removal of Micro/Nanoplastics from Water: A Review. Chemosphere 2024 , 346 , 140636. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ortiz, D.; Munoz, M.; Nieto-Sandoval, J.; Romera-Castillo, C.; de Pedro, Z.M.; Casas, J.A. Insights into the Degradation of Microplastics by Fenton Oxidation: From Surface Modification to Mineralization. Chemosphere 2022 , 309 , 136809. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ziembowicz, S.; Kida, M. Limitations and Future Directions of Application of the Fenton-like Process in Micropollutants Degradation in Water and Wastewater Treatment: A Critical Review. Chemosphere 2022 , 296 , 134041. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sobczak, M.; Bujnowicz, S.; Bilińska, L. Fenton and Electro-Fenton Treatment for Industrial Textile Wastewater Recycling. Comparison of By-Products Removal, Biodegradability, Toxicity, and Re-Dyeing. Water Resour. Ind. 2024 , 31 , 100256. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, M.; Li, Q.; Li, H.; Yang, P. Enhanced Heterogeneous Electro-Fenton Degradation of Salicylic Acid by Different Fe 3 O 4 Loaded Carriers. Desalination Water Treat. 2024 , 320 , 100723. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhu, Y.; Xie, Q.; Deng, F.; Ni, Z.; Lin, Q.; Cheng, L.; Chen, X.; Qiu, R.; Zhu, R. The Differences in Heterogeneous Fenton Catalytic Performance and Mechanism of Various Iron Minerals and Their Influencing Factors: A Review. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2023 , 325 , 124702. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Z.; Demeestere, K.; Hulle, S.V. Comparison and Performance Assessment of Ozone-Based AOPs in View of Trace Organic Contaminants Abatement in Water and Wastewater: A Review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021 , 9 , 105599. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Derco, J.; Gotvajn, A.Ž.; Čižmárová, O.; Dudáš, J.; Sumegová, L.; Šimovičová, K. Removal of Micropollutants by Ozone-Based Processes. Processes 2021 , 9 , 1013. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tripathi, S.C.; Hussain, T. Water and Wastewater Treatment through Ozone-Based Technologies. In Development in Wastewater Treatment Research and Processes ; Shah, M., Rodriguez-Couto, S., Biswas, J., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 139–172. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rekhate, C.V.; Srivastava, J.K. Recent Advances in Ozone-Based Advanced Oxidation Processes for Treatment of Wastewater- a Review. Chem. Eng. J. Adv. 2020 , 3 , 100031. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Derco, J.; Dudáš, J.; Valičková, M.; Šimovičová, K.; Kecskés, J. Removal of Micropollutants by Ozone Based Processes. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2015 , 94 , 78–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deng, L.-Z.; Mujumdar, A.S.; Pan, Z.; Vidyarthi, S.K.; Xu, J.; Zielinska, M.; Xiao, H.-W. Emerging Chemical and Physical Disinfection Technologies of Fruits and Vegetables: A Comprehensive Review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019 , 60 , 2481–2508. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Gou, X.; Yuan, D.; Wang, L.; Xie, L.; Wei, L.; Zhang, G. Enhancing Ozone Production in Dielectric Barrier Discharge Utilizing Water as Electrode. Vacuum 2023 , 212 , 112047. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Joseph, C.G.; Farm, Y.Y.; Taufiq-Yap, Y.H.; Pang, C.K.; Nga, J.L.H.; Li Puma, G. Ozonation Treatment Processes for the Remediation of Detergent Wastewater: A Comprehensive Review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021 , 9 , 106099. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Presumido, P.H.; Ribeirinho-Soares, S.; Montes, R.; Quintana, J.B.; Rodil, R.; Ribeiro, M.; Neuparth, T.; Santos, M.M.; Feliciano, M.; Nunes, O.C.; et al. Ozone Membrane Contactor for Tertiary Treatment of Urban Wastewater: Chemical, Microbial and Toxicological Assessment. Sci. Total. Environ. 2023 , 892 , 164492. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lee, W.; Choi, S.; Kim, H.; Lee, W.; Lee, M.; Son, H.J.; Chang, H.L.; Cho, M.; Lee, Y. Efficiency of Ozonation and O 3 /H 2 O 2 as Enhanced Wastewater Treatment Processes for Micropollutant Abatement and Disinfection with Minimized Byproduct Formation. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023 , 454 , 131436. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Miklos, D.B.; Wang, W.-L.; Linden, K.G.; Drewes, J.E.; Hübner, U. Comparison of UV-AOPs (UV/H 2 O 2 , UV/PDS and UV/Chlorine) for TOrC Removal from Municipal Wastewater Effluent and Optical Surrogate Model Evaluation. Chem. Eng. J. 2019 , 362 , 537–547. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miklos, D.B.; Hartl, R.; Philipp, M.; Linden, K.G.; Drewes, J.E.; Hübner, U. UV/H 2 O 2 Process Stability and Pilot-Scale Validation for Trace Organic Chemical Removal from Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluents. Water Res. 2018 , 136 , 169–179. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Collivignarelli, M.C.; Pedrazzani, R.; Sorlini, S.; Abbà, A.; Bertanza, G. H 2 O 2 Based Oxidation Processes for the Treatment of Real High Strength Aqueous Wastes. Sustainability 2017 , 9 , 244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, Y.; Zhang, J.; Li, C.; Tian, F.; Gao, N. Comparative Evaluation of Metoprolol Degradation by UV/Chlorine and UV/H 2 O 2 Processes. Chemosphere 2020 , 243 , 125325. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Farzanehsa, M.S.Z.; Vaughan, L.; Zamyadi, A.; Khan, S.J. Comparison of UV-Cl and UV-H 2 O 2 Advanced Oxidation Processes in the Degradation of Contaminants from Water and Wastewater: A Review. Water Environ. J. 2023 , 37 , 633–643. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Akerdi, A.T.; Bahrami, S.H. Application of Heterogeneous Nano-Semiconductors for Photocatalytic Advanced Oxidation of Organic Compounds: A Review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2019 , 7 , 103283. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmaruzzaman, M.; Raha, S. ZnO Nanostructured Materials and Their Potential Applications: Progress, Challenges and Perspectives. Nanoscale Adv. 2022 , 8 , 1868–1925. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Martínez-Escudero, C.M.; Garrido, I.; Contreras, F.; Hellín, P.; Flores, P.; León-Morán, L.O.; Arroyo-Manzanares, N.; Campillo, N.; Pastor, M.; Viñas, P.; et al. Photodecomposition of Antibiotics and Their Transformation Products in Wastewaters Using ZnO and TiO 2 with LED Lamps. J. Photochem. Photobiol. A Chem. 2024 , 454 , 115732. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Allé, P.H.; Garcia-Muñoz, P.; Adouby, K.; Keller, N.; Robert, D. Efficient Photocatalytic Mineralization of Polymethylmethacrylate and Polystyrene Nanoplastics by TiO 2 /β-SiC Alveolar Foams. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2020 , 19 , 1803–1808. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Domínguez-Jaimes, L.P.; Cedillo-González, E.I.; Luévano-Hipólito, E.; Acuña-Bedoya, J.D.; Hernández-López, J.M. Degradation of Primary Nanoplastics by Photocatalysis Using Different Anodized TiO 2 Structures. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021 , 413 , 125452. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Beyazıt, N.; Karaca, H. Performance comparison of UV, UV/H 2 O 2 , UV/Fe 2+ , H 2 O 2 /Fe 2+ , UV/H 2 O 2 /Fe 2+ processes in the removal of COD and color from textile wastewater. J. Sci. Rep.-A 2020 , 45 , 236–252. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moreira, F.C.; Boaventura, R.A.R.; Brillas, E.; Vilar, V.J.P. Electrochemical Advanced Oxidation Processes: A Review on Their Application to Synthetic and Real Wastewaters. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2017 , 202 , 217–261. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ganiyu, S.O.; Martínez-Huitle, C.A.; Rodrigo, M.A. Renewable Energies Driven Electrochemical Wastewater/Soil Decontamination Technologies: A Critical Review of Fundamental Concepts and Applications. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2020 , 270 , 118857. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xie, J.; Zhang, C.; Waite, T.D. Hydroxyl Radicals in Anodic Oxidation Systems: Generation, Identification and Quantification. Water Res. 2022 , 217 , 118425. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hu, Z.; Cai, J.; Song, G.; Tian, Y.; Zhou, M. Anodic Oxidation of Organic Pollutants: Anode Fabrication, Process Hybrid and Environmental Applications. Curr. Opin. Electrochem. 2021 , 26 , 100659. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, S.; Jeong, Y.; Park, M.-O.; Jang, Y.; Bae, J.-S.; Hong, K.-S.; Kim, S.; Song, P.; Yoon, J.H. Development of Boron Doped Diamond Electrodes Material for Heavy Metal Ion Sensor with High Sensitivity and Durability. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023 , 23 , 1375–1385. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vinayagam, V.; Palani, K.N.; Ganesh, S.; Rajesh, S.; Akula, V.V.; Avoodaiappan, R.; Kushwaha, O.S.; Pugazhendhi, A. Recent developments on advanced oxidation processes for degradation of pollutants from wastewater with focus on antibiotics and organic dyes. Environ. Res. 2024 , 240 , 117500. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Brillas, E.; Garcia-Segura, S. Benchmarking Recent Advances and Innovative Technology Approaches of Fenton, Photo-Fenton, Electro-Fenton, and Related Processes: A Review on the Relevance of Phenol as Model Molecule. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2020 , 237 , 116337. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Brillas, E. Fenton, Photo-Fenton, Electro-Fenton, and Their Combined Treatments for the Removal of Insecticides from Waters and Soils. A Review. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022 , 284 , 120290. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Monteil, H.; Péchaud, Y.; Oturan, N.; Oturan, M.A. A Review on Efficiency and Cost Effectiveness of Electro- and Bio-Electro-Fenton Processes: Application to the Treatment of Pharmaceutical Pollutants in Water. Chem. Eng. J. 2019 , 376 , 119577. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ismail, S.A.; Ang, W.L.; Mohammad, A.W. Electro-Fenton Technology for Wastewater Treatment: A Bibliometric Analysis of Current Research Trends, Future Perspectives and Energy Consumption Analysis. J. Water Process Eng. 2021 , 40 , 101952. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Madhavan, J.; Theerthagiri, J.; Balaji, D.; Sunitha, S.; Choi, M.; Ashokkumar, M. Hybrid Advanced Oxidation Processes Involving Ultrasound: An Overview. Molecules 2019 , 24 , 3341. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Serna-Galvis, E.A.; Porras, J.; Torres-Palma, R.A. A Critical Review on the Sonochemical Degradation of Organic Pollutants in Urine, Seawater, and Mineral Water. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2022 , 82 , 105861. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hayati, F.; Khodabakhshi, M.R.; Isari, A.A.; Moradi, S.; Kakavandi, B. LED-Assisted Sonocatalysis of Sulfathiazole and Pharmaceutical Wastewater Using N, Fe Co-Doped TiO 2 @SWCNT: Optimization, Performance and Reaction Mechanism Studies. J. Water Process Eng. 2020 , 38 , 101693. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Calcio Gaudino, E.; Canova, E.; Liu, P.; Wu, Z.; Cravotto, G. Degradation of Antibiotics in Wastewater: New Advances in Cavitational Treatments. Molecules 2021 , 26 , 617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saleh, R.; Taufik, A. Degradation of Methylene Blue and Congo-Red Dyes Using Fenton, Photo-Fenton, Sono-Fenton, and Sonophoto-Fenton Methods in the Presence of Iron(II,III) Oxide/Zinc Oxide/Graphene (Fe 3 O 4 /ZnO/Graphene) Composites. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019 , 210 , 563–573. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nicodemos, D.; Santana, C.S.; Silva, C.C.; Magalhães, F.; Aguiar, A. A Review on the Treatment of Textile Industry Effluents through Fenton Processes. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2021 , 155 , 366–386. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ofori, S.; Puškáčová, A.; Růžičková, I.; Wanner, J. Treated Wastewater Reuse for Irrigation: Pros and Cons. Sci. Total Environ. 2021 , 760 , 144026. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Adeel, M.; Maniakova, G.; Rizzo, L. Tertiary/Quaternary Treatment of Urban Wastewater by UV/H 2 O 2 or Ozonation: Microplastics May Affect Removal of E. Coli and Contaminants of Emerging Concern. Sci. Total Environ. 2024 , 907 , 167940. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Ding, N.; Li, Z.; Jiang, L.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, Y. Kinetics and Mechanisms of Bacteria Disinfection by Performic Acid in Wastewater: In Comparison with Peracetic Acid and Sodium Hypochlorite. Sci. Total. Environ. 2023 , 878 , 162606. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cheng, L.; Wei, X.; Gao, A.; Zhou, L.; Shi, X.; Zhou, X.; Bi, X.; Yang, T.; Huang, S. Performance and Mechanism of Sequential UV-NaClO Disinfection: Inactivation and Reactivation of Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, Disinfection Byproduct Formation and Microbial Community Variation. J. Water Process Eng. 2024 , 58 , 104824. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Q.; Cui, X.; Gao, X.; Chen, X.; Zhao, H. Intelligent Dosing of Sodium Hypochlorite in Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants: Experimental and Modeling Studies. J. Water Process Eng. 2024 , 64 , 105662. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Andrés, C.M.C.; Pérez de la Lastra, J.M.; Juan, C.A.; Plou, F.J.; Pérez-Lebeña, E. Hypochlorous Acid Chemistry in Mammalian Cells—Influence on Infection and Role in Various Pathologies. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022 , 23 , 10735. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kesar, S.; Bhatti, M.S. Chlorination of Secondary Treated Wastewater with Sodium Hypochlorite (NaOCl): An Effective Single Alternate to Other Disinfectants. Heliyon 2022 , 8 , e11162. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shi, C.; Li, C.; Wang, Y.; Guo, J.; Barry, S.; Zhang, Y.; Marmier, N. Review of Advanced Oxidation Processes Based on Peracetic Acid for Organic Pollutants. Water 2022 , 14 , 2309. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, G.-Y.; Lin, Y.-H.; Fu, C.-H.; Lin, C.-H.; Muthiah, B.; Espulgar, W.V.; Santos, G.N.; Yu, D.E.; Kasai, T. Quantification of Peracetic Acid (PAA) in the H 2 O 2 + Acetic Acid Reaction by the Wavelength Shift Analysis in Near-UV/Visible Absorption Region. Anal. Sci. 2024 , 40 , 489–499. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lin, Y.; He, Y.; Sun, Q.; Ping, Q.; Huang, M.; Wang, L.; Li, Y. Underlying the Mechanisms of Pathogen Inactivation and Regrowth in Wastewater Using Peracetic Acid-Based Disinfection Processes: A Critical Review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2024 , 463 , 132868. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, J.; Chen, W.; Wang, T.; Reid, E.; Krall, C.; Kim, J.; Zhang, T.; Xie, X.; Huang, C.-H. Bacteria and Virus Inactivation: Relative Efficacy and Mechanisms of Peroxyacids and Chlor(Am)Ine. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2023 , 57 , 18710–18721. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, Y.; Xiang, J.-L.; Wang, J.; Du, H.-S.; Wang, T.; Huo, Z.-Y.; Wang, W.; Liu, M.; Du, Y. Ultraviolet-Based Synergistic Processes for Wastewater Disinfection: A Review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2023 , 453 , 131393. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Foschi, J.; Turolla, A.; Antonelli, M. Artificial Neural Network Modeling of Full-Scale UV Disinfection for Process Control Aimed at Wastewater Reuse. J. Environ. Manag. 2021 , 300 , 113790. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Manoli, K.; Naziri, A.; Ttofi, I.; Michael, C.; Allan, I.J.; Fatta-Kassinos, D. Investigation of the Effect of Microplastics on the UV Inactivation of Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria in Water. Water Res. 2022 , 222 , 118906. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sun, X.; Wang, Z.; Xuan, X.; Ji, L.; Li, X.; Tao, Y.; Boczkaj, G.; Zhao, S.; Yoon, J.Y.; Chen, S. Disinfection Characteristics of an Advanced Rotational Hydrodynamic Cavitation Reactor in Pilot Scale. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2021 , 73 , 105543. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Suprakas, S.R.; Rashi, G.; Kumar, N. Water Purification Using Various Technologies and Their Advantages and Disadvantages. In Carbon Nanomaterial-Based Adsorbents for Water Purification ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 37–66. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Y.; Duan, X.; Zhou, X.; Wang, R.; Wang, S.; Ren, N.; Ho, S.-H. Advanced Oxidation Processes for Water Disinfection: Features, Mechanisms and Prospects. Chem. Eng. J. 2021 , 409 , 128207. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Z.; Yang, D.; Li, S.; Yang, L.; Yan, W.; Xu, H. Advances on Electrochemical Disinfection Research: Mechanisms, Influencing Factors and Applications. Sci. Total Environ. 2024 , 912 , 169043. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mosquera-Romero, S.; Prévoteau, A.; Louage, F.; Dominguez-Granda, L.; Korneel, R.; Diederik, P.L. Rousseau Fouling and Energy Consumption Impede Electrochemical Disinfection of Constructed Wetland Effluents. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2024 , 12 , 113348. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, H.; Dechesne, A.; He, Z.; Jensen, M.M.; Song, H.L.; Smets, B.F. Electrochemical Disinfection May Increase the Spread of Antibiotic Resistance Genes by Promoting Conjugal Plasmid Transfer. Sci. Total Environ. 2023 , 858 , 159846. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Jurík, J.; Jankovičová, B.; Zakhar, R.; Šoltýsová, N.; Derco, J. Quaternary Treatment of Urban Wastewater for Its Reuse. Processes 2024 , 12 , 1905. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091905

Jurík J, Jankovičová B, Zakhar R, Šoltýsová N, Derco J. Quaternary Treatment of Urban Wastewater for Its Reuse. Processes . 2024; 12(9):1905. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091905

Jurík, Jakub, Barbora Jankovičová, Ronald Zakhar, Nikola Šoltýsová, and Ján Derco. 2024. "Quaternary Treatment of Urban Wastewater for Its Reuse" Processes 12, no. 9: 1905. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091905

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Perspective
• Published: 17 March 2020

The hidden potential of urban horticulture

• Jill L. Edmondson   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3623-4816 1 , 2 ,
• Hamish Cunningham   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5901-5483 2 , 3 ,
• Daniele O. Densley Tingley 4 ,
• Miriam C. Dobson 1 , 2 ,
• Darren R. Grafius   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6833-4993 1 , 2 ,
• Jonathan R. Leake 1 , 2 ,
• Nicola McHugh 1 ,
• Jacob Nickles   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5754-0740 1 , 2 ,
• Gareth K. Phoenix 1 ,
• Anthony J. Ryan 2 , 5 ,
• Virginia Stovin 4 ,
• Nick Taylor Buck 6 ,
• Philip H. Warren 1 &
• Duncan D. Cameron   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5439-6544 1 , 2  

Nature Food volume  1 ,  pages 155–159 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

69 Citations

443 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Agriculture
• Engineering
• Environmental sciences
• Science, technology and society

Urban areas offer considerable potential for horticultural food production, but questions remain about the availability of space to expand urban horticulture and how to sustainably integrate it into the existing urban fabric. We explore this through a case study which shows that, for a UK city, the space potentially available equates to more than four times the current per capita footprint of commercial horticulture. Results indicate that there is more than enough urban land available within the city to meet the fruit and vegetable requirements of its population. Building on this case study, we also propose a generic conceptual framework that identifies key scientific, engineering and socio-economic challenges to, and opportunities for, the realization of untapped urban horticultural potential.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

111,21 € per year

only 9,27 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Urban conservation gardening in the decade of restoration

Estimating food production in an urban landscape

Scale up urban agriculture to leverage transformative food systems change, advance social–ecological resilience and improve sustainability

Data availability.

The datasets generated from GIS analyses using OS Mastermap for areas of green space and flat roofs potentially suitable for urban horticulture identified in Sheffield are available via Mendeley Data ( https://doi.org/10.17632/2fscg3m53d.1 ).

Loopstra, R., Reeves, A. & Stuckler, D. Rising food insecurity in Europe. Lancet 385 , 2041–2041 (2015).

Article   Google Scholar  

Zepeda, L. Hiding hunger: food insecurity in middle America. Agric. Hum. Values 35 , 243–254 (2018).

68% of the world population projected to live in urban areas by 2050, says UN. UN DESA (16 May 2018); https://go.nature.com/2PBUg00

Mok, H.-F. et al. Strawberry fields forever? Urban agriculture in developed countries: a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 34 , 21–43 (2014).

Orsini, F., Kahane, R., Nono-Womdim, R. & Gianuinto, G. Urban agriculture in the developing world: a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 33 , 695–720 (2013).

Morgan, K. Nourishing the city: The rise of the urban food question in the Global North. Urban Stud. 52 , 1379–1394 (2015).

UK NEA The UK National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report (UNEP WCMC, 2011).

Dennis, M. et al. Mapping urban green infrastructure: A novel landscape-based approach to incorporating land use and land cover in the mapping of human-dominated systems. Land 7 , 17 (2018).

Casalegno, S., Anderson, K., Hancock, S. & Gaston, K. J. Improving models of urban greenspace: from vegetation surface cover to volumetric survey, using waveform laser scanning. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8 , 1443–1452 (2017).

Edmondson, J. L., Davies, Z. G., McHugh, N., Gaston, K. J. & Leake, J. R. Organic carbon hidden in urban ecosystems. Sci. Rep. 2 , 963 (2012).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Horticultural Statistics—2018 (Defra, 2019).

Labour Market Profile—Sheffield (ONS, accessed 10 July 2018); https://go.nature.com/2HoHw8t

Output Area to Major Towns and Cities (December 2015) Lookup in England and Wales (ONS, accessed 7 October 2019); https://go.nature.com/2uBQaxR

The Area Based Analysis Unit, Office for National Statistics 1. Understanding patterns of deprivation. Reg. Trends 41 , 93–114 (2009).

Smith, D., Thompson, C., Harland, K., Parker, S. & Shelton, N. Identifying populations and areas at greatest risk of household food insecurity in England. Appl. Geogr. 91 , 21–31 (2018).

Crouch, D. & Ward, C. The Allotment: Its Landscape and Culture (Five Leaves Publications, 1997).

McHugh, N., Edmondson, J. L., Gaston, K. J., Leake, J. R. & O’Sullivan, O. S. Modelling short-rotation coppice and tree planting for urban carbon management - a citywide analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 52 , 1237–1245 (2015).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Grafius, D. R., Hall, S., McHugh, N. & Edmondson, J. L. How much heat can we grow in our cities? Modelling UK urban biofuel production potential. Glob. Change Biol. Bioenergy 12 , 118–132 (2020).

Al-Kodmany, K. The vertical farm: A review of developments and implications for the vertical city. Buildings 8 , 24 (2018).

Richardson, J. J. & Moskal, L. M. Urban food crop production capacity and competition with the urban forest. Urban For. Urban Green. 15 , 58–64 (2016).

Ackerman, K. et al. Sustainable food systems for future cities: The potential of urban agriculture. Econ. Soc. Rev. 45 , 189–206 (2014).

Google Scholar  

McClintock, N., Cooper, J. & Khandeshi, S. Assessing the potential contribution of vacant land to urban vegetable production and consumption in Oakland, California. Landsc. Urban Plan. 111 , 46–58 (2013).

Taylor, J. R. & Lovell, S. T. Mapping public and private spaces of urban agriculture in Chicago through the analysis of high-resolution aerial images in Google Earth. Landsc. Urban Plan. 108 , 57–70 (2012).

Martelozzo, F. et al. Urban agriculture: a global analysis of the space constraint to meet urban vegetable demand. Environ. Res. Lett. 9 , 064025 (2014).

Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation on Diets, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases Technical Report No. 916 (WHO, 2003).

Edmondson, J. L. et al. Feeding a city - Leicester as a case study of the importance of allotments for horticultural production in the UK. Sci. Total Environ. 705 , 135930 (2020).

White, J. T. & Bunn, C. Growing in Glasgow: Innovative practices and emerging policy pathways for urban agriculture. Land Use Policy 68 , 334–344 (2017).

Baldock, K. C. R. et al. A systems approach reveals urban pollinator hotspots and conservation opportunities. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3 , 363–373 (2019).

Edmondson, J. L., Davies, Z. G., Gaston, K. J. & Leake, J. R. Urban cultivation in allotments maintains soil qualities adversely affected by conventional agriculture. J. Appl. Ecol. 51 , 880–889 (2014).

Lin, B. B., Philpott, S. M. & Jha, S. The future of urban agriculture and biodiversity-ecosystem services: Challenges and next steps. Basic Appl. Ecol. 16 , 189–201 (2015).

Tablan, V., Roberts, I., Cunningham, H. & Bontcheva, K. GATECloud.net: a platform for large-scale, open-source text processing on the cloud. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 371 , 20120071 (2016).

Howard, T., Kuri, L. & Lee, I. P. Writing the Next Chapter for Anchor-based Redevelopment Initiatives (Evergreen Cooperative Initiative of Cleveland, Ohio, 2010); https://go.nature.com/3crocWn

Wright, H. C., Zhu, J., Cameron, D. D. & Ryan, A. J. Flexible polyurethane foam with sodium bentonite: Improving the properties of foams for use as a synthetic growing media. Acta Horticult . (in the press).

Dunant, C. F., Dreniok, M. P., Elefheriadis, S., Cullen, J. M. & Allwood, J. M. Regularity and optimisation practice in steel structural frames in real design cases. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 134 , 294–302 (2018).

Haberman, D. et al. The potential of urban agriculture in Montreal: A quantitative assessment. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inform. 3 , 1101–1117 (2014).

Sonnino, R. The new geography of food security: exploring the potential of urban food strategies. Geogr. J. 182 , 190–200 (2016).

Milan Urban Food Policy Pact (MUFPP, 2015); http://www.milanurbanfoodpolicypact.org/text

Draft Food and Wellbeing Strategy (Sheffield City Council, 2018); https://go.nature.com/2SreRGh

Maye, D. ‘Smart food city’: conceptual relations between smart city planning, urban food systems and innovation theory. City Cult. Soc. 16 , 18–24 (2019).

Bohn, K. & Viljoen, A. The edible city: envisioning the continuous productive urban lanscape. Field 4 , 149–161 (2010).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) under grant nos EP/N030095/1, EPSRC GCRF IS2016 and EPSRC EP/P016782/1, the ISCF Transforming Food Production Award and a University of Sheffield PhDT studentship.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Jill L. Edmondson, Miriam C. Dobson, Darren R. Grafius, Jonathan R. Leake, Nicola McHugh, Jacob Nickles, Gareth K. Phoenix, Philip H. Warren & Duncan D. Cameron

Institute for Sustainable Food, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Jill L. Edmondson, Hamish Cunningham, Miriam C. Dobson, Darren R. Grafius, Jonathan R. Leake, Jacob Nickles, Anthony J. Ryan & Duncan D. Cameron

Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Hamish Cunningham

Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Daniele O. Densley Tingley & Virginia Stovin

Department of Chemistry, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Anthony J. Ryan

Urban Institute, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK

Nick Taylor Buck

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors wrote the manuscript. N.M., D.R.G. and J.L.E. designed the spatial analyses. J.L.E. and J.R.L. designed the SBH research. M.C.D., P.H.W. and J.L.E. investigated the labour involved in allotment-based urban horticulture. D.D.C., G.K.P. and A.J.R. researched CEH foams. V.S. advised on water use. D.O.D.T. provided expertise on building structure. H.C., D.D.C., A.J.R., J.L.E., N.T.B. and J.N. researched CEH.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jill L. Edmondson .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Edmondson, J.L., Cunningham, H., Densley Tingley, D.O. et al. The hidden potential of urban horticulture. Nat Food 1 , 155–159 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0045-6

Download citation

Received : 07 October 2019

Accepted : 11 February 2020

Published : 17 March 2020

Issue Date : March 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-020-0045-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Mathematical optimization of frost resistant crop production to ensure food supply during a nuclear winter catastrophe.

• Nick Wilson

Scientific Reports (2023)

Urban agriculture in walkable neighborhoods bore fruit for health and food system resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic

• Takahiro Yamazaki
• Makoto Yokohari

npj Urban Sustainability (2023)

The bright and the dark side of commercial urban agriculture labeling

• Marilyne Chicoine
• Francine Rodier
• Fabien Durif

Agriculture and Human Values (2023)

Trait Improvement of Solanaceae Fruit Crops for Vertical Farming by Genome Editing

• Choon-Tak Kwon

Journal of Plant Biology (2023)

Low presence of potentially toxic elements in Singapore urban garden soils

• Tiong Ann Goh
• Sorain J. Ramchunder
• Alan D. Ziegler

CABI Agriculture and Bioscience (2022)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.