Time filter

Source Type

Rome, Italy

Orsini F.,University of Bologna | Kahane R.,GlobalHort | Kahane R.,CIRAD - Agricultural Research for Development | Nono-Womdim R.,FAO UN | Gianquinto G.,University of Bologna
Agronomy for Sustainable Development | Year: 2013

The year 2007 marked a critical event in the world history. For the first time, more than half of the world population now lives in cities. In many developing countries, the urbanization process goes along with increasing urban poverty and polluted environment, growing food insecurity and malnutrition, especially for children, pregnant and lactating women; and increasing unemployment. Urban agriculture represents an opportunity for improving food supply, health conditions, local economy, social integration, and environmental sustainability altogether. Urban agriculture is present throughout the world in a diversity of farming systems. Urban dwellers ranging 25-30 % are involved worldwide in the agro-food sector. Urban agriculture will gain in recognition for its benefits and services because urban population and rural-urban migration are increasing. The actual scarcity of knowledge on urban agriculture has somehow hindered the relevance of this activity. Here, we review the social, cultural, technical, economic, environmental, and political factors affecting urban agriculture with examples taken in East Asia, South America, or East Africa. We discuss the definition, benefits, and limitations of urban agriculture. Food security benefit of urban agriculture is evidenced by 100-200 million urban farmers worldwide providing the city markets with fresh horticultural goods. Urban agriculture favors social improvement since the poors spend up to 85 % of their income in food purchase and most urban farmers belong to poorest populations. Sociologically urban farming favors both social inclusion and reduction of gender inequalities, as 65 % of urban farmers are women. Urban agriculture has ecological benefits by reducing the city waste, improving urban biodiversity and air quality, and overall reducing the environmental impact related to both food transport and storage. The production of horticultural goods shows the main benefits of urban agriculture. Fruit and vegetable crops give high yields, up to 50 kg m-2 year-1, a more efficient use of agricultural inputs, high added value, and rapidly perishable products that can easily substitute the rural production in the local market. Urban horticulture is the most competitive branch of urban farming due to the high cost of urban land and with the need of high water- and fertilizer-use efficiency. Traditional urban horticulture systems are classified in four types: allotment and family gardens, simplified extensive systems, shifting cultivation, and intensive systems. We describe also innovative systems including organoponics and simplified soilless cultures. © 2013 INRA and Springer-Verlag France.

Gracia A.,CSIC - Centro de Investigacion y Tecnologia Agroalimentaria | Barreiro-Hurle J.,FAO UN | Perez y Perez L.,CSIC - Centro de Investigacion y Tecnologia Agroalimentaria
Energy Policy | Year: 2012

In this paper we estimate the willingness to pay for mix of renewable sources of electric power by means of a discrete choice experiment survey conducted in Spain in 2010. Two main categories of power supply attributes are explored: source of renewable power (wind, solar and biomass) and the origin of such power. The findings suggest that most consumers are not willing to pay a premium for increases in the shares of renewable in their electricity mix. For two of the three renewable sources considered (wind and biomass) an increase of the renewable mix would require a discount. Instead, we record positive willing to pay for increases in the share of both solar power and locally generated power. However, preferences for types of renewable (solar and wind) are found to be heterogeneous. By classifying respondents in two groups according to the implied importance of the share of renewable sources in their power mix we identify a market segment consisting of 20% of respondents that could promote renewable energy in the absence of subsidies. This is because such a segment shows willingness to pay higher than the current feed-in tariffs. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.

Discover hidden collaborations