top of page
Riley Barker

Rethinking Food Systems in Cities: The Case for Urban Agriculture Zoning and Subsidies

Introduction
Conventional agricultural practices employed by food companies across the United States are not sustainable and face existential threats from natural disasters, land degradation, desertification, and increasing costs in production (Hurlburt & Krishnaswamy et al., 2019). Such crises will inevitably exacerbate food insecurity, an enduring failure in the national food system. As of 2021, about 33.8 million people, including 5 million children, suffer from food insecurity; low-income communities of color are most likely to live in such conditions (USDA, 2021). For example, Washington, DC’s Wards 7 and 8, which are almost exclusively low-income and African American, have one supermarket per 70,000 people, while Wards 2 and 3, which are predominantly high-income and white, have one per 11,881 people (Hagey et al., 2012). In response to traditional agricultural systems’ shortcomings and the inequalities in food access they create, some municipalities, community organizing groups, and nonprofits have turned to urban agriculture to increase the availability of nutritious food while simultaneously rejuvenating local economies and promoting socio-political agency for areas that have suffered disinvestment and neglect (Hagey et al., 2012). As the relevance of urban farming continues to grow, there is a compelling case for local, state, and federal actors to offer sweeping support for developing urban agricultural systems utilizing financial and regulatory means.

Two Urban Farming Methods
Developments in local farming projects have already created food systems that are semi-localized and which largely eliminate long-range transportation costs and supply chain issues. Additionally, as indoor agricultural technology scales, farming as a general practice is becoming less dependent on seasonal harvests, can use less water than traditional agriculture, and does not need to develop new land to operate. This analysis includes a short survey of two urban farming approaches. Wider adoption of these methods and others, such as rooftop gardens and greenhouses, could reduce the dependence of city food systems on imported food products and food corporations.

1. Repurposing vacant lots into community gardens and cooperative farm projects.

Community gardens produce more food per sqft than conventional agricultural practices (Algert et al., 2014). However, their benefits go far beyond increased yield. Cooperative urban agricultural spaces yield fresher food, increase property values, reduce environmental degradation and urban blight, and can represent sites of resistance against intersecting vectors of systemic oppression for members of marginalized communities (Carlet, 2017; White, 2011; Cumbers et al., 2018). Studies find community gardens are spaces where people form meaningful connections between each other, the food they consume, and the environment, resulting in positive mental health impacts, reduced crime, the preservation of diverse cultural heritages, and political/civic empowerment (Mackenzie, 2016; Koay, 2020; Zutter et al., 2023). Currently, around 16.7% of lands in large US cities are vacant lots, which tend to be odd-shaped or too small for traditional development (Newman et al., 2016). Using this land for urban agriculture projects could ensure food sovereignty and community stability in areas that experience food apartheid and other socio-economic precarity.

2. Repurposing vacant buildings into vertical, indoor farms.

Cushman & Wakefield, a global commercial real estate services firm, predicts that
there will be a surplus of 330 million square feet of vacant office space in the United States by 2030 (Corbet et al., 2023). A national shift to remote or hybrid work in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic has left many office spaces empty, which means this space has the potential to be used in new, creative ways. Most office buildings already possess the temperature, energy, and water infrastructure, which are prerequisites for indoor, climate-controlled vertical farming operations. In the past decade, venture capital has spearheaded such farms, investing sporadically in tech-sector-adjacent projects. Though the overall market is nascent, some vertical farms have already seen success, as in the cases of Jackson Hole’s Vertical Harvest and AeroFarms (Birkby, 2016). Vertical indoor farming reduces the environmental impacts of conventional farming while increasing yield (Al-Kodmany 2018). Such systems may cut water use by up to 80% and avoid emissions created by traditional planting and harvesting, all the while increasing yield by 30x per acre – though private companies and academic estimates place this number closer to 100x, 250x or even 516x, depending on the type of crop being grown and the growth environment (Despommier, 2013; Banerjee and Adenaeuer, 2013).

Drawbacks
Despite some successes in small community farms and limited markets, implementing urban agriculture at a larger scale will be an uphill battle. Outdoor urban farming can run into physical threats like contaminants in the air, soil, or water systems (Hagey et al., 2012). Indoor vertical farming projects are energy-intensive because they typically require large scale infrastructure such as artificial light, water delivery systems, and climate controlled indoor environments. Private ventures have therefore elicited enormous upfront costs. Securing the initial space for urban agriculture efforts has also proved challenging as it requires navigating complex land laws and fending off predatory private land-redevelopment companies (Mayer, 2019). Without extensive research and development efforts, protection and funding from the government, and public support, urban farming projects will be both severely limited in scope and constantly under threat by external competition.

Recommendations

Both urban agriculture strategies listed above require substantial financial and regulatory oversight at all levels of government. Federal agencies should prioritize spending. In 2023, the USDA’s Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production secured $7.4 million in additional grant monies for twenty-five urban agriculture projects, building off $40 million in funding allocated since 2020. However, the twenty-five selected projects represent just 10% of more than three hundred applications across the country (USDA, 2023). Less efficient or wasteful spending can be strategically rebudgeted; intra-agency reallocations could facilitate a gradual expansion of the office and its activities. Other federal departments such as the EPA, HUD, and HHS can also play a role in securing funding for federally sponsored efforts. Additional funding could come from specific urban agriculture provisions in national spending bills. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act allocated $16.7 billion towards Agricultural Conservation, but such efforts are targeted at traditional farmland and agro-business, not innovative urban agricultural initiatives. Future bills could allocate special monies for direct municipal subsidies to community initiatives and provide tax incentives to emerging sustainable agriculture private markets like vertical farming and lab-grown protein.

State governments should prioritize spending, but they can also act in an oversight and enforcement capacity. Comprehensive legislation which incentivizes the expansion of urban farms and community-owned agriculture projects through the allocation of state discretionary monies should be passed to streamline and fast-track their development. Legislation that has supported local and regional food systems in the past includes Carolina Senate Bill 1067, Montana House Bill 583, Oregon House Bill 2763, Vermont House Bill 313, and Minnesota House F 1122 (Hagey et al., 2012). In 2023, the New York State Department of Agriculture awarded $800,000 in grants ranging from $5,700 - $25,000 to 35 urban farms and community gardens (NASDA, 2023). Such steps are proactive but constitute only a fraction of what these farms require to lessen the burden of food production on rural farmers.

At the municipal level, city governments can amend zoning laws to facilitate the development of creative agricultural and mixed-use urban spaces. However, policymakers must be strategic: not all public-private land programs will aid community gardens. For example, the Philadelphia Land Bank system disadvantages urban farmers by selling vacant city-owned lands to private developers (Schmidt, 2023). Stronger, progressive municipal zoning laws should pre-allocate a large percentage of public vacant lots, reserving such land for urban agriculture efforts and protecting farmers from predatory incursions by real estate firms and other capital investors.

Conclusion
The need for innovative urban farming operations will likely never fully supplant traditional agricultural methods, barring a sudden, irreversible shock to the global climate. A holistic approach to solving humanity's increasing food production needs must consider other strategies such as engineering crops for climate resilience, regenerative agriculture, and the development of better food storage and disposal technologies so an estimated 1.6 billion tons of food is not wasted annually (Ma et al., 2020). However, seven out of every ten humans on the planet will be living in cities by 2050 (United Nations, 2014); if we do not utilize some urban space for high-yield, space and water efficient localized agricultural production, the majority of the planet may become increasingly food insecure, relying entirely on a transportation economy which may not be able to meet import demand for fresh and nutritious foods.

The views expressed in this publication are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the position of The Rice Journal of Public Policy, its staff, or its Editorial Board.
 

References


Algert, Susan J., Aziz Baameur, and Marian J. Renvall. "Vegetable output and cost savings of community gardens in San Jose, California." Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 114.7 (2014): 1072-1076.

Al-Kodmany, Kheir. "The vertical farm: A review of developments and implications for the vertical city." Buildings 8.2 (2018): 24.Sustainability vol. 5. (2020): 1–51. doi:10.1016/bs.af2s.2020.08.002.

Avgoustaki, Dafni Despoina, and George Xydis. “How energy innovation in indoor vertical farming can improve food security, sustainability, and food safety?.” Advances in Food Security and Sustainability vol. 5 (2020): 1–51. doi:10.1016/bs.af2s.2020.08.002.

Banerjee, Chirantan, and Lucie Adenaeuer. “Up, up and Away! The Economics of Vertical Farming.” Journal of Agricultural Studies, vol. 2, no. 1, 2014, p. 40, doi:10.5296/jas.v2i1.4526.

Birkby, Jeff. "Vertical farming." ATTRA sustainable agriculture 2 (2016): 1-12.

Carlet, F., Schilling, J., & Heckert, M.. Greening US legacy cities: urban agriculture as a strategy for reclaiming vacant land. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 41(8), (2017). 887-906. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2017.1311288.

Corbet, Abby, et al. “Obsolescence Equals Opportunity: The Next Evolution of Office and How Repositioning and Repurposing Will Shape the Future”. Cushman and Wakefield, 2023. Obsolescence Equals Opportunity.

Cumbers, A., Shaw, D., Crossan, J., & McMaster, R. The Work of Community Gardens: Reclaiming Place for Community in the City. Work, Employment and Society, 32(1), 133-149. (2018) https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017017695042.

Despommier, Dickson. “Farming up the City: The Rise of Urban Vertical Farms.” Trends in Biotechnology, vol. 31, no. 7, 2013, pp. 388–389, doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.03.008.

Hagey, Allison, et al. “Growing Urban Agriculture: Equitable Strategies and Policies for Improving Access to Healthy Food and Revitalizing Communities.” PolicyLink (2012) www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/URBAN_AG_FULLREPORT.PDF.

Hurlbert, M., J. Krishnaswamy, et. al. “Risk Management and Decision making in Relation to Sustainable Development” Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. 2019. In press.

Koay, Way Inn, and Denise Dillon. “Community Gardening: Stress, Well-Being, and Resilience Potentials.” International journal of environmental research and public health vol. 17.18 6740. 16 Sep. 2020, doi:10.3390/ijerph17186740.
Ma, Yingqun, Yanqing Shen, and Yu Liu. "Food waste to biofertilizer: a potential game changer of global circular agricultural economy." (2020): 5021-5023.

Mackenzie, Annah. “Beyond Food: Community Gardens as Places of Connection and Empowerment.” RSS, Project for Public Spaces, 1 Mar. 2016, www.pps.org/article/beyond-food-community-gardens-as-places-of-connection-and-empowerment.

Mayer, Amy. “Near Cities, Land Owners and Urban Farmers Confront Pressure from Development.” Tri States Public Radio, Tri States, 4 Nov. 2021, www.tspr.org/harvest-public-media/2019-12-18/near-cities-land-owners-and-urban-farmers-confront-pressure-from-development.

Newman, Galen D., et. al. “A current inventory of vacant urban land in America” Journal of Urban Design, 21:3, (2016) 302-319, DOI: 10.1080/13574809.2016.1167589.

Rabbitt, P. Matthew, et al. “Key Statistics & Graphics.” USDA ERS. 2023. SDA ERS - USDA ERS - Key Statistics & Graphics.

Schmidt, Sophia. “Community Gardens Say Philly Land Bank Practice Makes Preservation Harder.” WHYY, 15 Mar. 2023, www.whyy.org/articles/philly-land-bank-30-year-self-amortizing-mortgage-community-gardens-unfair.
“State Department of Agriculture Announces $800,000 Awarded to Urban Farms and Community Gardens Across the State.” NY, NASDA, May 24, 2023, www.agriculture.ny.gov/news/state-department-agriculture-announces-800000-awarded-urban-farms-and-community-gardens-across.

“USDA Invests $7.4 Million in 25 Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production Efforts” USDA, 18 July 2023, www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2023/07/18/usda-invests-74-million-25-urban-agriculture-and-innovative.

United Nations (2014) World Urbanization Prospects: 2014 Revision, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, New York.

White, Monica M. “Sisters of the Soil: Urban Gardening asResistance in Detroit.” Race/Ethnicity: Multidisciplinary Global Contexts 5, no. 1 (2011): 13–28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.2979/racethmulglocon.5.1.13.pdf.

Zutter, Cynthia, and Ashley Stoltz. “Community gardens and urban agriculture: Healthy environment/healthy citizens.” International journal of mental health nursing, 10.1111/inm.13149. 5 Apr. 2023, doi:10.1111/inm.13149

Photo by Kinder Institute for Urban Research, Rice University



Comments


bottom of page