i An update to this article is included at the end

Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon

Review article

A review on urban agriculture: technology, socio-economy, and policy

Grace Ning Yuan a, Gian Powell B. Marquez b, *, Haoran Deng a, Anastasiia Iu a, Melisa Fabella c,
Reginald B. Salonga d, Fitrio Ashardiono e, Joyce A. Cartagena f
a
College of International Relations, Ritsumeikan University, Kita-ku, Kyoto 603-8577 Japan
b
College of Global Liberal Arts, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki, Osaka 567-8570 Japan
c
Graduate School of Economics, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Shiga, 525-8577 Japan
d
Institute for Advanced Education and Research, Nagoya City University, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya 467-8501 Japan
e
College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki, Osaka 567-8570 Japan
f
Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464 -8601 Japan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: It has been a challenge to support the expansion of urban agriculture (UA) in cities due to its poor economic
Urban agriculture profitability. However, it is also hard to deny the increasing benefits of UA in improving the socio-environmental
Vertical farming dimension of cities. Hence, in this review, different aspects of UA were examined to highlight its value beyond
Sustainable city
profitability such as social, health and well-being, disaster risk reduction, and environmental perspectives. A case
Policy
Genetically modified plants
study and relevant policies were analyzed to determine how policy makers can bridge the gap between current
and future UA practices and sustainable development. Bridging these policy gaps can help the UA sector to
sustainably grow and become successfully integrated in cities. Moreover, advancements in UA technologies and
plant biotechnology were presented as potential solutions in increasing the future profitability of commercial UA.
Consequently, as new UA-related technologies evolve, the multidisciplinary nature of UA and its changing identity
from agriculture to digital technology, similarly require adaptive policies. These policies should maximize the
potential of UA in contributing to resiliency and sustainability and incentivize the organic integration of UA in
cities, while equally serving social justice.

1. Introduction urban and peri-urban area, applying intensive production methods, using and
reusing natural resources and urban wastes, to yield a diversity of crops and
Agriculture has long been the major source of food for mankind. It has livestock.” UA is being positioned as a sustainable alternative for the
the potential to end world hunger and boost the economies of developing traditional methods that require colossal amounts of scarce natural re-
nations. It is also an essential industry that will remain at the center of sources such as water.
human activity for many centuries to come. However, the agricultural Preliminary to addressing the contemporary interests in UA, it should
system practiced today can hardly be called sustainable due to the be noted that though not as readily exemplified in the modern, developed
increasing strain it puts on our planet's scarce resources. Especially with world, agriculture does in fact have a longstanding history in urban
the growing population projected to peak at nearly 11 billion by 2100, spaces (Smit et al., 1996). Take for instance the widespread imple-
agriculture will struggle to meet the needs of the world population (UN, mentation of “war gardens” in the United States during the World Wars to
2019). To shoulder the increasing pressure, expansion of agriculture is bolster domestic food production during times of financial hardship.
necessary, but it is a challenging endeavor in the context of climate These gardens were later associated with themes of victory due to their
change, which requires transition to a model compatible with sustainable contributions to the war effort and representation of civilian patriotism
development. Urban agriculture (UA), which was practiced since ancient (Mares and Pe~ na, 2010). Yet another documented example is the use of
times, captured attention as a potential solution. According to Smit et al. garden areas in Japan during the Edo era both in and around castles
(1996), UA can be defined as “an industry that produces, process and which were cultivated by the local farmers and tenants. Many Japanese
markets food and fuel, largely in response to the daily demand of consumers cities during this time had integrated land use layouts, employing a
within a town, city or metropolis, on land and water dispersed throughout the combination of farmland and residential space (Yokohari et al., 2010). As

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gpbm@fc.ritsumei.ac.jp (G.P.B. Marquez).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11583
Received 19 February 2022; Received in revised form 17 May 2022; Accepted 7 November 2022
2405-8440/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

Fuji et al. (2002 in Yokohari et al., 2010) stated, such systems supplied energy consumption of urban hydroponic farms as an example, which
residents not only with fresh local produce, but with improved standards offsets its potential for greater yields and water conservation methods.
of sanitation due to their simultaneous utilization of night soil as Carolan (2020) also emphasized how tech-based or digital farming is
fertilizer. often capital-intensive in nature, which lacks economic viability in the
When placed in modern discourses however, UA has evolved as an absence of guaranteed long-term profits.
effective tool and commonly cited solution to many contemporary This paper has conducted an integrative review of the literature to
challenges. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set out by the identify the multifarious aspects of UA and how these have directly or
United Nations for the year 2030 is a direct manifestation of the types of indirectly contributed to the viability of its application. It seeks to update
initiatives in which UA can be employed for developed and developing and contribute to the UA topic by employing a multi-perspective
countries alike. Nicholls et al. (2020) examined urban and peri-urban approach and providing an integrated look into UA as a whole (Art-
agriculture by applying relevant sustainable development goals as a mann and Sartison, 2018; Haigh and Amaratunga, 2010; Snyder, 2019;
framework to consider the “synergies and tradeoffs across multiple ob- Torraco, 2016). To achieve this, the paper has drawn on two broad, yet
jectives.” In doing so, the impacts of UA within society were identified in related categories of literature. First, it accounts for research examining
relation to specific targets such as no poverty, zero hunger, sustainable the most recent developments in the field by offering a detailed analysis
communities and cities, and climate action. As this review will seek to of emerging practices such as vertical farming and plant biotechnology
detail, UA's extensive relation with such a set of goals is demonstrative of (Kalantari et al., 2018; Kwon et al., 2020; Lobato-G omez et al., 2021;
the sector's significance in a sustainable future. O'Sullivan et al., 2020). Having constructed a stable, conceptual frame-
The growing number of urban farm initiatives may be attributed work of the most up-to-date practices, the paper turns to literature
largely to its importance in food security efforts. This has coincided with exploring the multidimensional contributions made by UA through
a simultaneous emergence of local food production movements in practical applications (Carolan, 2020; Chang and Morel, 2018; Dubbeling
developed countries with populated metropolitans (Nicholls, 2020). That et al., 2019; Foodtank, 2017; McClintock, 2016; McDougall et al., 2019;
is, many cities in the Global North have become isolated from the food Siegner et al., 2018; Tomkins et al., 2019; Yoshida and Yagi, 2021). The
supply chain which reduced access to commercial fresh produce, and literature is disaggregated into five major subcategories covering, eco-
simultaneously limited volume and variety of nutritional foods for the nomic, social, disaster risk reduction, health and wellbeing, and envi-
wider public (Opitz et al., 2016). As nearly 68% of the world's population ronmental perspectives. In building upon these observations, the final
is projected to migrate to urban areas by the year 2050, UA offers the section presents possible recommendations by identifying suitable tech-
potential to help these vulnerable, populated cities grapple with the nologies and government policies that might help farmers make UA more
subsequent challenge on food insecurity (Nicholls et al., 2020). economically viable and socially relevant moving forward.
Alongside food security, and as this review will also seek to explore, The paper adopts a holistic approach by considering both theoretical
urban and community farming efforts encompass a wider range of and empirical research, with each perspective offering alternative in-
beneficial services which require appropriate implementation. In many sights into the potentials and perils of UA implementation. It therefore
cities, community farms have offered alternative social benefits to the aims to provide an overview and analysis of relevant literature that is
residents. For example, a study conducted on farms in New York found a available to date. To this extent, the recommendations are based on and
wide range of shared goals exhibited by the local farmers. Significantly, it limited to the conclusions drawn by selected literature. Further empirical
outlined the numerous ways in which practitioners contributed to social, research would thus be required to substantiate these claims and better
political, economic, and environmental problems external to food pro- assess the practicality of implementation.
duction. Some such activities included educational programs and work-
shops on health and nutrition, environmental restoration, and political 2. Recent status of urban agriculture
activism within the realm of UA (Cohen and Reynolds, 2014).
On the contrary, when coupled with the UA's recent resurgence, the UA is considered a common feature of cities in developing countries.
ramification of such diverse approaches and experiences has been the Particularly in the Global North, a resurgence of UA in recent years have
UA's incompatibility with a rather narrowly defined legislative system. been associated with socioeconomic benefits including but not limited to
This has in turn slowed down or completely inhibited the incorporation food security, social justice, environmental quality, and health, and in
of initiatives into cities (Orsini et al., 2020). On the extreme end of this, some cases “experimenting with radical alternatives to the capitalist neoliberal
farming and gardening activities can, and have, become engulfed by organization of urban life” (Tornaghi, 2014). Furthermore, problems
unchanging systems making them a part of socially unjust phenomena associated with traditional agricultural practices, which can be separated
such as gentrification. For instance, some lower income neighborhoods in roughly into two categories: those (1) concerning loss of wildlife to
San Francisco have become subject to “environmental gentrification” on expand the arable land and (2) consequences from the intensified land
account of community garden startups which were originally intended to use (Lubowski et al., 2006), had pushed UA as a way to lower the reliance
serve the residents. Respective municipalities began noticing the pleasant on traditional agriculture. This interest in UA as a sustainable alternative
environment generated by the greenery and open space, and initiated to traditional agriculture, particularly in highly urbanized developed
remodeling efforts to conform the neighborhood with middle- and nations, was further highlighted due to UA's role as food source in cities
upper-class tastes (Marche, 2015). where food supply had been cut due to production and logistic disruption
Even in instances where UA is not actively contributing to gentrifi- brought by COVID-19 pandemic in 2019. Yet, while having positive
cation processes, farms have run into other problems. For instance, small prospects, UA also has its own limitations and disadvantages. First and
communities or family farms often utilize labor-intensive methods foremost, the concern is the amount of available land in the urban area
because of a lack of access to necessary equipment or limited awareness given the expansion of the cities (FAO, 2011). While the search for a
of more efficient alternatives. Economic viability is thus compromised solution for this problem is in progress with new technologies allowing
due to the low efficiency of material and labor inputs (McDougall et al., for vertical cultivation of crops, the price of the initial setup remains a
2019). Conversely, some large-scale commercial farms employ newly relevant concern as it will be inaccessible for the poorer population.
developed agricultural methods or advanced technological systems to Certain special knowledge is required for the large-scale operation of UA
manage large scale urban farms. However, many such operations are still installations for commercial gain as well.
in the developing stage, and may lack policy regulation. Because these By utilizing innovative methods and technologies, UA can alleviate
systems are still being researched and developed, they can have unin- the pressure from rural agriculture and secure food supply within a
tended consequences or implications that require further alterations to sustainable framework. With industrial-scale production, rural agricul-
make them sustainable. Barbosa et al. (2015) determined the substantial ture is focusing on monocultures which sacrifices diversity of the

2
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

cultivated crops and accelerates soil degradation. UA, on the other hand, horizontal space and are able to fit in the urban landscapes thus poten-
can provide sufficient variety of crops and vegetables for a person's daily tially eliminating the need for further sprawl of the traditional rural
consumption while occupying only 10% of urban space (Hernandez and farms (Figure 1). However, it is not the only benefit vertical farms have to
Manu, 2018). offer to environmental sustainability. It also allows to sufficiently reduce
Previously, cities were regarded as incompatible with agriculture due the amount of the freshwater consumption while still producing greater
to the lack of available land required for farming. This perception began yields as compared to conventional farming methods (Kalantari et al.,
to change as people discovered ways to creatively use limited space, such 2017, 2018). One of the relevant concerns regarding discussion of ver-
as designing rooftop gardens and farms and adopting for agricultural tical farming, and urban farming in general, is their economic competi-
practices underutilized land in the urban areas which is not sufficient for tiveness vis-a-vis conventional rural farming that can produce a larger
construction or other purposes. Technological advancement significantly amount of yield due to the vast space the farmlands occupy. However, it
contributed to the expansion of UA with various vertical farming tech- is argued that urban farms can achieve economic sustainability even
niques being developed, allowing for better management of space. Also, without additional sources of income if they undergo a process of farm
biotechnological advancement has been simultaneously developing and diversification (Yoshida et al., 2019).
contributing to the development of more varieties of crops which can Among other advantages of vertical farming is that the food is free
grow suitably in urban setting and conditions. Hence, this review will from harmful pesticides and herbicides since in the controlled conditions
present advances in vertical farming and plant biotechnology which are of indoor farming, the risk of pest infection is substantially reduced,
important drivers in UA's adoption in cities. which maximizes the overall nutrition of the product (Al-Kodmany,
2018). However, pests such as downy mildew, molds, spider mites, in-
2.1. Vertical farming sects, and others, have still been reported to occur and their control
follows the same chemical pesticides as employed in conventional farms.
Vertical farming is a UA technique that allows for an indoor cultiva- But the controlled environment of vertical farms made it easier for the
tion of crops where factors such as lighting, temperature, and nutrients use of biological pest control as an environmentally benign option
can be controlled and administered with precision. This revolutionary (Currey, 2017), which can be integrated in the system using banker
method reduces the required amount of freshwater in addition to con- plants (Roberts et al., 2020). Nevertheless, for commercial-scale vertical
servation of land and soil. The technology is constantly being improved, farms, it is still more economical and environmentally safe to employ
and as a result urban farmers can choose from different types of vertical prevention strategies against pests than combatting them (Currey, 2017).
farming techniques varying in their levels of sophistication and cost. Also, the use of fertilizers in vertical farming has different forms with
Thus, even without specific allocation of land by the municipal govern- each method having its own benefits and limits. In this review, hydro-
ments, UA farmers can still integrate sustainable agricultural practices ponics, aeroponics, aquaponics, and digeponics will be on focus.
into cities and engage in commercial activities. Given that UA expansion
will continue, vertical farming can become a reliable source of food for 2.1.1. Hydroponics
urban dwellers. Hydroponics can be considered a form of vertical farming that grows
In the conditions of the urban space where land is an expensive asset, plants in nutrient solutions instead of soil, which can be done with or
urban farmers who pursue commercial gains inevitably encounter the without the use of inert medium. This is a relatively easy technique that
problem of finding locations large enough to ensure profit for the busi- eliminates the possibility of soil-borne disease and stimulates faster growth
ness. Technologies of vertical farming present a viable solution which of the plants (Figure 2). However, while it reduces the amount of water
also has a potential to offer a sustainable solution for the future devel- required for irrigation and prevents pests from infecting the plants, it does
opment of agriculture. Traditional horizontal spread of the farming fields not rule out the possibility of water-borne diseases, which might spread
over the centuries caused great damage to the environment, encroaching quicker than soil-borne and destroy the entire yield (Sharma et al., 2018).
on the forest territories thus destroying and upsetting other ecosystems Moreover, hydroponics offers farmers a wide variety of other pro-
(WHO, 2005). Vertical farms, on the other hand, do not require large duction advantages that should also be noted briefly here. The most

Figure 1. A vertical farm of vegetable crop to increase food resiliency of cities. Photo by Aisyaqilumaranas/Shutterstock.com.

3
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

Figure 2. A hydroponic farm of leafy vegetables using LED light. Photo by Nikolay_E/Shutterstock.com.

prominent of which is its efficient allocation of land and water. This is plants and allows oxygenation to the roots. In addition, on top of elimi-
notable when compared with conventional farming methods that are nating the soil-borne diseases, it also solves the problem of water-borne
often land-use intensive and may utilize inefficient means of irrigation diseases which is still a possibility with the hydroponic method.
(Barbosa et al., 2015). Additionally, many studies have highlighted In Thailand, Srihajong et al. (2006) established a mathematical model
significantly higher output rates for hydroponic farms. For example, for operating an aeroponic system for agricultural products. In their
Barbosa et al. (2015) found that lettuce yields from hydroponic farms simulation, total electric energy consumption per day is 8.46kWh, with
were 11 times higher than traditional methods. However, this came at an initial cost for heat pipes of 13 000 Baht (40 Baht ffi 1 USD). When
the cost of higher energy consumption. According to the same study, compared with hydroponic system, the start-up cost of aeroponics is
yields of lettuce per greenhouse unit can have energy demand up to 90, more expensive. Aeroponic systems also require constant monitoring,
000
11,000 kJ/kg/y while traditional methods only demand up to particularly when pumps used in aeroponic systems operate under a
1100
75 kJ/kg/y. This translates to 82 times more energy consumption steady high pressure (80 pounds per square inch) with required nutrient
of hydroponic farms compared to the traditional ones. On the side note, flow. The high pressure is required to spray an ideal droplet size (20–100
researchers and scientists are continuously developing optimization microns) of water and nutrient mixtures for plant growth (Gopinath
schemes for efficient energy consumptions. One example of this scheme et al., 2017). The droplet size is an important factor to aeroponic systems
is the use of Internet of Things (IoT) based systems which can also pro- as the amount of oxygen available to the root system depends on it. Still,
vide solutions towards agricultural modernization, as cited in Khudoy- Gopinath et al. (2017) emphasized that aeroponic systems with larger
berdiev et al. (2020). These are in the form of sensors and pumps require greater energy requirements compared with other hy-
microcontrollers, which can be found in smart cities, environmental droponic systems.
monitoring, smart farming, and are responsible for improving the overall
system efficiency and automization processes (Mehmood et al., 2019). 2.1.3. Aquaponics
However, the integration of IoT may further diminish the environmental Another form of vertical farming is aquaponics which combines
performance of hydroponic systems when energy sources are of aquaculture and hydroponic systems (Figure 4). The main advantage of
non-renewable. But if these are replaced with renewable alternatives, this system is the integration of the fish and crop farming, which creates
GHG emissions and the negative environmental impact of hydroponic the exchange of nutrients through the water that is shared between the
farms can be greatly reduced (Martin et al., 2019). The same observation two. It has similar advantages to the hydroponic and aeroponic systems
on the analysis of overall efficiency of urban hydroponics was pointed out in its efficient use of water, soil-less cultivation, but in addition, it allows
by Romeo et al. (2018). They echoed notions of higher energy demands plants and fish to grow simultaneously without increasing water con-
of hydroponic farms. But, since the system is powered by electricity sumption (Gooley and Gavine, 2003 in Lennard and Goddek, 2019).
which can easily be generated by renewable sources, the hydroponic When it comes to energy requirements, aquaponic systems are likely
system can perform better than the heated greenhouses and open field dependent on system configuration (e.g., design, species, scale, and
farms in terms of higher production yield and minimal environmental technologies) and geographic location (Goddek et al., 2015). A combi-
impact (Romeo et al., 2018). The higher production yield of 23 crops in nation study of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC)
hydroponic system compared with soil-based farming has been further in Belgium found that energy consumption, infrastructure, and water
summarized by Sathyanarayana et al. (2022). consumption are the main critical issues in an aquaponic system (For-
chino et al., 2018). Furthermore, the main economic burden was asso-
2.1.2. Aeroponics ciated with the energy consumption, which was responsible for about
Aeroponics is another form of vertical farming that does not require half of the whole production cost. Therefore, designing a system with a
soil but, unlike hydroponics, uses mist sprayed on the roots of the plants less energy and water demand component is needed towards economic
to supply necessary nutrients. This method requires even less water than and environmental sustainability.
hydroponics and 95 % less than traditional agricultural methods which
makes it a viable solution in cities experiencing water scarcity (Al-Kod- 2.1.4. Digeponics
many, 2018, Figure 3). A study of Otazu (2010) shows that in aeroponic While aquaponics combines the aquaculture and hydroponics sys-
systems, only 1/10th to 1/30th of water are used in field production of tems, the term “digeponics” is coined by replacing the aquaculture with
crop plants such as potatoes. The thin layer of water acts as a buffer to the anaerobic digester in a similar system. More specifically, anaerobic

4
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

Figure 3. An aeroponic farm of leafy vegetables where water is directly sprayed to the roots. Photo by Globe Guide Media Inc/Shutterstock.com.

digestion is a process by which organic matter is broken down by energy consumed (usually derived from fossil fuels) by conventional
anaerobic microorganisms to produce biogas and by-product digestate Nordic greenhouses. Also, the incorporation of anaerobic digestion is
(Marquez et al., 2020). Digestate is composed of solid and liquid fractions advantageous in upcycling the organic agricultural wastes such as the
which contains nutrients and can be used as bio-fertilizer. Ehmann et al. roots and stems of crops, which are regularly produced after each harvest
(2018) reported 0.58 % and 0.38 % of total nitrogen, 0.26 % and 0.24 % in the farm. However, further studies are needed to successfully up-scale
of NHþ 4 -N, 0.22 % and 0.07 % of phosphorus, 0.46 % and 0.41 % of the system and optimize growing conditions of crops in terms of substrate
potassium, and 0.47 % and 0.16 % of calcium contents in fresh solid microbiology.
digestate and liquid digestate fractions, respectively. On the other hand, seamless and compact biogas digester design
One remarkable application is the ‘Food to waste to food’ project which can be operated in urban setting while not compromising energy
which was claimed to be the first efficient method for the utilization of production is already under development (unpublished). Upon commer-
digestate as a growing medium and bio-fertilizer in greenhouses (Stoknes cialization, anaerobic digestion system can easily be integrated to UA,
et al., 2016). This project integrated food waste treatment through biogas providing better efficiency to any types of farming system. The same
production, while using the digestate as bio-fertilizer to grow crops, and a compact system platform can also provide wastewater treatment function
new closed dynamic bubble-insulated greenhouse technology where to remove excess fertilizer before a necessary water disposal.
biogas is burned for temperature control. A small-scale bubble-insulated
greenhouse was constructed in Norway as a prototype. A heat loss of 0.9 2.2. Plant biotechnology
W/m2 K (watt per meter squared per kelvin) was measured in a
bubble-insulated greenhouse, compared to typical conventional green- Urban community farms also face climatic challenges such as extreme
houses which have a heat loss of about W/m2 K. This makes the energy heat and cold. Moreover, crops grown in urban farms can also be
demand for the small-scale greenhouse lower of only 10–20 % of the threatened by pests and diseases. Aside from factors that can affect the

Figure 4. An aquaponic farm where vegetables and fish are grown for food. Photo by HarJac20/Shutterstock.com.

5
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

growth of plants, some of the other challenges faced by urban farms products developed using genetic engineering from the US. According to
include limited space, high labor costs, and high operation costs. While USDA Foreign Agricultural Service report, Japan imports 100 % of its
open community farms are subject to environmental factors, vertical corn supply and 94 % of soybean supply, which are mostly GM (Sato,
farms including indoor farms and greenhouses are operated with full 2020). Genome edited crops are still being evaluated for commercial
control of conditions such as temperature, humidity, light, water, and cultivation in many countries while regulations in different countries are
nutrient input. The major challenges in such farms are limited space and still being established. In 2021, the first GE crop was successfully
high operational costs. launched to the Japanese market after Ezura and co-workers developed a
How can plant biotechnology address such challenges faced by urban GABA-enhanced tomato, making it the world's first GE crop to be
agriculture? Plant biotechnology has paved the way for the development commercialized (Ezura, 2022). GABA or γ-aminobutyric acid is an amino
of disease-resistant and climate-ready crops to address the current acid with human health benefits, particularly useful in the prevention of
environmental changes faced by farmers in growing their crops. Biotech hypertension. Since GE crops does not contain a “foreign gene” (i.e.,
plants can be developed by marker-assisted selection (MAS), genetic transgene-free), consumers might have less bias against them. Once the
modification (GM) or genome editing (GE). In MAS, conventional appropriate regulatory framework for the commercialization of GE crops
breeding can be made faster by using DNA markers to select for hybrids is established, they could eventually be accepted by the consumers (Ishii
instead of using phenotypic selection which usually requires longer pe- and Araki, 2016). Nevertheless, these GM and GE crops have enormous
riods of time. On the other hand, GM involves the use of recombinant potential in maximizing the productivity of urban agriculture in Japan
DNA technology to change the genetic makeup of organisms. Recombi- and other countries.
nation is the insertion of DNA molecules from different distinct species to
produce an improved version of the organism. Finally, GE is the most 2.3. How can UA help?
recent technology that has shown immense potential for application in
plant biotechnology. Genome editing is based on the precise identifica- Despite the necessity of integrating UA into sustainable city planning,
tion of short DNA sequences and their deletion, then insertion of new it is only relatively recently that the topic began to gain attention. With
DNA sequence to correct errors or to change the genetic information. the rapid urbanization, the concept of sustainable cities that “emphasise a
Using plant biotechnology tools, it is now possible to develop crops balance among economic development, environmental protection, and equity
with desired traits such as resistance to pests and diseases, tolerance to in income, employment, shelter, basic services, social infrastructure and
drought, heat, cold or salinity, improved flavor, rapid cycling as well as transportation” became prominent (Hiremath et al., 2013 in Azunre et al.,
other superior growth traits. For urban agriculture, the limited space for 2019). Although somewhat included in the policy planning, UA was
cultivating crops can be addressed by developing plants with compact generally moved to the periphery of the discourse with the policies
architecture and rapid life cycle (O'Sullivan et al., 2020). Using the GE focusing on other aspects of urban development. In particular, the gov-
tool CRISPR-Cas9, Kwon et al. (2020) targeted the genes responsible for ernments in the global south are reluctant to allocate land for UA inte-
stem length and flowering in tomatoes to create a smaller plant size that gration. Therefore, most of the relatively big urban farms are located on
can produce fruits in a shorter time span. Dwarfism is a trait that natu- the peripheries of the cities due to lower land prices (Azunre et al., 2019).
rally exists in some varieties of crops and has been used to improve other However, the situation is gradually changing with the realization that
commercial crops. The gene responsible for dwarfism has been identified UA has profound implications for the sustainability of cities in terms of its
and characterized in many plant species and used in plant breeding for economic, environmental, and social contribution. Expansion of green
decades now. Similarly, the genes that are involved in the regulation of zones in the cities improves air quality, and partial reliance on urban
flowering time have been extensively studied and shown useful in crop agriculture decreases emissions of greenhouse gases. UA also contributes
improvement. Targeting these traits, Kwon et al. (2020) created compact to local trade development, creating full time employment and additional
varieties of cherry tomato and ground cherry that have the same pro- sources of income. For instance, in Ghana, urban farmers produce most of
ductivity as the wild-type varieties. This strategy can be applied to other the exotic vegetables for the region, such as lettuce and spring onions,
vegetable and fruit crops that can be cultivated either in indoor or out- and supply them to urban markets (Azunre et al., 2019). Furthermore, UA
door community urban farms. Maintaining a high flowering/fruiting rate has the potential of becoming a source of sustenance for urban commu-
for agricultural crops in urban farms can compensate for the high oper- nities and providing impoverished population with necessary nutrition. It
ation costs and will not put the burden on the consumers. Table 1 shows gives people access to fresh and chemical-free products while reducing
some plants which have undergone genetic modification that may be their food expenditures. In developing regions, the percentage of poor
suitable for UA. Further, Lobato-G omez et al. (2021) compiled a list of households engaging in UA substantially exceeds average-income
genome-edited fruit-bearing crops of which can be explored for their households (Zezza and Tasciotti, 2010). However, it is not to imply
suitability in UA application. that UA alone can fully sustain urban population, instead, a balance be-
While crops that are developed by conventional breeding are more tween urban and rural agriculture should be reached to secure cities’
easily accepted by the public, those that involve GMs are still not food supply through sustainable practices.
accepted by the Japanese consumers even though the Japanese govern- The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted numerous distri-
ment has approved the commercial cultivation of GM crops. The same is bution channels and food production processes all over the world,
true for genome edited agricultural products. However, it is interesting to highlighted the urgency of the food security issue. Although no signifi-
note that Japan remains one of the top importers of food and feed cant fluctuation of the food prices on the global level was recorded during

Table 1. Genetically modified plants suitable for urban farming.

Plants Tools Characteristics References

Tomato CRISPR-Cas9, silencing three genes: SP5G, SP, and SlER  Shortened internodes to increase compactness while maintaining Kwon et al. (2020)
productivity of tomato
Kiwifruit CRISPR-Cas9-mediated mutagenesis of CEN-like candidate genes  Shortening life cycle within a year with rapid terminal flower and Varkonyi-Gasic et al.
fruit development (2019)
Lettuce Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated down-regulation of XTH genes  Improvement of shelf-life of harvested leaves Wagstaff et al. (2010)
through antisense inhibition
CRISPR-Cas9-mediated knocking-out of LsNCED4  Increased seed germination temperature to 37  C Bertier et al. (2018)

6
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

the pandemic, inflation of food prices was present, with low- and middle- income from sales, savings on food and health expenditures are directly
income countries sustaining majority of the damage (World Bank, 2021). incurred by the urban households. A study in four West African capitals
Population in the developing countries spend a larger portion of their showed that rainfed crops such as maize and cassava are mainly pro-
income on food compared to the high-income countries, which puts an duced for household consumption, while short-cycle and long-cycle crops
additional strain on the vulnerable groups (World Bank, 2021). Restric- such as lettuce, cabbage, carrots, and onions can generate monthly in-
tion on the movements of people and goods further inhibited the access come from sales (van Veenhuizen and Danso, 2007). Furthermore, in
to food on urban markets, thus creating food deficits and causing infla- Ghana, income from irrigated urban vegetable farming was found to be
tion (FAO, 2020). Unemployment is also on the rise during the pandemic two to three times higher than the average income earned from rural
due to the production processes being put on hold in attempts to stop the farming (Danso et al., 2002).
spread of the disease. At the city level, there are: (a) direct benefits and costs which are not
With the combined impact of the reduced income and higher food carried by the farmers, and (b) indirect benefits and costs which are in
prices, many households were forced to reduce their expenditure on food the form of positive and negative externalities. These externalities
and lower their quality standards as a sustenance measure (World Bank, include the social, health, and environmental impacts of UA in the urban
2021). According to the World Bank (2021), by the end of 2020, setting. However, comparing different city situations remains a challenge
approximately 130 million people will face acute food insecurity. Prior to as these impacts depend on policies and legislation existing in the city.
the pandemic, such drastic global-scale reduction in life quality due to One common approach for economists to examine or quantify these
food insecurity problems was hardly imaginable. However, the current impacts is by using cost-benefit framework (Nugent, 1999) although such
global food crisis and its repercussions fully demonstrated the urgency of method should be applied more extensively in analyzing UA's impacts.
the problem. Hence, the next section will examine how UA can increase At the macro level, effects of UA are felt through its contribution to
its role in playing its part in solving these challenges. the national's gross domestic product (GDP) and to the efficiency of the
national food system. Moreover, UA products can supplement rural ag-
3. Different contributions of urban agriculture to city riculture's limited supply, substitute for food imports, and boost export
production of agricultural commodities (Mougeot, 2000). In Kenya, UA
3.1. Economic perspective has generated the highest self-employment to small-scale enterprises and
the third highest earnings overall (House et al., 1993). Unfortunately,
UA can be defined as a variety of livelihood systems such as subsis- studies on economic impacts of UA in the macro level are limited since
tence production and processing which can be adapted to urban situa- most research are focused on the household level.
tions from the household level to a more commercialized sector (van The term ‘economic viability of UA’ can also be ambiguous. Copious
Veenhuizen and Danso, 2007). From subsistence-oriented motives to literature has discussed the economic viability of either micro-farms,
large scale commercial production facilities, UA has many different roles rooftop gardens, greenhouses, or vertical farms to examine the cost and
for communities in the cities and urban areas. While UA economic ben- gains of these specific types of UA (Whittinghill and Rowe, 2012; Tho-
efits are marginal at the community level, it has the potential to maier et al., 2014; Sanye-Mengual et al., 2015; Chang and Morel, 2018).
contribute to building the resilience of urban communities, especially in These authors realized that different types of UA can have significant
coping with economic challenges. variations in economic viability, but they usually take part for the whole
In measuring the economic viability of UA, its economic impacts and and generalize the economic viability of UA based on their specified
profitability are distinguished in three levels: (a) household level, (b) city discoveries. To better understand the difference, some literature of UA's
level, and (c) macro level (van Veenhuizen and Danso, 2007). economic viability using different approaches has been summarized in
At the household level, economic benefits and costs involved in Table 2. It indicates that UA's economic viability is apparent, albeit
agricultural production such as self-employment, exchange of products, several economic factors (e.g., proximity, investment and operation

Table 2. The economic potential of different types of urban agriculture.

Location UA concerns Result(s) References

Ruhr metropolis, Professional urban and peri-urban farms  It is less likely to achieve success in densely populated municipalities where various adjustment Sroka et al.
Germany strategies (e.g., provision of tourism services, using short distribution channels) are not (2019)
implemented
 Farm success is mainly dependent on the farm location thereby minimizing transport costs and
offering convenience to the customers
 Full-time farmers who are using appropriate adjustment strategies for farm development are
more likely to achieve farm success in the long run
Galati, Romania Integrated aquaponics system:  LECA substrate aquaponic technique requires higher investment costs but generates higher Petrea et al.
Deep water culture (DWC) and Light income than the DWC technique (2016)
expanded clay aggregate (LECA)  Electricity costs represent more than half of the total variable costs value, thus creating a great
demand for renewable energy source alternatives
Sicily, Italy Pilot aquatic plant producing lettuce and  Aquaponic farming yields positive operating income and benefit/cost ratio for the first year of Asciuto et al.
Nile tilapia experimental activity (2019)
 Economic viability might be slightly more sensitive to revenue than its operational cost
Arizona, US Consumer behavior towards urban  Consumers having subjective knowledge of UA and a favorable attitude towards urban farming Grebitus et al.
farming increases the likelihood to purchase produce from urban farms and grow their own produce at (2017)
urban farms
European cities Economic performance and self-  Most urban gardeners were not motivated mainly by profit, but of other factors such as safe and Glavan et al.
sufficiency of urban gardening healthy food production, source of relaxation, environmental impact, and as a means of (2018)
socializing
 Albeit profit being of second importance, economic productivity of urban gardens can be
compared to market production by a substantial amount
Bangkok, Thailand Peri-urban farming systems (fish,  Despite having the highest costs among the four systems, shrimp farms remain to be the most Vagneron
shrimp, rice, and fruits) profitable, yielding the highest income, net income per family worker, investment, and input (2007)
costs

7
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

costs, capital, and consumer knowledge) should be taken into consider- the community in the decision-making process helps to ensure a service-
ation to assess the benefits and costs in engaging into UA. based system geared towards the society. In accordance with approaches
posited by neoliberal policies, the secession of regulations thereby clears
3.2. Social perspective a space for local voices, enabling structure that is self-sustaining and less
susceptible to gentrification (Marche, 2015). Municipal working groups
Regarding the implementation of UA systems within developed offer a potential solution by filling gaps in formal policy, while de-
countries it is important to acknowledge that integration is taking place partments or focus groups can be organized to meet specialized needs
within pre-established socioeconomic structures, and not the other way (Deelstra and Girardet, 2000). Food policy councils in Portland and
around. In the Global North, the physical and cultural environments Vancouver for instance are composed of local activists that advise
encountered by the UA narrative are often distinguished in part by deeply municipal governments in navigating related issues, and draft proposals
rooted societal structures and potential injustices requiring attention. To for project development (Mendes et al., 2008). Meanwhile, councils in
this end, systems of inequality can distort the “sustainable” and “social New York have held policy makers accountable, providing communities
justice” front commonly adopted by UA initiatives, by engulfing opera- with an extra layer of protection from extensive development or
tions within socially detrimental processes like eco gentrification becoming exclusionary (Cohen, 2016). Subsequently, what emerges are
(McClintock, 2016). In other words, the new entity is forced to work channels that propagate mutual relations between public officials and
around pre-existing frameworks, a transition that is often facilitated by civil society. Co-dependency between the two entities is thus reliant upon
policies (Siegner et al., 2018). active civil participation without absolving government responsibility.
Food insecurity and gentrification in cities highlight many of the Although UA in isolation is not a viable solution, producers can be
challenges targeted by urban farming, yet point to external social issues situated to work against social injustices rather than being absorbed to
which necessitate attention if UA is to become truly economically viable. uphold an already corrupt system. Attuning control and responsibility of
Specifically, food insecurity is a manifestation of wider, and deeply government officials helps make space for grassroot efforts and sufficient
embedded inequities, to the extent that expanding agricultural systems interaction with relevant social justice movements taking place in the
into cities does not automatically guarantee improved food security for community. With the support of local councils, policy approaches would
the residing population (Horst et al., 2017). This is because low-income benefit by recognizing the intersections and resultant variables within
communities are likely already subject to underinvestment and the agricultural sector which allow UA to encompass more than food
discriminatory patterns. Farms are thus left vulnerable to falling into “a production and security. Further, utilizing policies in such a manner to
corporate food system model of profit maximization and resource use effi- extract commonly, or uncommonly, theorized benefits of UA will enable
ciency, subscribing to capitalist logics rather than alternative, the future economic viability of these projects. However, this is predi-
social-justice-oriented practices” (Siegner et al., 2018). These problems are cated not only upon an inward-looking understanding of the sector itself
exacerbated when met with the high cost of development pressures, but a comprehensive perception of the surrounding society to make the
rendering urban produce either unattainable or unaffordable for many. most of UA's characteristics in each respective case.
Thus, dialogue surrounding urban farms and inherent potentials becomes
unproductive when it is conflated with generalized notions of increased 3.3. Disaster risk reduction perspective
access (Siegner et al., 2018).
Several studies have shown a concentration of urban or community Here it is worth briefly mentioning the specific functions of UA in the
farms in places where they are not most needed to improve food security. context of emergency crises and post disaster reconstruction. The impacts
That is, organizations have not been strategically distributed throughout of disasters on urban areas have been exacerbated by the effects of global
the cities in question to the advantage of those who need it most (Horst warming. Effects are particularly acute in developing countries, water-
et al., 2017). There exists a contradiction between utilizing UA to combat stressed countries, as well as coastal and low-lying regions. Many cities
food insecurity, and a preconceived notion which employs “greening” as are also predisposed to the risk of food supply chain disruptions, which in
a tool in gentrification to make neighborhoods more attractive to the turn often disproportionately affects the urban poor, elderly and the
upper class. That is, the development and presence of green spaces is disabled (Dubbeling et al., 2019). Furthermore, rapid urbanization and
often followed by increasing property values (Daftary-Steel et al., 2015). mass migration into city centers in developing countries can often lead to
In San Francisco, community garden initiatives started by minority competing demands, diminishing resources, and overextended infra-
groups have grown in recent years, onsetting neighborhood remodeling structure systems. On these points, UA offers several potential benefits to
processes in response to the “beautification” brought about by green help mitigate the negative impacts incurred by disasters, expedite
spaces (Marche, 2015). Therefore, if UA is to become economically viable post-disaster reconstruction processes, and contribute to overall urban
by improving upon societal inequities, its implementation needs to be and livelihood resilience.
structured to resist gentrification, not contribute to it. As mentioned, one of the primary impacts of disasters on urban areas
In terms of external social conditions, the most optimal solutions relates to supply chain disruptions. Dependence on imported food often
involve attacking systemic inequalities at the core, still policy mecha- leaves even very developed cities vulnerable to sudden food depletion.
nisms and strategies exist which can help prevent UA integration from The severity of import-dependence in many cities is exemplified by the
succumbing to harmful capitalist tendencies. McClintock (2014) fact that cities such as London are never more than five days away from
observed the effects of neoliberal policies which served more radical food depletion (Adam-Bradford, 2010). Meanwhile, economic crises can
variants of agricultural entrepreneurialism that “return the means of pro- result in rising food prices compounded by unstable incomes, which can
duction to urban residents.” Regardless of top-down versus bottom-up push the urban poor further into poverty (Adam-Bradford, 2010). Thus,
distinctions, endeavors reflecting a degree of municipal liberalism in following a crisis, urban populations may resort to informal markets to
practice display the capacity to meet residential needs because of a sustain their livelihoods, this includes UA.
continued engagement with civic activism (Marche, 2015). This is The existence of local agricultural food production helps to reduce
indicative of a boundary wherein policy capabilities meet the need for vulnerability to supply chain disruptions in times of crisis. For example,
civic participation in order to optimize the benefits offered by UA within urban areas in developed countries have experienced first-hand the im-
a society which manifest themselves on a couple of fronts. pacts of food supply shortages during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. In
The intersection with social injustices is inevitable in the integration Tokyo, the existence of UA has helped to mitigate some of these negative
process of UA, therefore it becomes beneficial for local governments to effects by shortening the supply chain and providing residents with direct
include the voices of residents. Given the pernicious tendency to favor access to local produce (Yoshida and Yagi, 2021). In several cases, UA
“beautified” variations of community farms, the deliberate inclusion of farms have been able to increase sales since the start of the pandemic due

8
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

to the country's stay-home campaign and increasing consumer demands require more direct engagement with government authorities to promote
for local marketing channels (Yoshida and Yagi, 2021). These short integration with long term development goals.
supply chains or direct marketing schemes employed by Tokyo's urban
farms thus represent a specific resilient attribute of UA that has supported 3.4. Health and well-being perspective
food security in a time of crisis.
In addition to enhancing food security, much of the literature has UA can alleviate poverty and food insecurity, while also improving
emphasized the role of UA as a livelihood strategy. Specifically, that its the health of city residents and preserving the environment (Foodtank,
contributions during disaster risk reduction and management extend 2017). In addition, urban green space is a necessary component for
beyond addressing the immediate challenges of food insecurity. For delivering healthy, sustainable and livable cities for all population
example, during economic crises, UA can help to subvert income inse- groups, particularly among lower socioeconomic groups (WHO, 2017).
curity and marginalization by stimulating ‘green job’ creation and Because of the continuing shift of population to urbanized areas, studies
diversifying income sources for many households. This helps to alleviate on how urban nature can be utilized as a tool to reduce health risks have
some of the immediate pressures faced by the urban poor by expanding been increasing but with varying results.
their coping capacity in times of financial distress (Dubbeling et al., Most urban areas, like for example New York City, lack vacant land
2019). for green space, making rooftops an important space for greening. In such
Besides economic benefits, UA also presents numerous social benefits a case, UA has great potential to help mitigate the city's public health
that should not be overlooked in the context of risk reduction and urban problems on obesity and diabetes which are correlated to inadequate
resilience. The experiences of refugee camps offer a constructive illus- access to fresh, healthy food retail (Ackerman et al., 2014). Fruits and
tration of UA's social dimensions. A study conducted by Tomkins et al. vegetables are the most common types of food that can be cultivated on a
(2019) traced the role of UA in Iraqi refugee camps as many have evolved rooftop greening. Through the increase in fruit and vegetable cultivation
into ‘accidental cities’ since the start of the Syrian Civil War in 2011. Of and consumption, improving health conditions, and reducing poverty
the camps surveyed, refugees generally had adequate access to food may be achieved (Orsini et al., 2013). In Tokyo, other than as a source of
supplies due to the prominence of humanitarian aid. Therefore, instead fresh and safe products, UA serves as a resource for recreation and
of relying on UA for sustenance purposes, gardens were often associated well-being, including a space for personal leisure and spiritual comfort
with benefits such as promoting social cohesion and providing a healing (Moreno-Pe~ naranda, 2011).
space from trauma. These multifaceted benefits are further exemplified Studies on the association between green spaces and general health,
by the 16 different types of gardens identified in the study, which range and the mediators of this association have been reported as well. Dad-
from street gardens to ornamental planting practices (Tomkins et al., vand et al. (2016) investigated whether the presence of green space can
2019). attenuate negative health impacts of stressful life events using a quanti-
Given the wide-ranging functions of UA in disaster risk reduction tative data of a representative sample of Dutch residents. The results
practices, its implementation should be situated within a more compre- showed that only the relationships of stressful life events with the
hensive risk reduction strategy. In other words, UA should be integrated number of health complaints and perceived general health were signifi-
with wider development objectives if municipalities are to make the most cantly reduced by the amount of green space in a 3-km radius. However,
of all it has to offer. For example, in the case of the refugee camps, the buffering effects of green space were less pronounced for mental health
existence of UA has stimulated development of other constructive than for physical and general health indicators and provided a conser-
infrastructure thereby bolstering sustainable practices within camps. vative and rather limited test of the buffering effects of green space that is
This has included Sustainable Drainage Systems, which have facilitated close to home. Another study assessed the association between greenness
water mobility, improved water quality, greywater management and exposure and subjective general health (SGH) through evaluation of their
reduced pollution and erosion (Tomkins et al., 2019). In other cities such mediators such as mental health status, social support, and physical ac-
as Beijing and Toronto, UA has been incorporated into municipal climate tivity (van den Berg et al., 2010). Using the data obtained from a
change action plans, while its economic benefits have supported “slu- population-based randomized sample of adults residing in Barcelona,
m-upgrading” programs in many South American countries (Dubbeling Spain, the study revealed mental health status, perceived social support,
et al., 2019). In particular, arid climates such as in Burkina Faso, UA has and to less extent, physical activity, to be more impacted by residential
been implemented as a part of efforts to lower surface temperatures and surrounding greenness than subjective proximity to green spaces (van
reduce impacts of the urban heat island effect (Dubbeling et al., 2019). It den Berg et al., 2010). Further, a study among youth living in the city of
can therefore be seen how the efficient integration of UA can help mu- Plovdiv, Bulgaria was conducted to compare single and parallel media-
nicipalities meet multiple development objectives simultaneously. tion models— estimate the independent contributions of different
However, it is important to note that many such benefits are predicated paths— with several models that posit serial mediation components in
on government involvement and effective coordination between the pathway from green space to mental health (Dzhambov et al., 2018).
municipal authorities and local civil society groups. The researchers found that higher restorative quality in the neighbor-
Oftentimes, the realization of UA's full potential has been inhibited by hood brought by higher perceived green spaces was directly associated
a lack of governmental recognition and technical assistance. This is with better mental health and promoted more physical activity and more
especially true in post-disaster contexts, wherein agricultural production social cohesion, and in turn, indirectly led to better mental health. Hence,
is easily overlooked in times of crisis. It is not uncommon for relief op- direct and indirect positive effects of green spaces, and in extension UA,
erations to leave recovering communities dependent on external food on the health and well-being of urban dwellers should incentivize UA's
aid. It is for these reasons that agriculture-related activities should be integration in urban planning because their long-term impact on the
implemented during early stages of the post-disaster cycle (Adam-- population's economic productivity and healthcare cost can bring the
Bradford, 2010). The fragility of UA systems has more recently been city's finances into better position when compared with short-term gain
highlighted by the impacts of COVID-19. One study conducted on urban from allowing maximization of urban space for commercial use.
and peri-urban farms in S~ao Paulo found that a lack of municipal support
exacerbated pre-existing shortcomings. Namely, a lack of technical 3.5. Environmental perspective
assistance, an inability to diversify commercialization channels, and
difficulty accessing inputs. Furthermore, noncommercial community Environmental risks often emerge as agricultural practices shift into
gardens were unable to significantly contribute to food security due to city centers. Such risks may pertain to the production of goods and ser-
restrictions and lack of formal recognition by the government (Biazoti vices by farms, or they may appear as negative externalities in the sur-
et al., 2021). Thus, if UA is to advance disaster risk reduction, it will rounding community. For instance, increased levels of pollution in cities

9
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

can diminish the quality of urban-grown products, generating health elements such as, Ba, Cu, Pb, Sb, Sn, V, Zn in vegetables grown within
risks for consumers (Tuijl et al., 2018). Meanwhile, the use of certain close proximity to roads (Antisari et al., 2015). Simultaneously, a high
pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers in the process of farming can soil pH has also been documented to accelerate plant uptake of con-
generate additional risks for residents and damage local biodiversity. taminants found in the earth, especially the bioavailability and toxicity of
Under such circumstances, farming practices may become environmen- Pb and Cd (Chang et al., 2014). Finally, though the presence of these
tally detrimental, or unwanted in heavily populated regions, particularly pollutants may pose health risks by way of vegetable consumption,
of those commercial urban farms (McDougall et al., 2019). While these another significant pathway for exposure is through the direct ingestion
additional risks are minimal for small-scale UA, the practice of of soil and dust particles (Paltseva et al., 2020).
commercial-scale UA using soil-base farming will bring the same risks as However, these risks may be subverted depending on the type of UA
agro-industrial farms do on their surrounding environment. Buscaroli that is being utilized. For instance, farming technologies associated with
et al. (2021) identified three cases where plant protection products (PPP) indoor farming, hydroponics, aquaponics, may help to minimize the
used in UA may cause harm to its environment, these are, “1) disregard for impacts of soil and/or air pollutants generated by human activity.
precautionary limitations, 2) misuse of authorized active substances, and c) Though the use of alternative farming mechanisms can help mitigate
use of unauthorized substances.” While these are preventable, the lack of risks posed by urban pollution, its employment is succeeded by other
supervision and regulation on backyard UA may suggest that the risks are changes in production that can affect the overall economic viability and
still present albeit minimal. To avoid risks, it is highly recommended to sustainability of UA. A simple example of this might be how the use of
regulate the type and size of farming in cities. For example, mandating indoor farming shields crops from air and soil pollution in cities, but may
the use of vertical farm technique when establishing a commercial-scale simultaneously require greater energy consumption for climate control
UA will prevent these PPP risks in urban communities while bringing systems (Aubry and Manouchehri, 2019).
commercial-scale source of food within cities. From the opposite perspective, agricultural practices which are
The relationship between the agricultural sector and the environment focused in producing high-quality products, especially those which are
is defined in two senses by the latter. Namely, the environmental impact utilizing terroir approach, will be more inclined to improve the envi-
induced through alterations made by farming practices, and subse- ronment and local ecosystem condition where the UA are located. Using
quently the kind of environment that is produced by incorporating food terroir concept, the interaction between local environment and
production in the given region. This is true of urban and rural systems ecosystem characteristics as well as the local agriculture knowledge and
alike, illuminating the push to reconcile modern agrarian methodologies practices can directly influence the characteristics of agricultural prod-
with environmental conscious regulations (Kalen, 2011). Regarding ucts (Ashardiono, 2019). In the premise that these high-quality products
environmental risks, though many of the associated negative external- command better profit, UA which utilize terroir approach will have more
ities are well researched, and a degree of precedence exists in this policy incentive in demanding urban policies which promote better environ-
sphere, exemptions have often been made in agriculture, generating mental condition around their site. As the following example illustrates,
harmful regulatory gaps (Schneider, 2010). It is therefore important that UA production tradeoffs can be overcome through policies, thereby
farming methodologies being brought into city centers act in harmony heightening long term viability.
with wider environmental policies and standards rather than go unreg-
ulated. Such policies can be deemed as an effective solution to help 4. Policies in urban agriculture
correct negative externalities and risks placed on the environment.
One of the most prominent environmental risks faced by UA in To accommodate the multiple functions of UA, in addition to the
contemporary societies has been the navigation and risk management sector's intrinsic diversity, respective urban policies require a degree of
associated with environmental contamination. Specifically, the anthro- structural robustness in ensuring proper integration. By and large how-
pogenic pollution of soil and air as a result of industrial activities, ever, policies remain limited in scope, and incapable of sufficiently
transportation, mining, sewage, and fossil fuel combustion. The ultimate implementing systems within respective municipalities (Orsini, 2020).
impact of environmental contamination of produce is dependent on The more recent emergence of UA initiatives helps to explain some of
several factors such as the quantity and type of pollutant present, how these policy gaps and lack of formal recognition. Respectively, since the
long the produce remains in the soil, and similarly the kind of crop being adoption of the Support Group on Urban Agriculture (SGUA) in 1992 by
exposed. Vegetables like lettuce and cabbage risk greater exposure to the UNDP's Urban Agriculture Advisory Committee (UAAC), developed
atmospheric particles on account of the greater surface area of leaves, states have begun to gradually incorporate policy support for UA into
while root vegetables are more vulnerable to soil contaminants. Duration national legal frameworks (van Veenhuizen and Danso, 2007). Take for
of growth will also increase or reduce the amount of exposure to any instance, the lack of specific provisions for city farms in the EU's rural
pollution present, and so herbs like thyme, which are grown year-round, development policy between the years 2007 and 2013 (McEldowney,
become more susceptible to absorption (Aubry and Manouchehri, 2019). 2017). Similarly, in the United States, formal recognition of urban food
Regarding contamination, lead is a commonly cited concern for urban production in the context of planning only took hold in 2007 with the
farmers utilizing soil-based methods of crop cultivation. Leaded-gasoline establishment of the Policy Guide on Community and Regional Food
and paints were widespread several decades ago, despite the phase-out of Planning (American Planning Association, 2007). Moreover, despite the
such products many urban sites today continue to test positive for growing popularity of community gardens, farmer's markets, and urban
varying levels of contamination (LaCroix, 2014). However, aside from farms in Australia, the country had yet to implement similar strategies or
low-growing and root vegetables, the lead uptake of plants is generally policy mechanisms as of 2019 (Sarker et al., 2019).
low, and risks of bioaccumulation remain small (Brown et al., 2016). One Siegner et al. (2018) contrasted supposed implementations with
study concluded it to be highly unlikely that human consumption of food observed realities as a product of shortcomings within urban planning
grown in lead-contaminated soils would result in elevated blood levels of political frameworks. Theoretical work in cities like Cleveland has shown
the component. Additionally, that elevated levels present within the soil the production capacity of urban farms to meet local demands almost
pose minor risk to UA in general (Brown et al., 2016). entirely on the assumption of robust policy and planning support. This
Still other forms of urban air and soil pollution do exist that could observed disparity between theory and practice, is underpinned by issues
impede more seriously upon the uptake of UA systems in certain cities. of inequality that have yet to be directly addressed (Horst et al., 2017).
For instance, old industrial sites may be more prone to different forms of Once again, much of this can, and has been attributed to the nascent
contamination depending on the type of activities once conducted on the industry and developing foundation of related academic literature. Fully
land (LaCroix, 2014). While produce grown near roads may risk fledged legislative systems, extending beyond surface level benefits of UA
contamination from vehicles. One study in Italy found a higher uptake of and into issues of economic inequities, therefore need to be established

10
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

on the grounds of empirical analysis to improve functions of future ad- requirements, restrictions on animal numbers, noise, hygiene, to some
aptations (Stewart et al., 2013). combination of regulations, or none at all. A vast majority of respondents
Whilst evolution in urban planning has taken place during the 21st with chickens were found to be in violation of municipal setback codes,
century, development has remained within boundaries defined by the with some making the case that distance from property should be
knowledge and intention of policymakers. A substantial amount of aca- contingent upon other factors such as agreements with neighbors
demic literature exists introducing social benefits of UA, and how policy (McClintock et al., 2014). To this end, the argument is made to establish a
mechanisms may help realize such potential Horst et al. (2017), e.g., middle ground wherein policy mechanisms adopt a case-by-case basis
outlined food justice goals in the United States and Canada, a charac- while simultaneously leaving room for potential variants that may
teristic of UA that is often celebrated and looked into by initiatives in emerge (McClintock et al., 2014).
developing countries. In other words, it is deployed as a solution to food
injustice, or a strategy to minimize economic disparities in urban spaces. 4.1.2. Digital farming as new form of urban agriculture
Despite this, Horst et al. (2017) noted that “without explicit valuation of As UA systems have evolved, they have come to intersect with other
food justice” policy mechanisms existing congruent to this common, industries, such as the tech sector, which has enabled the development of
well-researched stance will ultimately fall short of uplifting the disad- new dimensions. This includes elements such as automation, software
vantaged communities they seek to target. Additionally, UA is only part integration, and silicon-based hardware (Carolan, 2020). Digitized al-
of a food justice solution, and that “there is a distinction between alleviating ternatives are being adopted by rural and urban farmers alike as they can
symptoms of injustice . . . and disrupting social and political structures that help increase output and optimize production. Vertical farming offers
underlie them” (Reynolds, 2015). several common examples of how technologies have been integrated into
To this extent, even with commonly referenced and targeted goals the agricultural sector thus far. For instance, the use of HVAC (heating,
such as food justice, purported benefits of UA are not a given in the ventilation, and air conditioning) systems helps to maintain suitable
absence of robust policy frameworks. The researched socioeconomic environments for vertical farm crops. In order to do so, systems make use
benefits of UA extend beyond such mainstream functions, and the sector's of automated monitoring operations that help track environmental var-
rapid development has onset advancements currently not accounted for iables like temperature and humidity (Kalantari et al., 2017). Such sys-
in policy regimes. Consequently, as the next section seeks to detail, this tems make use of sensors and actuators to build up a database of
stifles development of legislation targeting lesser-known features in need information about the surrounding environment, eliminating the need
of support, such as hygiene or regulatory challenges presented by live- for human management (Kalantari et al., 2017). However, as a study
stock and digital farming, respectively. conducted by Carolan (2020) on the topic of digital urban agriculture
(DUA) exemplifies, these advancements have complicated regulatory
4.1. Policy challenges efforts so desperately needed.
Notably, farms associated with DUA were found to enjoy greater ease
4.1.1. Livestock rearing as part of urban agriculture of integration on the policy-front due to blurred definition lines and the
The inclusion of agriculture into populated metropolitan areas has absence of laws specifically targeting the emerging sector. Findings from
given rise to hygiene concerns particularly around raising livestock. the study suggested that due to the hybrid nature of DUA, farms often do
Though less of an issue for plant-based farming, discourses for animal not fall neatly into either agriculture or technology sectors. This pre-
husbandry center predominantly on tradeoffs made between food secu- sented planning challenges when it comes to zoning laws. Rather than
rity as a benefit of UA and maintaining public health standards (Butler, being classified with traditional UA, by taking on the identity of the tech
2012). Thus, there exists a dichotomy whereby overly strict standards sector, digital farms were almost indiscriminately faced with fewer
can result in a restrictive, exclusionary space, whilst undeveloped ones zoning restrictions. Again, this was because initiatives were perceived as
may promote volatile developments subject to inconsistencies (Butler, categorically different from UA practices that lacked the “digital” tag at
2012). Urban livestock initiatives have engendered a kind of shock to the front (Carolan, 2020).
municipal policy systems on account of reintroducing animals into city Subsequently, lax zoning approaches often favored land allocation to
centers. This is in direct contradiction with the expulsion of farm animals digital farms over traditional UA. In doing so, growing numbers of digital
to rural spaces at the height of the industrial revolution specifically for farms were more likely to depress local market prices by selling com-
sanitation reasons (Butler, 2012). modities at breakeven prices. Such phenomena threaten other local
The city of Oakland's attempt to amend its home occupation permit sellers as “digitized” operations grow and ramp up production in the
provides one such example whereby the products of animal husbandry absence of adequate policies (Carolan, 2020). DUAs are just one instance
were overlooked by policy makers. McClintock et al. (2014) observed of UA's rapid expansion into other industries, a characteristic requiring
that in the state of Seattle, residents are not required to obtain a permit to diligence and consideration on behalf of policymakers to combat harmful
sell produce grown directly from their property. At the state level this law regulatory grey areas. To this end, achieving economic viability hinges
is inclusive of plant and animal farming alike. However, the amendment upon the decision-making process to create an environment that is not
made by the city of Oakland in 2011 to its related local ordinance on only conducive, but responsive to these types of changes.
home occupation failed to mention the inclusion of animal products such
as eggs and honey from these permit exemptions. So, although state 4.1.2.1. The case of Gotham Greens. Established in 2009, Gotham Greens
permits were not required, failure of explicit omission on behalf of the offers one such example of a “digital” urban farming operation. The or-
local jurisdiction complicated the process for its respective residents ganization's flagship greenhouse, situated in Greenpoint Brooklyn, New
seeking to sell such products. Such transitory processes of including an- York, is characterized as a rooftop hydroponic commercial farm. Other-
imal farming in developing UA policies has highlighted the fact that there wise referred to as Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) the farm
remains a dearth of certain regulations and specifications tailored to utilizes various advanced technologies to help ensure high output effi-
livestock. ciency alongside year-round production. This is inclusive of computer
Although municipal codes have evolved substantially, they continue systems that manage internal temperatures and irrigation. Moreover, the
to require reconfiguration to accommodate the possibility of urban installation of solar photovoltaics, advanced ventilation systems, and
livestock. Several variables including species type, real estate, and animal high efficiency pumps and fans further seeks to optimize energy effi-
cruelty laws exist on this front to structure codifications. One study ciency of the greenhouse (Al-Kodmany, 2018). Since its establishment
conducted on livestock owners in several cities across the United States the organization has opened additional farms at two other locations in
found considerable diversity in the types of regulations faced by farmers New York as well as one in Chicago, expanding production and its con-
(McClintock et al., 2014). Ordinances between states ranged from area sumer base (Reynolds and Darly, 2018).

11
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

Construction of the flagship farm at Greenpoint was completed in current realities and challenges. Urban land allocation to agriculture can
2011 following the introduction of new zoning regulations within the have social, economic, and environmental value-added benefits, neces-
state of New York. Specifically, those that enabled Gotham Greens to sitating consideration for landscape multifunctionality. These are inclu-
secure zoning approval eliminated height and bulk restrictions that had sive of ecological functions like biodiversity protection and nutrient
previously affected rooftop farms and gardens in the city. Changes in said cycling, as well as social cohesion factors such as recreation, health and
laws emerged in 2010 in response to increasing awareness for UA ini- well-being, and educational opportunities (Artmann and Sartison, 2018).
tiatives, and particularly sought to encourage and accommodate the Specific instances exemplifying such multifaceted potentials have been
development of CEA in urban areas (Meier, 2011). discussed in section 3, which prompted the need of further support in
Policy development in favor of vertical farms is reflective of a trend in constructing more robust legislative systems to improve initiatives for
the recent decade to support farms associated with high-tech systems like future adaptations (Krikser et al., 2019).
that of Gotham Greens. Accordingly, this resulted in the emergence of
other CEA farms around the same time in New York, including Brooklyn 4.1.3. Educational opportunities
Grange, Eaglestreet Rooftop Farm, and Square Roots to name a few Similar to the environmental protection and development of UA,
(Reynolds and Darly, 2018). The driving force behind policy develop- policymakers also withheld the capacity to promote educational oppor-
ment, or the relaxation of restrictions specifically pertaining to “digital” tunities for urban farmers. In supplying individuals with the necessary
operations, has been on the assumption of their sustainability and energy knowledge and tools to make the most sustainable decisions, cities can
efficiency. However, though Gotham Greens has sought to optimize its cultivate human capital and ensure maintained success of UA initiatives
energy use through advanced computer systems, some studies have irrespective of external policy changes (Deelstra and Girardet, 2000). It
suggested that energy efficiency is not ubiquitous across all CEA initia- should be noted that even when left unregulated, farmers have begun
tives. For instance, a study conducted by Barbosa et al. (2015) found that reducing pesticide use independently, showing a preference for more
compared to traditional, soil-based farms, rooftop farms heavily reliant organic alternatives (Brown and Jameton, 2000). Community gardens
on artificial lighting provided by LEDs were less energy efficient. have also opted out of synthetic chemicals in favor of less environmen-
In terms of its economic viability, Gotham Greens has been recorded tally damaging methods such as composting and hydroponics (Tendero
to “produce 7–8 times more food than traditional farming” on account of and Phung, 2019). These more sustainable, eco-friendly alterations are
its technology-dependent efficiencies, and year-round production. often a product of the intentions that commonly motivate the de-
Coupled with the fact that the organization was the only supplier of fresh mographics entering the UA sector.
food during Hurricane Sandy, these characteristics appear promising in The values generated by environmental conservation and activism
the context of food security (Al-Kodamy, 2018). However, as Carolan's efforts are compatible with those put forth by UA and can therefore in-
study highlighted, it was the production surpluses by large commercial fluence the behavioral intentions of urban farmers. Educational back-
“digital” farms like Gotham Greens which can harm smaller agricultural ground, in particular, has a notable impact on the perceived behavioral
businesses (2020). Furthermore, in observing the growing prominence of intentions of farmers (Kopiyawattage et al., 2019). Accordingly, while
rooftop and hydroponic farms, Dimitri et al. (2016) discovered that many producers may act on the best of intentions, a lack of knowledge and
displayed a tendency to be profit-oriented and reported higher sales than access to resources can result in mistakes or poor decisions in the context
their more traditional competitors. of environmental well-being (McDougall et al., 2019). Given the gravity
Regarding employment, Goodman and Minner (2019) noted that of educational opportunities, governmental policies can and should
opportunities generated by CEAs overall in New York have proven situate themselves to promote sufficient pedagogical means for urban
limited. This is on account of the dominance Gotham Greens currently producers so that they may more effectively carry out these intentions
withholds over the sector, a vast majority of which are in low-paying (Siegner et al., 2018).
positions. Even more so, having received an automation grant in 2016, In this context, the conduct of UA may be divided into two broad
seeking to improve efficiency further, many of these jobs became categories, those operated by small or family farms, and commercial size
vulnerable to replacement by machinery. To such an extent, policy operations. Different operational scales of UA require different skill sets
development has taken place in New York in support of UA. However, as and knowledge. Educational approaches should therefore take into
the example of Green Gotham demonstrated, many of these policies have consideration these esoteric distinctions to better equip farmers with
acted predominantly in favor of initiatives backed by advanced tech- information that is relevant to the type of farming at hand. For instance,
nologies on the assumption that they offer more sustainable and small-scale farmers may benefit from a detailed understanding of com-
economically efficient alternatives. posting practices and cultivation methods to improve overall efficiency
The aforementioned instances highlighted a tendency for political and reduce labor costs (McDougall et al., 2019). Similarly, to reduce
frameworks to lack the functionalities that prompt efficient incorpora- environmental impacts, improving the carbon literacy of small-scale and
tion of agriculture into cities as they overlook the nuances of emerging community farmers could also improve consumer choices made by these
practices. Here urban planners may benefit in drawing from the related farms (Sharp and Wheeler, 2013).
experience of recreational green spaces. Such green spaces have thrived In particular, some countries and cities seeking to expand UA projects
in recent years under comparatively greater social and political support. have already started implementing educational and training programs to
As Orsini (2020) noted, “policies exist for the promotion of green spaces in support local farmers. For instance, the state of California's Cooperative
the city for ecological-environmental, aesthetic-recreational, and Extension has adopted educational and assistance programs geared to-
social-educational purposes.” One study conducted in the United States wards the support of UA. One such example is the Small Farm Program
found that between the years 2001 and 2007, a total of 204 bills related (SFP) which assists and supports the state's smaller scale urban food
to park improvement and green space support were passed. The bills producers (Reynolds, 2010). Additionally, California adopted the Urban
covered a wide range of dimensions including, funding, outreach, pres- Agricultural Incentives Zone Act in 2013 which has allowed cities to
ervation, recreational activities, and safety. The diversity and quantity of employ tax incentives for agricultural land-use in designated zones.
bills passed were thus indicative of “a continued commitment to improve- Significantly, the act encompasses the use of land for educational pur-
ment and reinvention of existing policies” in the states represented by the poses relating to agriculture (Reynolds and Darly, 2018).
study (Kruger et al., 2010). Should a similar foundation be tailored to- The achievement of high sustainability in urban farms is contingent
wards agricultural purposes, UA may become more readily accessible upon the training and knowledge procured by producers. This contrasts
(Orsini, 2020). the tendency of recreational farmers to make less sustainable choices,
Considering the multifaceted potentials of UA integration, the resulting in low efficiency of material and labor inputs (McDougall et al.,
fundamental dimension of policy becomes apparent in addressing the 2019). This may be addressed by developing education policies and

12
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

training opportunities for farmers and the community as a whole. economic hardship (McClintock, 2010), as UA will not only serve as a
Regarding developments within the sector itself, such as new technologies, buffer for food security but also alleviating potential unrest in the com-
training programs and workshops aid farmers in updating applied meth- munities (Moore, 2006). Therefore, while UA may not be directly prof-
odologies. Subsequently, the presence of direct farm-to-consumer markets itable, its economic viability is brought by its multidimensional
can incentivize farmers by ensuring the profitability of operations. Gov- beneficial impacts on the urban environment, social well-being, disaster
ernments can help ensure that organizations and institutions have the preparedness, and sustainability.
necessary financial means of providing educational opportunities for the On the other hand, UA has a potential to be economically profitable as
surrounding community. Similarly, educating community members helps a commercial-scale food producer in a closed system and controlled
in creating jobs for low-income households (Carolan, 2020). environment such as vertical farms, plant factories, and greenhouses
Conversely, while local governments can bolster productivity and (Specht et al., 2016). The technologies for this type of UA are already
sustainability of UA, education becomes another benefit of integration as rapidly advancing to increase efficiency and consequently profitability.
awareness is generated amongst residents concerning topics like nutri- The integration of digital technology into vertical farms to increase
tion and food production (Tuijl et al., 2018). Promotion of education automation, control, and efficiency, incorporation of compatible urban
through agriculture on the policy front thus comes full circle as farmers renewable electricity and bio-heating to sustainably power the increasing
are equipped with techniques which improve production quality whilst energy demand of more complex system, and utilization of CRISPR-Cas 9
exposure to such practices helps generate more conscious consumers in genetic editing tool to design crops with compact architecture and rapid
the community (Horst et al., 2017). Such advantages are demonstrative life cycle to grow in confined space are the current development pushing
of alternate societal contributions UA has to offer. UA to not only be profitable, but also produce high-quality agricultural
products where urban consumers will have assurance on the safety
5. Conclusion standards of food products.
While the resurgence of UA among cities worldwide has been mainly
The economic profitability of UA is highly dependent on its size, type, driven by the public and private sectors, the role of policy makers is an
price competitiveness, and consumers’ perceived value of produce integral part of UA revolution to successfully integrate UA practices in
beyond uses as food. Despite its highly relative profitability, UA has many cities. Existing policies and regulations, land prices, availability of urban
different roles for communities in cities and urban areas, from markets, as well as the prices for agriculture commodities strongly
subsistence-oriented motives to large scale commercial production fa- influenced UA activities (de Zeeuw et al., 2011). Its current situation is
cilities. Through UA, a household can reduce its expenses by producing similar to the early days of renewable energy in the market, particularly
its own food, thus leading to savings in their household budgets (Smit solar power. Part of solar power success, aside from the technological and
and Bailkey, 2006). Furthermore, for a household that produced more manufacturing advancement, is the monetary incentive policy on both
than their consumption needs, they can sell the production surpluses and the adopters of technology and their consumers. Hence, government
generate additional income for their household. In a more commercially policies which are conducive for UA and properly formulated in the
oriented UA, the local community and households will be able to receive framework of systems approach, can further help increase economic
income by becoming agricultural laborers in the production facilities or viability of UA while bringing positive impact on food security, social
by producing the necessary agricultural inputs such as compost and justice, environmental quality, health and well-being, climate change
fertilizer for UA. Additionally, these community and household members mitigation, and disaster risk reduction.
can also conduct food processing activities and market food products to
gain further income. Among these economic benefits beyond profit, UA Declarations
can also help provide a healthier diet and nutrition to the urban poor
(Zezza and Tasciotti, 2008). Based on these potentials, the level of food Author contribution statement
security and health conditions of the urban poor communities can be
increased through UA activities (Poulsen et al., 2015). For the general All authors listed have significantly contributed to the development
urban communities, UA will increase the availability of fresh and and the writing of this article.
affordable foods like vegetables. UA complemented the urban food
supplies from the rural agriculture by lessening its dependence on Funding statement
off-seasons food imports, while also act as a buffer when there are
reduced supplies, thus flattening the price/variety seasonality (Battersby This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies
and Marshak, 2013). Other roles of UA can be embedded as one of the in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
elements in the urban infrastructure, providing several ecosystem ser-
vices to the urban environment as part of the green and blue infra- Data availability statement
structure, whereby maintaining green open spaces and vegetation cover,
UA can help improve the urban microclimate, and physical and mental Data included in article/supp. material/referenced in article.
health of urban dwellers. On risk-prone areas such as floodplains, UA can
help in stormwater management by controlling the infiltration rate of Declaration of interest's statement
excess stormwater (Dubbeling and de Zeeuw, 2011). Local food pro-
duction can reduce GHGs emissions and contribute to a low carbon The authors declare no conflict of interest.
economy because of shorter supply chains and the amount of fossil fuels
used in transportation. Encouraging food production close to cities helps Additional information
in reducing the ecological footprint of the city, increasing the synergy
between urban domestic, industrial sectors, and agriculture (Smeets No additional information is available for this paper.
et al., 2007). With a local food provision, cities will be able to strengthen
their resilience (de Zeeuw et al., 2011) and self-reliance in coping with Acknowledgements
natural disasters and increasing their capacity in adapting to climate
change. Local food production will act as a safety net for urban com- The corresponding author would like to acknowledge Ritsumeikan
munities during disasters and emergencies when the flow of food dis- University for their internal research grant support. G.P. Marquez and R.B.
tributions from the rural areas failed to reach the urban areas. UA will Salonga would like to acknowledge Ritsumeikan University and Nagoya
also reduce the vulnerabilities in urban communities during times of City University, respectively, for their internal research grant support.

13
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

References de Zeeuw, H., Van Veenhuizen, R., Dubbeling, M., 2011. The role of urban agriculture in
building resilient cities in developing countries. J. Agric. Sci. 149 (S1), 153–163.
Dimitri, C., Oberholtzer, L., Pressman, A., 2016. Urban agriculture: connecting producers
Ackerman, K., Conard, M., Culligan, P., Plunz, R., Sutto, M.P., 2014. Sustainable food
with consumers. Br. Food J. 118 (3), 603–617.
systems for future cities: the potential of urban agriculture. Econ. Soc. Rev. 45 (2),
Dubbeling, M., de Zeeuw, H., 2011. Urban agriculture and climate change adaptation:
189–206.
ensuring food security through adaptation. In: Otto-Zimmermann, K. (Ed.), Resilient
Adam-Bradford, A., 2010. Urban agriculture and its function in urban environmental
Cities, Local Sustainability, 1. Springer, Dordrecht.
management in the context of adaptation, food security and climate change. In:
Dubbeling, M., Veenhuizen, R., Halliday, J., 2019. Urban agriculture as a climate change
Laband, D.N. (Ed.), Proceedings: Emerging Issues along Urban/rural Interfaces III,
and disaster risk reduction strategy. Field Actions Sci. Rep. 20, 32–39.
Auburn University Center for Forest Sustainability, USDA Forest Service, Centers for
Dzhambov, A., Hartig, T., Markevych, I., Tilov, B., Dimitrova, D., 2018. Urban residential
Urban and Interface Forestry, Auburn University Forest Policy Center. Auburn
greenspace and mental health in youth: different approaches to testing multiple
University School of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences, pp. 92–99.
pathways yield different conclusions. Environ. Res. 160, 47–59.
Al-Kodmany, K., 2018. The vertical farm: a review of developments and implications for
Ehmann, A., Thumm, U., Lewandowski, I., 2018. Fertilizing potential of separated biogas
the vertical city. Buildings 8 (2), 24.
digestates in annual and perennial biomass production systems. Front. Sustain. Food
American Planning Association, 2007. APA Policy Guide on Community and Regional
Syst. 2, 12.
Food Planning. APA. https://www.planning.org/policy/guides/adopted/food.htm.
Ezura, H., 2022. Letter to the Editor: the world’s first CRISPR tomato launched to a
Antisari, L.V., Orsini, F., Marchetti, L., Vianello, G., Gianquinto, G., 2015. Heavy metal
Japanese market: the social-economic impact of its implementation on crop genome
accumulation in vegetables grown in urban gardens. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35,
editing. Plant Cell Physiol. 63 (6), 731–733.
1139–1147.
Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2011. The place of urban and peri-urban
Artmann, M., Sartison, K., 2018. The role of urban agriculture as a nature-based solution:
agriculture (UPA) in national food security programmes. Food and Agriculture
a review for developing a systemic assessment framework. Sustainability 10 (6),
Organization. https://www.fao.org/3/i2177e/i2177e00.pdf.
1937.
Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2020. Covid-19 and Smallholder Producers’
Asciuto, A., Schimmenti, E., Cottone, C., Borsellino, V., 2019. A financial feasibility study
Access to Markets. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.
of an aquaponic system in a Mediterranean urban context. Urban For. Urban Green.
Foodtank, 2017. Foodtank 2016-2017 Annual Report. https://foodtank.com/wp-content/
38, 397–402.
uploads/2017/07/Annual-Report_web.pdf.
Ashardiono, F., 2019. Protecting Japanese tea growers from the devastating effects of
Forchino, A.A., Gennotte, V., Maiolo, S., Brigolin, D., Melard, C., Pastres, R., 2018. Eco-
climate change: a terroir-based ecosystem approach for rural development.
designing aquaponics: a case study of an experimental production system in Belgium.
J. Asiatique-Japan Res. Inst. Ritsumeikan University 1, 29–43.
Procedia CIRP 69, 546–550.
Aubry, C., Manouchehri, N., 2019. Urban agriculture and health: assessing risks and
Fuji, M., Yokohari, M., Watanabe, T., 2002. Identification of the distribution pattern of
overseeing practices. Field Actions Sci. Rep. 20, 108–111.
farmlands in Edo. J. City Plan. Inst. Japan 37, 931–936.
Azunre, G.A., Amponsah, O., Peprah, C., Takyi, S.A., Braimah, I., 2019. A review of the
Glavan, M., Schmutz, U., Williams, S., Corsi, S., Monaco, F., Kneafsey, M., Guzman
role of urban agriculture in the sustainable city discourse. Cities 93, 104–119.  c-Istenic, M., Pintar, M., 2018. The economic performance of
Rodriguez, P.A., Ceni
Barbosa, G.L., Gadelha, F.D.A., Kublik, N., Proctor, A., Reichelm, L., Weissinger, E.,
urban gardening in three European cities – examples from Ljubljana, Milan and
Wohlleb, G.M., Halden, R.U., 2015. Comparison of land, water, and energy
London. Urban For. Urban Green. 36, 100–122.
requirements of lettuce grown using hydroponic vs. conventional agricultural
Goddek, S., Delaide, B., Mankasingh, U., Ragnarsdottir, K.V., Jijakli, H.,
methods. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 12 (6), 6879–6891.
Thorarinsdottir, R., 2015. Challenges of sustainable and commercial aquaponics.
Battersby, J., Marshak, M., 2013. Growing communities: integrating the social and
Sustainability 7 (4), 4199–4224.
economic benefits of urban agriculture in Cape Town. Urban Forum 24, 447–461.
Goodman, W., Minner, J., 2019. Will the urban agricultural revolution be vertical and
Bertier, L.D., Ron, M., Huo, H., Bradford, K.J., Britt, A.B., Michelmore, R.W., 2018. High-
soilless? A case study of controlled environment agriculture in New York City. Land
resolution analysis of the efficiency, heritability, and editing outcomes of CRISPR/
Use Pol. 83, 160–173.
Cas9-induced modifications of NCED4 in lettuce (Lactuca sativa). G3 (Bethesda, Md.)
Gooley, G.J., Gavine, F.M., 2003. Integrated Agri-Aquaculture Systems: a Resource
8 (5), 1513–1521.
Handbook for Australian Industry Development. RIRDC Publication No. 03/012.
Biazoti, A.R., Nakamura, A.C., Nagib, G., Le~ao, V.O.P.S., Giacche, G., Mauad, T., 2021.
http://backyardaquaponics.com/Travis/03-012.pdf.
The impact of Covid-19 on urban agriculture in S~ao Paulo, Brazil. Sustainability 13
Gopinath, P., Vethamoni, P.I., Gomathi, M., 2017. Aeroponics soilless cultivation system
(11), 6185.
for vegetable crops. Chemical Sci. Review Letters 6 (22), 838–849.
Brown, K.J., Jameton, A.L., 2000. Public health implications of urban agriculture. J. Publ.
Grebitus, C., Printezis, I., Printezis, A., 2017. Relationship between consumer behavior
Health Pol. 21 (1), 20–39.
and success of urban agriculture. Ecol. Econ. 136, 189–200.
Brown, S.L., Chaney, R.L., Hettiarachchi, G.M., 2016. Lead in urban soils: a real or
Haigh, R., Amaratunga, D., 2010. An integrative review of the built environment
perceived concern for urban agriculture. J. Environ. Qual. 45 (1), 26–36.
discipline’s role in the development of society’s resilience to disasters. Int. J. Dis.
Buscaroli, E., Braschi, I., Cirillo, C., Fargue-Lelievre, A., Modarelli, G.C., Pennisi, G.,
Resil. Built Environ. 1 (1), 11–24.
Righini, I., Specht, K., Orsini, F., 2021. Reviewing chemical and biological risks in
Hernandez, M., Manu, R., 2018. Growing Greener Cities: Urban Agriculture and the
urban agriculture: a comprehensive framework for a food safety assessment of city
Impact on SDG 11. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://sdg
region food systems. Food Control 126, 108085.
.iisd.org/commentary/generation-2030/growing-greener-cities-urban-agriculture-an
Butler, W.H., 2012. Welcoming animals back to the city: navigating the tensions of urban
d-the-impact-on-sdg-11/.
livestock through municipal ordinances. J. Agric. Food Sys. Commun. Dev. 2 (2),
Hiremath, R.B., Balachandra, P., Kumar, B., Bansode, S.S., Murali, J., 2013.
193–215.
Indicator- based urban sustainability—a review. Energy for Sustainable Dev. 17 (6),
Carolan, M., 2020. Urban farming is going high tech: digital urban agriculture’s links to
555–563.
gentrification and land use. American Planning Association 86 (1), 47–59.
Horst, M., McClintock, N., Hoey, L., 2017. The intersection of planning, urban agriculture,
Chang, M., Morel, K., 2018. Reconciling economic viability and socio-ecological
and food justice: a review of the literature. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 83 (3), 277–295.
aspirations in London urban microfarms. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 38, 9.
House, W.J., Ikiara, G.K., McCormick, D., 1993. Urban self-employment in Kenya:
Chang, C.Y., Yu, H.Y., Chen, J.J., Li, F.B., Zhang, H.H., Liu, C.P., 2014. Accumulation of
panacea or viable strategy? World Dev. 21 (7), 1205–1223.
heavy metals in leaf vegetables from agricultural soils and associate potential health
Ishii, T., Araki, M., 2016. Consumer acceptance of food crops developed by genome
risks in the Pearl River Delta, South China. Environ. Monit. Assess. 186, 1547–1569.
editing. Plant Cell Rep. 35 (7), 1507–1518.
Cohen, N., Reynolds, K., 2014. Urban agriculture policy making in New York’s “new
Kalantari, F., Tahir, O.M., Joni, R.A., Fatemi, E., 2018. Opportunities and challenges in
political spaces”: strategizing for a participatory and representative system. J. Plann.
sustainability of vertical farming: a review. J. Landscape Ecol. 11 (1), 35–60.
Educ. Res. 34 (2), 221–234.
Kalantari, F., Tahir, O.M., Mahmoudi Lahijani, A., Kalantari, S., 2017. A review of vertical
Cohen, N., 2016. Policy Brief: New Directions for Urban Agriculture in. CUNY Urban Food
farming technology: a guide for implementation of building integrated agriculture in
Policy Institute, New York City. https://www.cunyurbanfoodpolicy.org/news/2016/
cities. Adv. Eng. Forum 24, 76–91.
10/19/policy-brief-new-directions-for-urban-agriculture-in-new-york-city.
Kalen, S., 2011. Agriculture, food, and environmental policy. Nat. Resour. Environ. 26
Currey, C.J., 2017. An Introduction to Pests in Hydroponic Production. Produce Grower.
(1), 3–7. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23054892.
https://www.producegrower.com/article/an-introduction-to-pests-in-hydroponic-pr
Khudoyberdiev, A., Ahmad, S., Ullah, I., Kim, D., 2020. An optimization scheme based on
oduction/.
fuzzy logic control for efficient energy consumption in hydroponics environment.
Dadvand, P., Bartoll, X., Basaga~ na, X., Dalmau-Bueno, A., Martinez, D., Ambros, A.,
Energies 13 (2), 289.
Cirach, M., Triguero-Mas, M., Gascon, M., Borrell, C., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., 2016.
Kopiyawattage, K.P.P., Warner, L., Roberts, T.G., 2019. Understanding urban food
Green spaces and general health: roles of mental health status, social support, and
producers’ intention to continue farming in urban settings. Urban Agric. Reg. Food
physical activity. Environ. Int. 91, 161–167.
Sys. 4, 1–11.
Daftary-Steel, S., Herrera, H., Porter, C.M., 2015. The unattainable trifecta of urban
Krikser, T., Zasada, I., Piorr, A., 2019. Socio-economic viability of urban agriculture: a
agriculture. J. Agric. Food Sys. Commun. Dev. 6 (1), 19–32.
comparative analysis of success factors in Germany. Sustainability 11 (7), 1999.
Danso, G., Keraita, B., Afrane, Y., 2002. Farming Systems in Urban Agriculture, Accra,
Kruger, J., Lankford, T., Schmid, T., 2010. State Legislative Support for parks. Environ.
Ghana. With Special Focus on its Profitability, Wastewater Use and Added Malaria
Health Insights 4, 27–31.
Risk. Consultancy report submitted to FAO-Ghana office via International Water
Kwon, C.-T., Heo, J., Lemmon, Z.H., Capua, Y., Hutton, S.F., Van Eck, J., Park, S.J.,
Management Institute.
Dubbeling Lippman, Z.B., 2020. Rapid customization of Solanaceae fruit crops for
Deelstra, T., Girardet, H., 2000. Urban agriculture and sustainable cities. In: Bakker, N.,
urban agriculture. Nat. Biotechnol. 38 (2), 182–188.
Dubbeling, M., Gündel, D., Sabel-Koschella, U., Zeeuw, H. (Eds.), Growing Cities,
LaCroix, C.J., 2014. Urban agriculture and the environment. Urban Lawyer 46 (2),
Growing Food: Urban Agriculture on the Policy Agenda. German Foundation for
227–248. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24392805.
International Development, pp. 43–65.

14
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

Lennard, W., Goddek, S., 2019. Aquaponics: the basics. In: Goddek, S., Joyce, A., Reynolds, K., Darly, S., 2018. Commercial urban agriculture in the global city:
Kotzen, B., Burnell, G.M. (Eds.), Aquaponics Food Production Systems. Springer, perspectives from New York City and Metropole du Grand Paris. CUNY Urban Food
Cham. Policy Institute. https://www.cunyurbanfoodpolicy.org/news/2018/12/11/lscislvs
Lobato-G omez, M., Hewitt, S., Capell, T., Christou, P., Dhingra, A., Gir on-Calva, P.S., r7spj7834v9ls796n6xm7h.
2021. Transgenic and genome-edited fruits: background, constraints, benefits, and Reynolds, K., 2010. Urban Agriculture as Revolution: an Action Research and Social
commercial opportunities. Horticulture Research 8, 166. Movement Analysis of Food Production in Alameda County. Doctoral dissertation.
Lubowski, R.N., Plantinga, A.J., Stavins, R.N., 2006. Land-use change and carbon sinks: University of California, Davis. https://cityfarmer.info/ph-d-thesis-urban-agricultur
econometric estimation of the carbon sequestration supply function. J. Environ. Econ. e-as-revolution-an-action-research-and-social-movement-analysis-of-food-producti
Manag. 51 (2), 135–152. on-in-alameda-county-california/.
Marche, G., 2015. What can urban gardening really do about gentrification? A case-study Reynolds, K., 2015. Disparity despite diversity: social injustice in New York City’s urban
of three San Francisco community gardens. Eur. J. Am. Stud. 10 (3), 1–13. agriculture system. Antipode 47 (1), 240–259.
Mares, T.M., Pe~ na, D.G., 2010. Urban agriculture in the making of insurgent spaces in Los Roberts, J.M., Bruce, T.J.A., Monaghan, J.M., Pope, T.W., Leather, S.R., Beacham, A.M.,
Angeles and Seattle. In: Hou, J. (Ed.), Insurgent Public Space: Guerrilla Urbanism and 2020. Vertical farming systems bring new considerations for pest and disease
the Remaking of Contemporary Cities. Routledge, pp. 241–254. management. Ann. Appl. Biol. 176 (3), 226–232.
Marquez, G.P.B., Takeuchi, H., Monta~ no, M.N.E., Hasegawa, T., 2020. Performance of rice Romeo, D., Vea, E.B., Thomsen, M., 2018. Environmental impacts of urban hydroponics in
straw as mono- and co-feedstock of Ulva spp. for thalassic biogas production. Heliyon Europe: a case study in Lyon. Procedia CIRP 69, 540–545.
6 (9), E05036. Sanye-Mengual, E., Orsini, F., Oliver-Sola, J., Rieradevall, J., Montero, J.I.,
Martin, M., Poulikidou, S., Molin, E., 2019. Exploring the environmental performance of Gianquinto, G., 2015. Techniques and crops for efficient rooftop gardens in Bologna,
urban symbiosis for vertical hydroponic farming. Sustainability 11 (23), 6724. Italy. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35 (4), 1477–1488.
McClintock, N., 2010. Why farm the city? Theorizing urban agriculture through a lens of Sarker, A.H., Bornman, J.F., Marinova, D., 2019. A framework for integrating agriculture
metabolic rift. Camb. J. Reg. Econ. Soc. 3 (2), 191–207. in urban sustainability in Australia. Urban Sci. 3 (2), 50.
McClintock, N., 2014. Radical, reformist, and garden-variety neoliberal: coming to terms Sathyanarayana, S.R., Gangadhar, W.V., Badrinath, M.G., Ravindra, R.M.,
with urban agriculture’s contradictions. Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Public. Shriramrao, A.U., 2022. Hydroponics: an intensified agriculture practice to improve
Present. 19 (2), 147–171. food production. Reviews in Agric. Sci. 10, 101–114.
McClintock, N., Pallana, E., Wooten, H., 2014. Urban livestock ownership, management Sato, S., 2020. Japan: Agricultural Biotechnology Annual. USDA-FAS GAIN Report. http
and regulation in the United States: an exploratory survey and research agenda. Land s://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileNa
Use Pol. 38, 426–440. me¼Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Tokyo_Japan_10-20-2019.
McClintock, N., 2016. Cultivating (a) sustainability capital: urban agriculture, Schneider, S.A., 2010. A reconsideration of agricultural law: a call for the law of food,
ecogentrification, and the uneven valorization of social reproduction. Ann. Assoc. farming, and sustainability. William Mary Environ. Law Pol. Rev. 34 (3), 935–963.
Am. Geogr. 108 (2), 579–590. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr/vol34/iss3/5/.
McDougall, R., Kristiansen, P., Rader, R., 2019. Small-scale urban agriculture results in Sharma, N., Acharya, S., Kumar, K., Singh, N., Chaurasia, O.P., 2018. Hydroponics as an
high yields but requires judicious management of inputs to achieve sustainability. advanced technique for vegetable production: an overview. J. Soil Water Conserv. 17
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116 (1), 129–134. (4), 364–371.
McEldowney, J., 2017. Urban Agriculture in Europe: Patterns, Challenges and Policies. Sharp, A., Wheeler, M., 2013. Reducing householders’ grocery carbon emissions: carbon
European Parliamentary Research Service. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/th literacy and carbon label preferences. Australian Marketing J. 21 (4), 240–249.
inktank/en/document.html?reference¼EPRS_IDA(2017)614641. Siegner, A., Sowerwine, J., Acey, C., 2018. Does urban agriculture improve food security?
Mehmood, F., Ullah, I., Ahmad, S., Kim, D.H., 2019. Object detection mechanism based Examining the nexus of food access and distribution of urban produced foods in the
on deep learning algorithm using embedded IOT devices for smart home appliances states: a systematic review. Sustainability 10 (9), 2988.
control in CoT. J. Ambient Intell. Hum. Comput. Smeets, P.J.A.M., van Mansfeld, M.J.M., Zhang, C., Loohuis, R.O., Broeze, J., Buijs, S.,
Meier, S., 2011. Gotham greens farms, Llc. Sustainable Urban CEA. NYSERDA. https Moens, E., van Latesteijn, H., van Steekelenburg, M., Stumpel, L., Bruinsma, W., van
://www.nyserda.ny.gov/Business-and-Industry/Agriculture/CEA-Completed-Projec Megen, T., Mager, S., Christiaens, P., Heijer, H., 2007. Master Plan. Greenport
ts. Shanghai Agropark. https://edepot.wur.nl/222976.
Mendes, W., Balmer, K., Kaetheler, T., Rhoads, A., 2008. Using land inventories to plan Smit, J., Bailkey, M., 2006. Urban agriculture and the building of communities. In: van
for urban agriculture: experiences from Portland and Vancouver. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. Veenhuizen, R. (Ed.), Cities Farming for the Future: Urban Agriculture for Green and
74 (4), 435–449. Productive Cities. International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR), Philippines,
Moore, S., 2006. Forgotten roots of the green city: subsistence gardening in columbus, pp. 145–171.
Ohio, 1900–1940. Urban Geogr. 27 (2), 174–192. Smit, J., Ratta, A., Nasr, J., 1996. Urban Agriculture: Food, Jobs and Sustainable Cities.
Moreno-Pe~ naranda, R., 2011. Japan’s Urban Agriculture: Cultivating Sustainability and The Urban Agriculture Network, United Nations Development Programme.
Well-Being. United Nations University. https://unu.edu/publications/articles http://urban.agroeco.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/UNDP-Urban-Agriculture-
/japan-s-urban-agriculture-what-does-the-future-hold.html. Part-one-1.pdf.
Mougeot, L.J.A., 2000. Urban Agriculture: Definition, Presence, Potentials and Risks, Snyder, H., 2019. Literature review as a research methodology: an overview and
Main Policy Challenges. Cities Feeding People Series. International Development guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 104, 333–339.
Research Center (IDRC). Report 31. https://idl-bnc-idrc.dspacedirect.org/bitstream/h Specht, K., Weith, T., Swoboda, K., Siebert, R., 2016. Socially acceptable urban
andle/10625/26429/117785.pdf?sequence¼12.%20. agriculture businesses. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 36, 17.
Nicholls, E., Ely, A., Birkin, L., Basu, P., Goulson, D., 2020. The contribution of small-scale Srihajong, N., Ruamrungsri, S., Terdtoon, P., Kamonpet, P., Ohyama, T., 2006. Heat pipe
food production in urban areas to the sustainable development goals: a review and as a cooling mechanism in an aeroponic system. Appl. Therm. Eng. 26 (2–3),
case study. Sustain. Sci. 15, 1585–1599. 267–276.
Nugent, R., 1999. Measuring the sustainability of urban agriculture. In: Koc, M., Sroka, W., P€ olling, B., Mergenthaler, M., 2019. City adjustments as the main factor of
MacRae, R., Mougeot, L.J.A., Welsh, J. (Eds.), For Hunger-Proof Cities: Sustainable success of urban and peri-urban farms–empirical evidence from the Ruhr Metropolis.
Urban Food Systems. International Development Research Centre, pp. 95–99. NJAS - Wageningen J. Life Sci. 89 (1), 1–13.
https://idl-bnc-idrc.dspacedirect.org/bitstream/handle/10625/23475/IDL-2 Stewart, R., Korth, M., Langer, L., Rafferty, S., Silva, N.R.D., Rooyen, C., 2013. What are
3475.pdf?sequence¼1. the impacts of urban agriculture programs on food security in low and middle-
Opitz, I., Berges, R., Piorr, A., Krikser, T., 2016. Contributing to food security in urban income countries? Environ. Evid. 2, 7.
areas: differences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the global Stoknes, K., Scholwin, F., Krzesinski, W., Wojciechowska, E., Jasi nska, A., 2016.
north. Agric. Hum. Val. 33, 341–358. Efficiency of a novel “food to waste to food” system including anaerobic digestion of
Orsini, F., Kahane, R., Nono-Womdim, R., Gianquinto, G., 2013. Urban agriculture in the food waste and cultivation of vegetables on digestate in a bubble-insulated
developing world: a review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 33, 695–720. greenhouse. Waste Manag. 56, 466–476.
Orsini, F., 2020. Innovation and Sustainability in Urban Agriculture: the Path Forward. Tendero, M., Phung, C.G., 2019. The revival of urban agriculture: an opportunity for the
J. Consumer Prot. Food Safety 15, 203–204. composting stream. Field Actions Sci. Rep. 20, 40–51.
Orsini, F., Pennisi, G., Michelon, N., Minelli, A., Bazzocchi, G., Sanye-Mengual, E., Thomaier, S., Specht, K., Henckel, D., Dierich, A., Sawicka, M., 2014. Farming in and on
Gianquinto, G., 2020. Features and functions of multifunctional urban agriculture in urban buildings: present practice and specific novelties of zero-acreage farming
the global north: a review. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 4, 562513. (ZFarming). Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 30 (1), 43–54.
O’Sullivan, C.A., McIntyre, C.L., Dry, I.B., Hani, S.M., Hochman, Z., Bonnett, G.D., 2020. Tomkins, M., Yousef, S., Adam-Bradford, A., Perkins, C., Grosrenaud, E., Mctough, M.,
Vertical farms bear fruit. Nat. Biotechnol. 38 (2), 160–162. Viljoen, A., 2019. Cultivating refuge: the role of urban agriculture amongst refugees
Otazu, V., 2010. Manual on Quality Seed Potato Production Using Aeroponics. and forced migrants in the Kurdistan region of Iraq. Int. J. Des. Nat. 14 (2), 103–118.
International Potato Center, Lima, Peru, pp. 1–42 (CIP). https://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/cultivating-refuge-role-urban-agriculture-amon
Paltseva, A.A., Cheng, Z., Egendorf, S.P., Groffman, P.M., 2020. Remediation of an urban gst-refugees-and-forced-migrants-kurdistan.
garden with elevated levels of soil contamination. Sci. Total Environ. 722, 137965. Tornaghi, C., 2014. Critical geography of urban agriculture. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 38 (4),
Petrea, S.M., Coad a, M.T., Cristea, V., Dediu, L., Cristea, D., Rahoveanu, A.T., 551–567.
Zugravu, A.G., Rahoveanu, M.M., Mocuta, D.N., 2016. A comparative cost – Torraco, R.J., 2016. Writing integrative literature reviews: using the past and present to
effectiveness analysis in different tested aquaponic systems. Agric. Agric. Sci. Proc. explore the future. Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 15 (4), 404–428.
10, 555–565. Tuijl, E.V., Hospers, G.J., van der Ber, L., 2018. Opportunities and challenges of urban
Poulsen, M.N., McNab, P.R., Clayton, M.L., Neff, R.A., 2015. A systematic review of urban agriculture for sustainable city development. Eur. Spatial Res. Pol. 25 (2), 5–22.
agriculture and food security impacts in low-income countries. Food Pol. 55, United Nations [UN], 2019. Global Issues: Population. https://www.un.org/en/globa
131–146. l-issues/population.

15
G.N. Yuan et al. Heliyon 8 (2022) e11583

Vagneron, I., 2007. Economic appraisal of profitability and sustainability of peri-urban editors: J. Sarukhan, et al.. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris
agriculture in Bangkok. Ecol. Econ. 61 (2-3), 516–529. /handle/10665/43354.
van den Berg, A., Maas, J., Verheij, R., Groenewegen, P., 2010. Green space as a buffer World Health Organization [WHO], 2017. Urban green Space Interventions and Health: a
between stressful life events and health. Soc. Sci. Med. 70 (8), 1203–1210. Review of Impacts and Effectiveness. Full report. https://www.euro.who.int/en/heal
van Veenhuizen, R., Danso, G., 2007. Profitability and Sustainability of Urban and Peri- th-topics/environment-and-health/urban-health/publications/2017/urban-green-spa
Urban Agriculture. In: Agricultural Management, Marketing and Finance Occasional ce-interventions-and-health-a-review-of-impacts-and-effectiveness.-full-report-2017.
Paper, Food and Agricultural Organization. Food and Agricultural Organization. World Bank, 2021. Food Security and Covid-19. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic
https://ruaf.org/document/profitability-and-sustainability-of-urban-and-peri-urba /agriculture/brief/food-security-and-covid-19.
n-agriculture/. Yokohari, M., Amati, M., Bolthouse, J., Kurita, H., 2010. Restoring urban fringe
Varkonyi-Gasic, E., Wang, T., Voogd, C., Jeon, S., Drummond, R.S.M., Gleave, A.P., landscapes through urban agriculture: the Japanese experience. disP - The Planning
Allan, A.C., 2019. Mutagenesis of kiwifruit centroradialis-like genes transforms a Review 46 (181), 51–59.
climbing woody perennial with long juvenility and axillary flowering into a compact Yoshida, S., Yagi, H., 2021. Long-term development of urban agriculture: resilience and
plant with rapid terminal flowering. Plant Biotechnol. J. 17 (5), 869–880. sustainability of farmers facing the covid-19 pandemic in Japan. Sustainability 13
Wagstaff, C., Clarkson, G.J.J., Zhang, F., Rothwell, S.D., Fry, S.C., Taylor, G., Dixon, M.S., (8), 4316.
2010. Modification of cell wall properties in lettuce improves shelf life. J. Exp. Bot. Yoshida, S., Yagi, H., Kiminami, A., Garrod, G., 2019. Farm diversification and
61 (4), 1239–1248. sustainability of multifunctional peri-urban agriculture: entrepreneurial attributes of
Whittinghill, L.J., Rowe, D.B., 2012. The role of green roof technology in urban advanced diversification in Japan. Sustainability 11 (10), 2887.
agriculture. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 27 (4), 314–322. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ Zezza, A., Tasciotti, L., 2008. Does urban agriculture enhance dietary diversity? Empirical
26332344. evidence from a sample of developing countries. Food and Agric. Organ. United
World Health Organization [WHO], 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: health Nations. https://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/en/c/283318/.
synthesis: a report of the millennium ecosystem assessment/core writing team: C. Zezza, A., Tasciotti, L., 2010. Urban agriculture, poverty, and food security. Food Pol. 35
Corvalan, S. Hales, A. McMichael; extended writing team: C. Bulter et al.; review (4), 265–273.

16
 Update
Heliyon
Volume 9, Issue 2, February 2023, Page

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13165
 Heliyon 9 (2023) e13165

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon

Corrigendum

Corrigendum to “A review on urban agriculture: Technology,

socio-economy, and policy” [Heliyon 8(11), (2022)
Article e11583]
Grace Ning Yuan a, Gian Powell B. Marquez b, *, Haoran Deng a, Anastasiia Iu a,
Melisa Fabella c, Reginald B. Salonga d, Fitrio Ashardiono e, Joyce A. Cartagena f
a
College of International Relations, Ritsumeikan University, Kita-ku, Kyoto 603-8577 Japan
b
College of Global Liberal Arts, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki, Osaka 567-8570 Japan
c
Graduate School of Economics, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Shiga, 525-8577 Japan
d
Institute for Advanced Education and Research, Nagoya City University, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya 467-8501 Japan
e
College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki, Osaka 567-8570 Japan
f
Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464 -8601 Japan

In the original published version of this article, the acknowledgements section omitted some information. This has now been
corrected to “G.P. Marquez and R.B. Salonga would like to acknowledge Ritsumeikan University and Nagoya City University,
respectively, for their internal research grant support.” The authors apologize for these errors. Both the HTML and PDF versions of the
article have been updated to correct the error.

DOI of original article: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11583.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gpbm@fc.ritsumei.ac.jp (G.P.B. Marquez).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13165
Received 19 January 2023; Accepted 19 January 2023
Available online 28 January 2023
2405-8440/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).