GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES Master of Science Urban and Regional Planning
FOOD ISLANDS
TRANSFORMING ROOFTOPS INTO COMMERCIAL URBAN FARMS:
REPLICATING A SUCCESSFUL CASE FROM THE NETHERLANDS IN BRAZIL
Master Thesis
Prepared for: Dr. Mendel Giezen
Second Reader: Herman Kok Date: 01/06/2018
Roberta Nasser Goulart UVA-ID: 11620633
erregoulart@gmail.com
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT 3
INTRODUCTION
01. SUSTAINABILITY, FOOD SYSTEMS AND URBAN AGRICULTURE 4
02. STRUCTURE OF THE PAPER 6
BLOCK 01 — RESEARCH FOUNDATION
01. LITERATURE REVIEW 7
02. URBAN AGRICULTURE: A SUSTAINABLE SHIFT TOWARDS LOCAL FOOD SYSTEMS 8
03. THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 11
METHODOLOGY 14
BLOCK 02 — THE URBANFARMERS CASE STUDY AND ITS APPLICABILITY IN ANOTHER CONTEXT
01. STADSLANDBOUW THE HAGUE — NETHERLANDS 17
02. URBANFARMERS — UF002 DE SCHILDE 20
03. URBAN AGRICULTURE IN SÃO PAULO — BRAZIL 24
04. URBANFARMERS — BRAZIL (UFBRA) 30
05. ANALYSIS 34
06. SCALING UP AND OUT — UF IN SÃO PAULO (EXTRA ITAIM) 36
DISCUSSION 40 CONCLUSION 43 BIBLIOGRAPHY 01. CORE LITERATURE 45 02. CONSULTED LITERATURE 46 03. PERSONAL COMMUNICATION 49
ABSTRACT
The contemporary phenomena known as Urban Agriculture (UA) has been manifesting around the world in different ways, with different purposes and outcomes (Orsini, 2017). This paper has the intention to shed a light on one specific emerging and understudied category: commercial rooftop greenhouses. The main aim of this paper is to explore what the potential is and what the barriers are in transforming an underused rooftop, located in a highly dense neighborhood of the city of São Paulo (Brazil) into a large scale commercial urban farm — or large scale commercial rooftop greenhouse (CRTG). This paper will be based on a single case study (Bryman, 2012) that represents this new category of UA (UrbanFarmers in The Hague, Netherlands) and will present a broader overview of the main topics related to it followed by two analysis. The first analysis will be focused on how UA is taking place in the city of The Hague and on how UrbanFarmers (UF) — UF002 De Schilde — was implemented and functions in this specific scenario. The second will be focused on how UA is taking place in the city of São Paulo and how the ongoing process of implementing an UrbanFarmers farm there is developing. These two analysis will form a solid background to answer the aim of this paper, which will be presented by an evaluation of a possible transfer of this successful case of The Hague to a specific new location in São Paulo. This paper will be developed through the lens of two theoretical frameworks: the multi-level perspective (MLP) on socio-technical transitions (Geels, 2010) and the scaling up and out theory (Pitt, 2016). Qualitative research methods will be used to gather and analyse the data for this research, which will be ultimately focused on the role urban agriculture plays in helping mitigate climate change and creating LFS.
Acronyms: Commercial Rooftop Greenhouses (CRTGs); Commercial Urban Farms (CUF); Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA); Local Food Systems (LFS); Rural Agriculture (RA); Rooftop Greenhouses (RTGS); Uncontrolled Environment Agriculture (UEA); Urban Agriculture (UA); Urban Commercial Farms (UCF); UrbanFarmers (UF); UrbanFarmers Brazil (UFBRA); Urban Rooftop Farms (URF).
Key concepts: local food systems, urban agriculture, commercial rooftop greenhouses, sustainable transitions, scaling up and out.
INTRODUCTION
01. Sustainability, Food Systems and Urban Agriculture
Food is one of human’s basic needs (Cohen, 2015) and one of the most important resources that cities demand everyday. Cities are in constant growth and today more than half of the world’s population live in urban areas (The World Bank, 2017) and it is predicted by the United Nations that, by 2050, more than two-thirds of the world’s population will be urban (Shamshiri, 2018). Even though urban areas occupy only 2% of the world’s total surface, they are responsible for 75% of the demand for multiple resources (Thomaier, 2014), including food. However, only 15% to 20% of the food consumed in cities is being produced in urban perimeters (Corbould, 2013; Dimitri, 2015), which means that food, just as many other resources (Maye, 2017), is being produced in nearby rural areas or in other states, countries and continents. As cities grow and expand, rural areas are being pushed to even further away from the inner city, increasing the distance between food and consumers. At the same time, due to urban population growth, the demand for food in urban areas is also rising (Steel, 2008).
It seems to be a general knowledge that food is traveling long distances — food miles (Martinez, 2010) — from the location where it is being produced to the location where it is being consumed (Buehler, 2016). Also, the way it is being transported — cargo ships, trains, trucks or planes (Leavens, 2017) — is among many other aspects, the main reason of why feeding cities, specially big metropolitan areas, is becoming a challenging and unsustainable practice. Food supply chains are extensive and food transportation is responsible for a great amount of greenhouse gas emissions, as it demands a considerable amount of fossil fuels which impacts directly on the environment (Martinez, 2010). According to Ngo and Dorff (2008), different modes of transportation, such as planes, trains, trucks and ships, have different levels of energy efficiency and depending on the origin, destination, urgency of delivery and perishability of the product which is being delivered, a specific mode will be chosen or even a combination of all four modes might be needed. "Goods traveling by air use more than four times the amount of energy by weight as road
transport, nearly 40 times more than rail and over 44 times more than marine" (Ngo and Dorff, 2008). Based on this
statement, it is possible to assume that distance is not the only worrying variable regarding food miles, and that in some cases it might be more sustainable to bring items from a longer distance by train or ship than from a closer location by plane. If we take as an example the city of New York (NY), it might be more sustainable to import food by ship from the Netherlands than by plane from California. However, this could also work the other way around if food was imported by plane from the Netherlands and by train from California.
However, not only transportation is a concern regarding sustainability and food. Most conventional agriculture requests numerous plots of land, which might lead to deforestation in rural areas, and consumes great amount of natural resources (Steel, 2008) such as water and energy. These factors are also raising questions about the environmental impacts traditional agriculture is causing. Likewise, the amount of pesticides and other chemicals that is being used and the quality (aspect, taste and nutrients) of food that reaches consumers after traveling for days is causing urban citizens to reconsider what type of food they are consuming (Ngo and Dorff, 2008). For the
past few years, facing urbanization, globalization and climate change pressures, the concept of urban (and peri-urban) agriculture has come out as one solution to help reduce agriculture’s environmental impacts (Buehler, 2016) and it has become a popular activity (Corbould, 2013) around the world for several reasons. Yet this paper will highlight that UA: (a) allows to grow food next to consumers; (b) shortens distances of transportation; (c) uses sustainable technologies and methods to cultivate and produce food and (d) can be made on rooftops, avoiding use of new land.
UA emerges as a tool to reconnect farmers and consumers (Mount, 2011) and to promote local food systems (LFS)
"but local food systems arise within a context largely shaped by the prevailing systems, and with which they will necessarily interact and co-evolve” (Mount, 2011).Current food systems, dominant since the 70s (Maye, 2017), may be still functioning, but it is clear that they are not fulfilling our current needs without compromising future generations's needs. In other words, they are not being sustainable. The contemporary concept of sustainability, since it was first mentioned in the end of the 20th century (Du Pisani, 2006), has been emerging in many different strands and when applied to cities, encompasses different fundamental systems such as energy, transportation and water. However, food systems only recently started to be placed in this context and remains an understudied field (Forster and Escudero, 2014). Food systems are complex systems that embed a group of linked activities from food production to disposal. A food system can be defined as “all biological processes (or agrobiodiversity) as well as the
physical infrastructure involved in feeding a population: growing, harvesting, processing, packaging, transporting, marketing, consumption, and disposal of food waste and related items. It also includes the inputs needed and outputs generated at each of these steps” (Forster and Escudero, 2014).
Considering the above, this research will focus on the connection UA has with the following topics: (a) local food systems (LFS); (b) transitions towards sustainable food systems; (c) potential of cities to provide solutions to mitigate environmental impacts reducing their ecological footprint — which according to Game (2015) is the main reason why there is interest in transforming urban food systems — and (d) transform food systems.In order to collaborate with general knowledge, this paper aims to help fill in existing gaps in academia regarding (a) UA and its considerably new category (CRTGs) and (b) the potential and limitations of these commercial operations (Buehler, 2016). Analysis will be made around a successful single case study — UrbanFarmers in The Hague (Netherlands) — that will be presented to exemplify how these farms are being inserted in the urban scenario and the potential they have to produce food in large scale while collaborating to mitigate climate change. The analysis will provide the variables involved in the process of scaling up and out (Pitt, 2016) these farms to different contexts, which will be used later on in the section that will focus on exploring the potential and barriers in transforming an underused rooftop, located in a highly dense neighborhood of the city of São Paulo (Brazil) into a large scale commercial urban farm — or large scale commercial rooftop greenhouses (CRTGs) — to promote LFS and mitigate climate change.
02. Structure of the Paper
This paper will be divided in two blocks. The first block will built this paper's foundation with a literature review, a theoretical and conceptual framework and a broader overview on the stablished connection between sustainability, food systems and urban agriculture. This block will mainly demonstrate how (and why) UA has been manifesting around the world, how (and where) commercial rooftop greenhouses (CRTGs) are situated and how they are promoting LFS.
The second block will be divided into six sections and will present the single case study (Bryman, 2012) of this paper. The first section will bring an overview of the Stadslandbouw in The Hague and the scenario where UF002 De Schilde was inserted. The second section will develop an in depth analysis of UF002 De Schilde — this will be based on diverse variables (producers, consumers, policies and culture). UF002 De Schilde is the second farm built and operated by UF and first rooftop farm in the world using aquaponics system (UrbanFarmers, 2016). This farm occupies today the position of the "largest commercial rooftop greenhouse in Europe and first in the entire Benelux
area" (UrbanFarmers, 2018). This company was chosen because they are one of the pioneers in what is known today
as CRTGs, have an innovative business model and were the first in the world to have a rooftop farm that has a
"proof-of-concept (technology) and operational break-even (financial viability)” — (UrbanFarmers, 2018). UF has a sizable
farm (which leads to a broad range of consumers) and makes use of different (sustainable) techniques — aquaculture, hydroponics, biological pest control, etc. (UrbanFarmers, 2017) — making them a good exemplary case for this paper. This section aims to explore and clarify, with an empirical investigation, this contemporary phenomena (large scale commercial rooftop urban farms) within its real world context (Yin, 2014). The third section will bring an overview of UA in São Paulo and how it is being developing in this specific context. The forth section will describe the on going process of bringing UF to Brazil and the challenges that are being faced when trying to replicate this model into a different scenario.
The fifth section will develop an analysis of the previous findings through the lens of the multi-level perspective (MLP) theoretical framework in social-technical transitions towards sustainability (Geels, 2010). And lastly, the sixth section will investigate, under the same variables used in section two, what the potential is and what the barriers are in transforming an underused rooftop, located in a highly dense neighborhood of São Paulo (Brazil) into a large scale commercial urban farm — or large scale commercial rooftop greenhouses (CRTGs) — in order to promote LFS and mitigate climate change. This section will explore the possibilities of implementing an UF farm on a supermarket's underused rooftop in the inner city of São Paulo — at Itaim Bibi neighborhood. This last section will use the scaling up and out theory — a distinct mechanism of policy transfer (Pitt, 2016) — and will investigate how knowledge (policy, management, techniques, etc.) from the case study previously presented could be transferred to a different place and time (Dolowitz and Marsh, 1996), in this case, São Paulo — a big metropolis with large demand for food, ever increasing population (IBGE, 2017), transportation problems (Cintra, 2013) and numerous rooftops available — a propitious combination for CRTGs. Large scale commercial rooftop greenhouses (CRTGs) are situated inside the commercial category of urban agriculture (UA) and stand out among others mainly due to their size,
intention, purpose and technologies used. However, it is still an understudied field, and this research has set intention to shed a light on it.
BLOCK 01
01. Literature Review
In general, there is plenty of scientific literature about sustainability and cities but not many connecting it to food systems and to UA. The concept of UA appears inside the sustainability framework in multidisciplinary scientific literature such as agronomy, social science, nutrition and urban planning (Orsini, 2017). It is presented as a possible
“multifunctional resource” to make food system (and cities) more resilient (Orsini, 2017); as a possible way to connect
food production to cities (Thomaier, 2014) and producers to consumers (Dimitri, 2015; Mount, 2011). It is a relatively new concept but it has been gaining momentum for the past years in theory and in practice, especially when connected to the concepts of food justice (Horst, 2017), food security (Maye, 2017a; Corbould, 2013; Buehler, 2016; Dimitri, 2015), environmental impacts (Buehler, 2016) and LFS (Mount, 2011).
Across the world, the UA phenomena has become a global trend and it usually arises with the same main goal: food production (Dimitri, 2015). Research shows that in practice it has been spreading around in the shape of walls, gardens and farms; in different dimensions; in unusual locations such as rooftops and facades; using different technologies such as soil, aquaponics and hydroponics and with diverse purposes such as educational, recreational, therapeutical, environmental and commercial (Orsini, 2017). Is it notable that most studies in this field, for some specific reasons, concentrate on grassroots initiatives, which are usually small to medium size gardens, focused on social and educational aspects and ran by volunteers who cultivate food for their own consumption or for donation (Buehler, 2016). Although bottom-up initiatives might have been the most common origin for UA in the past few years, it is visible that, more recently, private companies have been entering the field (Orsini, 2017; Buehler, 2016) in the form of urban rooftop farms (URF) and commercial urban farms (CUF).
Previous studies not only lack knowledge about URF and CUF, but also about their potential and limitations (Buehler, 2016). One possible reason for the existence of this gap might be the fact that the concepts of UA and URF are considerably recent and also because the commercial category of URF has only gained visibility in 2011, when Lufa Farms opened in Montreal (Canada) the first commercial rooftop farm in the world (Lufa Farms, 2017). Since then, companies and models of URF and CUF have been emerging across the global North and new concepts such as ZFarming — Zero-Acreage Farming (Thomaier, 2014), RTGS — Rooftop Greenhouses (Pons, 2015) and CEA — Controlled Environment Agriculture (Game, 2015) arised to represent some particular methods of food production that are being adopted in these farms.
Regarding the role of actors towards these new initiatives and sustainable transitions, in the literature, some defend that governments are crucial for: (a) creating policies and normalizing practices (Cohen, 2015); (b) supporting urban farming, ”including ZFArming”, and facilitating its integration into the urban landscape, policies and planning
(Thomaier, 2014); (c) creating policies and programmes "to support local food initiatives” (Martinez, 2010); (d) identifying initiatives and opportunities to accelerate niche expansion (Pitt, 2016) and (e) supporting sustainability transitions because "their actions will need to change economic frame conditions and/or consumer practices, which
subsequently incentivize private actors to reorient their innovation and commercial activities” (Geels, 2010). Regarding
citizens (civil society) there are opinions related to their role in: (a) starting niche innovation to tackle local problems (Pitt, 2016); (b) adopting and reinforcing daily practices (Cohen, 2015) and (c) supporting green niches (Geels, 2010). There seems to be a consensus in the literature concerning the fact that system transitions are complex processes since they involve multiple actors (e.g. citizens, policy makers, authorities, etc) in different levels and different scenarios (e.g. political, economical, cultural, etc).
02. Urban Agriculture: a sustainable shift towards local food systems
One of the biggest challenges cities face today is the rapid growth of urban population (Dimitri, 2015). The increasing number of inhabitants in cities means more demand for food which makes direct pressure on existing food systems (Buehler, 2016). The production of food in cities is still not self-sufficient (Pons, 2015), therefore cities still obtain food from different sources in urban, peri-urban, rural areas and even overseas (Drescher, 2001) — in most cases still relying on long distances and/or costly transportation (Pons, 2015). The close relationship that once existed between producers and consumers since ancient civilizations has been cut down in many cities by “modern
urban planning” (Pons, 2015). However, cities not only make pressure on existing food systems, but they also provide
solutions as they “shape, support and normalize food practices, and in the process play an important role in transitioning
the wider food system" (Cohen, 2015), for example by promoting LFS.Food practices can be defined as all daily interconnected activities performed (in cities) — such as shopping, cooking and discarding — to achieve a specific goal. These practices are defined by three elements: meanings, material and competences (Cohen, 2015). In this paper, we should consider meanings as the ideals and understanding people have in general (according to their cultural/social background) about agriculture, urban agriculture, climate change, food and everything related to it. Material should refer to farms, greenhouses, supermarkets, shops, means of transport, products (organic and non-organic), chemicals and the technology involved. Competences should refer to the knowledge people have about performing tasks (and habits), for example, how they cultivate and buy their food. These three elements of social practices are usually determined and reinforced by society and, as stated by Cohen (2015), they are also influenced by time, space and power — consequently so are the changes in the practices and systems, known as socio-technical transitions.
According to Geels (2010), these transitions are named “socio-technical” because they englobe a wide range of changes in people's habits, market, technologies, governments (and their policies), etc. "Socio-technical systems are
"A number of studies have calculated that cities
can achieve significant levels of local self-reliance in terms of food production” (Buehler, 2016)
towards sustainability involves changing the practices that constitute and reproduce them” (Cohen, 2015). These
changes do not happen easily because stablished existing systems are already settled by many elements and
“lock-in mechanisms” (Geels, 2010), which may be caus“lock-ing systems failures. In a world where goods travel across the world
everyday to different destinations (Ngo and Dorff, 2008), it is up to citizens in their daily activities, to decide whether to buy local products or not and there are numerous factors that can interfere in an individual's decision. As stated by Ngo and Dorff (2008), “when it comes to food choice, for some 'food miles' may be a top priority but for others, factors
such as overall food preference, affordability, variety, nutrition, cultural acceptability, novelty, food security or flavour may take equal or greater consideration”. Transitions towards sustainability can be a challenging process, yet fundamental to solve failures in food systems (Maye, 2017). The multi-level perspective (MLP) theoretical framework on socio-technical transitions towards sustainability (Geels, 2010) is capable of demonstrating the interaction between the different levels — niche, regime and landscape — in which transitions occur. This framework helps to clarify how innovative ideas and practices arise (niche level) as possible alternatives and solutions for the flaws in dominant systems (regime level) and how these, in turn, suffer pressure also from a broader perspective (landscape level). UA is one of these innovative ideas that usually start inside the niche level — green niche innovation (Geels, 2011) — and aims to make pressure on the existing regime.
In the past few years, as mentioned before, the interest in urban (and peri-urban) agriculture has grown (Forster, 2014) not only because UA contributes to change food systems (Horst, 2017) but also because the idea of growing food in cities started to make sense since most food produced in the world is being consumed in urban areas due to an ever increasing urban population(Dimitri, 2015). According to Shamshiri (2018), this is one of the main reasons why food production systems are changing. However, this demand for food production cannot be reached by using traditional agricultural techniques (with none or little technology) in urban areas (Corbould, 2013), since there is not enough space. Maye (2017) states that smart technologies play an important role on how food is being cultivated (and distributed) in cities — however she also defends that “smart technology can be an important part of the solution
to city food challenges but in combination with social innovations to enable flexible modes of governance that are inclusive, technologically and socially-orientated and linked to specific city-region contexts" (Maye, 2017). In fact,
technology is a great ally of UA and LFS. It is one of the most important elements that take part on these multi-dimensional transitions (Martens, 2005) and plays an essential role in commercial urban farms, specially in RTGS (Pons, 2015), where hydroponics and aquaculture techniques are used and technology is needed to control the environment inside the greenhouses, irrigation, amount of light, temperature, quality of water and nutrients, etc. (Game, 2015). According to Shamshiri (2018), greenhouses cultivation are today "highly sophisticated CEA” and this has allowed an effective production all year-round, less human labor and the growth of food in city buildings — optimizing the use of abandoned rooftops that generally have their potential underestimated (Buehler, 2016).
However, it is known that the success of LFS not only relies in high-tech solutions, but also involves people’s behavior and significant participation of authorities, as exemplified in the case of New York City (Cohen, 2015). The role of authorities in different levels — but specially local (Thomaier, 2014)— is key to promote and sustain the proactive role cities are assuming in promoting food systems focusing on sustainability, resiliency and health
(Cooper, 2017). Cities, as seen in many examples of UA in the world, are being identified as an essential part of food systems and it is possible to see that they have been the main scene for green innovation, creation and experimentation — “including new forms of social innovation, governance and sustainability transitions” (Maye, 2017) at the niche level (Geels, 2010). Yet, these are only possible if policies, master plans, structure plans and land zoning (Drescher, 2001) developed by authorities and planners, are up to date and aligned with these new needs and sustainable trends.
In LFS, promoted by CRTGs, for example, the direct exchange of products shortens down the supply chain and it can happen through two basic types of transaction, according to Martinez (2010): the first is from farmers to consumers
(“direct-to-consumer") and the second from farmers to retail, restaurants etc. ("direct-to-retail/food service”). At the
present moment, these exchanges promoted by LFS are able to supply only a small part of a city's food demand, but they are specially needed (and recommended) for perishable leafy greens, fruits and crops (Thomaier, 2014). However, promoting LFS and selling produce is not the only intention of UA (Dimitri, 2015). In many cases, they also provide the reconnection between food and citizens by promoting educational and community activities and, unlike conventional food systems, allow people to see where (and how) their food is being grown. According to Mount (2011),”the source and content of food, declining food nutrition and taste” are for consumers a few of the many problems presented by conventional food systems. The distance imposed by traditional food systems has made urban citizens disconnected from the origin of their food, reaching the point where some people only recognized fruits and vegetables in the supermarket shelf and have never seen the plant they actually come from. Distance in food transportation is also often associated with climate change (Buehler, 2015) and those in favor of LFS defend that the production of food in cities reduces waste of energy (Drescher, 2001), fossil fuels use, GHG emissions and pollution (Martinez, 2010). Arguably, these could be reduced as urban farmers are not only responsible for cultivating and distributing the crops but also for all the in between steps such as processing, marketing and packaging (Horst, 2017), which sometimes are made by different actors in different locations, increasing the food supply chain length and vulnerability of the system. In addition, CRTGs can reduce environmental impact since their systems are capable of: recirculating and reducing considerably the amount of water used for crops (Game, 2015); capturing and reusing rain and gray water for irrigation (Thomaier, 2014); utilizing solar panels (Shamshiri, 2018); regulating temperatures inside the buildings (Game, 2015), cultivating food without the use of new land (avoiding deforestation) and producing crops using biological pest control (Pons, 2015).
The global North — especially North America — is where the UA movement is stronger and where more than half of URF in the world are located, from which, 70% are built in open-air and 26% have commercial operations (Buehler, 2016). This contemporary trend seems to be spreading from United States and Canada to other continents, especially Europe and Asia, where farms are usually smaller (Buehler, 2016). UrbanFarmers (UF), Gotham Greens (GG) and Lufa Farms (LF) are some of the companies responsible for running the biggest CRTGs in the world today. These
"There is an urgent need to change the use of urban and peri urban land to follow cities growth” (Drescher, 2001).
are all large scale greenhouses with CEA (Game, 2015) where hydroponics systems and other sustainable technologies are used for cultivating leafy greens, vegetables and herbs and where the main objective is to produce and sell food in cities — while mitigating climate change and running an “economically viable farming
business” (Thomaier, 2014). UF is a Swiss-based company that will be used as the case study of this paper. GG is a
North American company that runs four greenhouses with a total of 15.000 sq. meters divided between New York and Chicago (Gotham Greens, 2018). GG was founded in 2009 and are global pioneers in UA (Gotham Greens, 2018). LF is a Canadian company that runs three farms in Montreal. Their first farm opened in 2011, in the borough of Ahuntsic, was the first commercial rooftop greenhouse in the world and it has almost 3.000 sq. meters (Lufa Farms, 2017). In the following years, in accordance with their motto, “a city of rooftop farms”, business kept growing and LF opened other two farms — Laval with around 4.000 sq. meters and Anjou with more than 5.500 sq. meters (Lufa Farms, 2017). These LF farms use hydroponics technique along with special greenhouse design and other systems to cultivate more than 70 different species of greens, herbs and vegetables. Their produce is sold through an online farmers’ market under a subscription box programme (Lufa Farms, 2017). LF (2017) states that it delivers 10.000 boxes a week and that they are capable of feeding 2% of the population in Greater Montreal, Trois-Rivières and Quebec City. These companies all have the same purpose: producing fresh high quality food where it is eaten and using sustainable methods.
03. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
This paper intends to: (1) shed a light on this new understudied category of UA and its potential to feed cities and change food systems; (2) understand how UF launched their farm in The Hague, Netherlands — global North; (3) investigate the potential for replicating their model in the global South — city of São Paulo (Brazil); and (4) contribute to general knowledge on the topic, while raising awareness on how our cities might be holding on solutions towards sustainability considering that "cities are responsible for ecological decline and yet are sources of
environmental innovation” (Cohen, 2015). In order to achieve these aims, this paper, as demonstrated in Diagram 01,
will use two theoretical frameworks.
The first will be the multi-level perspective (MLP) on socio-technical transitions towards sustainability (Geels, 2010). The MLP is one approach that analyse how socio-technical transitions take place (and interact) in three different levels: niche, regime and landscape (Geels, 2010). The niche level (lower level) is defined as an experimentation level — a "protected space” (Geels, 2011) — where radical innovative solutions emerge (Geels, 2010). According to Geels (2011), this level is considered crucial for transitions since it allows actors — "entrepreneurs, start-ups, spinoffs" — that are unsatisfied with existing regimes, to launch innovations that might co-evolve (Mount, 2011) with these regimes (niche-regime interaction) or eventually replace them. The regime — middle level of this framework — is where existing socio-technical systems are sustained by “lock-in mechanisms and path dependency” (Geels, 2010). Regime suffers pressures from both niche and landscape levels, which might break down regime’s stability and allow space for niche innovations, promoting transitions — “shifts from one regime to another" (Geels, 2011). The landscape level is the highest and wider level of this framework and it is responsible for influencing the interactions
between niche and regime (Geels, 2011). As shown in Diagram 01, this is the level where pressure starts, leading to changes at the niche level, while at the same time creating pressure on the regime (Geels, 2011). The socio-technical transitions theory, as in this case, is frequently used to represent significant changes in big systems — e.g. food system — mainly because these systems changes involve social practices, technologies, policies and cultural changes (Geels, 2010). The MLP in socio-technical transitions will be used to clarify the interaction between actors, environments and innovations. Usually, companies such as UrbanFarmers start as radical innovations inside the urban agriculture niche — experimentation zone (Pitt, 2016). These innovations, while gaining strength, begin to challenge and pressure the existing regime, the “over-arching social-technical system of rules, structures and
organizations” (Pitt, 2016), in this case, the conventional food system. The regime, where different actors are
involved, might resist or open space for the new niche to enter. Usually, innovative ideas such as UFappear because there is a desire to change (Pitt, 2016) arising in a broader scenario — the landscape level —which also exerts pressure on the present regime. Interesting discoveries should arise in this study as the MLP (Geels, 2010) usually helps clarify the complexity of system transitions.
As shown in Diagram 01, a second and complementary theoretical framework will be used in this research — the scaling up and out from Pitt (2016) — where scaling is defined as “the practice of introducing proven interventions into
new settings with the goal of producing similarly positive effects in larger, more diverse populations”. This framework is
situated inside the niche level in Diagram 01 as it can be a mechanism to push innovative ideas out of this Diagram 01 — Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
experiment level and promote transitions — scaling up — (Pitt, 2016), and as a mechanism to replicate innovations between niches — or scaling out. This framework was developed based on Dolowitz and Marsh’s (2000) framework for policy transfer which describes it as "knowledge about policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas
in one political setting (past or present) is used in the development of policies, administrative arrangements, institutions and ideas in another political setting” and will be applied in this research when analysing a possible transfer of UF to São Paulo and together with MLP when analysing food systems transitions.
In order to reinforce the theoretical framework, it is fundamental to define the concepts included in it. In this paper, the concept of urban agriculture (UA) will be defined as the production of food in urban perimeters and it will be represented by large-scale commercial farms (Orsini, 2017) and RTGS (Pons, 2015) — private agriculture holdings, using high technology cultivation methods and focused mainly on environmental aspects. Since CUF and RTGS support local food production, the concepts of food system and LFS will also be part of this conceptual framework. The first, following the definition presented by Forster (2014) — “all biological processes (or agrobiodiversity) as well as
the physical infrastructure involved in feeding a population: growing, harvesting, processing, packaging, transporting, marketing, consumption, and disposal of food waste and related items. It also includes the inputs needed and outputs generated at each of these steps” — and the second following the definition presented by Mount (2011), where LFS
has as main principles: ”(a) reconnection of producer and consumer, (b) the direct exchange through which this occurs,
and (c) the shared goals and values that underlie the system”. The term “local” may have different connotations when
applied to food systems (Martinez, 2010) and distances can be understood differently depending on the context, which explains why in this paper it will be linked to Mount’s concept. The previous concepts will be placed inside the sustainable transitions framework and connected to the overarching concept of sustainability. Lastly, in this paper, the term "transitions" will be defined as “a set of connected changes” (Martens, 2015), since this definition fits perfectly in this context, considering that changes in sustainable transitions happen in different levels and dimensions.
METHODOLOGY
Pursuant to the research question and subquestions this study aims to answer (subquestions being (a) what is the business model of UF (The Hague) and its context within agriculture in The Netherlands? (b) what is the business model UF is pursuing in Brazil and its context within agriculture in this country? (c) what is the attractiveness and what are the barriers of replicating UF in São Paulo? (d) how could CRTGs be scaled up and out in São Paulo?), this paper followed an exploratory methodology, and in order to gain a broader overview of current practices, qualitative research techniques have been used. Primary data used in the following sections was mainly collected from interviews. The first interview (A) of this research was made by conference call on the 22 of March 2018 with Ms. Talita Campoi Marinho, Managing Partner and Co-Founder of UrbanFarmers Brazil (UFBRA). Ms. Marinho described how the UF movement started in Brazil and gave an overview of the barriers and difficulties along the process and the current status of their project. The second interview (B) was made with Ms. Thais Mauad by video conference on the 23 of April 2018. Ms. Mauad is an Associate Professor at the Department of Pathologies at FMUSP
(Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo); Coordinator of the GEAU (Grupo de Estudos em Agricultura Urbana); Specialist in urban health and Founder (and Volunteer) of the urban garden located at the rooftop of the FMUSP — the well known state-owned Brazilian Medicine University. She described the project they have at the
University and how it started 5 years ago. Ms. Mauad also gave a general perspective on what is happening in UA in São Paulo and has raised some interesting insights for this research since she has been engaged with UA for years. The third interview (C) was made with Mr. Tom Voorma by conference call on the 24 of April 2018. Mr. Voorma is a Project Manager of Urban Farming, Food Strategy and Theme Park on Food and Sustainability at the Department of City Management at the Municipality of The Hague (Gemeente Den Haag). Mr. Voorma has added knowledge to this research from a policy maker perspective and explained the role authorities had regarding UA initiatives in The Hague.
The forth interview (D) was made with Mr. Daniel Pacheco, Managing Director of UF Brazil on the 25 of April 2018 via conference call. He provided technical information on the future implementation of UFBRA and presented the main barriers faced concerning technologies. The fifth interview (E) was made on the30 of April 2018 on site (UF002 De
Schilde) with Mr. Luis Paim Sotto Mayor Negrão, Farm Manager of UF Netherlands. This visit and interview with Mr.
Negrão was fundamental to understand how the farm functions on a daily basis, the process of implementation and the possible comparisons with a potential urban farm in Brazil. The sixth interview (F) was made with Mr. Mohsen Hosseini on the 1 of May 2018 via conference call. Mr Hosseini is an Urban Food Planner and Architect specialized in vertical farming; Ph.D researcher at University IUAV of Venice and fellow researcher at Tongji University of Shanghai and Wageningen University. Mr. Housseini has added to different moments of this research since he is familiar with UA in the Dutch scenario and recently developed a comparative research focused on UA in Amsterdam and Shanghai. The seventh (G) and last interview of this research was made with Mr. Andre Begueldo on the 03 of May 2018 via conference call. Mr. Begueldo is an assistant in the Department of Operations at Shopping Eldorado in São Paulo and has presented their urban garden project allowing for a comparison to other initiatives in the city.
Secondary data was collected from academic articles, documents, policy plans, reports, extensive web research and literature materials on the topic (mainly implementation). These have brought together a great deal of information, which was organized and analyzed by theme using a simplified version of a coding method — thematic analysis (Bryman, 2012). As this research had a deductive approach, after compiling knowledge, questionnaires were developed to conduct interviews with specialists. These were in depth semi-structured interviews to collect primary data in order to better understand the implementation process and functioning of UF in The Hague, the ongoing process of implementing UF in Brazil and general knowledge on the topic. This research has used data collected from analysis of documents (and food policies) on the city level — The Hague and São Paulo — and due to short time, it did not go deeper on national level.A comparative design among multiple case studies (Bryman, 2012) could also be done in this research if there was more time, resources and if companies equivalents to UF — Lufa Farms (Montreal, Canada) and Gotham Greens (Chicago, USA) — would agree to collaborate to this study. This would be extremely valuable as it would bring a broader view of the subject and a more complete analysis, especially in the scaling up and out section (Pitt, 2016), since the three examples are inserted in different contexts, all very contrasting with São Paulo.
This methodology could potentially be generalized in other contexts. More specifically, evaluating the implementation of a commercial rooftop greenhouse in a given city could be conducted by qualitative research techniques, with primary data being collected with interviews. Concerning the interviews, the selected profiles of interviewees could also be similar if another research project was to be conducted with the same purposes (policy makers, entrepreneurs in UA, academia, urban gardeners and urban farm managers could be interviewed). Secondary data could be collected from the same academic articles and literature materials on the topic and with local (city-specific) documents, policy plans, reports and extensive web research. These could also be organized and analyzed again by theme using the same (possibly simplified) version of a coding method — thematic analysis (Bryman, 2012). Additionally, some findings of this research could be similar if this study was conducted in other circumstances — for example, the successful implementation and scaling of CRTGs would depend on clear policies and regulation, a proper building and rooftop to accommodate the necessary technologies, development of research by academia and skilled professionals by Universities and the acceptance of CRTGs produce by consumers. Conversely, these specific pieces of these findings may not be entirely applicable and comparable to other contexts due to local, city-specific circumstances.
The following block of this paper will be divided into six sections. The first section will bring an overview of the
Stadslandbouw in The Hague and the scenario where UF002 De Schilde was inserted. UF002 De Schilde is the second
farm built and operated by UF and first rooftop farm in the world using aquaponics system (UrbanFarmers, 2016). This Swiss based company has their first farm located in Basel, Switzerland — known as UF001 LokDepot — and their second farm UF002 De Schilde, located in The Hague in The Netherlands (UrbanFarmers, 2016). The second section will develop an in depth analysis of UF002 De Schilde, considering the specific context in which it was inserted based on diverse variables (producers, consumers, policies and culture). The third section will bring an overview of UA in São Paulo and how it is being developing in this specific context. The forth section will describe the on going process of bringing UF to Brazil and the challenges that are being faced when trying to replicate this model into a
different scenario. The fifth section will bring an analysis of the findings gathered in the previous sections, using the lens of the MLP theoretical framework on socio-technical transitions towards sustainability (Geels, 2010). Finally, the sixth section will develop on the possibility of scaling up and out UF, based on the findings of implementing an UF in the rooftop available in a supermarket in São Paulo described in the fifth section.
BLOCK 02
01. Stadslandbouw The Hague - Netherlands
The Netherlands is the second biggest agricultural producer and food exporter in the world, falling behind only the USA (Government of the Netherlands, 2018a) — which in turn has 270 times more landmass.Dutch use more than half of their land for agriculture and horticulture (Viviano, 2017) and for decades, along with numerous partners and one of the world’s most important institutions for agricultural research (WUR, 2014)— the Wageningen University & Research (WUR) — has managed to develop innovative (and technological) solutions and created controlled environments that allows the intensive production of high quality food under the Northern European weather conditions (Government of The Netherlands, 2018c). This important position as one of the largest agricultural world’s potency, according to Ms. Verburg, former Dutch Minister of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, can only be held in the long run if the Netherlands also gets to be leader in sustainable food (The Ministry of Agriculture,
Image 01 — Greenhouses at the Westland Region in the Netherlands Photographed by Luca Locatelli. Source: National Geographic (Viviano, 2017).
"Local policies and programs can affect the diffusion and adoption of material elements, provide economic cues to practitioners, and shape our cultural understanding and knowledge of practices"
Nature and Food Quality, 2009). In order to achieve that, Ms. Verburg has launched, in 2009, a national food policy document on Sustainable Food that has three main objectives: “(a) stimulating producers into developing sustainable
innovations; (b) stimulating consumers into buying sustainable and healthy food; and (c) stimulating the international agenda to ensure good agreements are made” (Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, 2009). According to
the policy, the idea is not to set rules or laws but to encourage cooperation from consumers and producers. This policy has set intention for the Netherlands to achieve a sustainable food supply chain and encourages everyone, including politics, science and industry, to take part on it — "from consumers to producers, from farmers to retailers,
from young to old” (Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, 2009). These interactions involving authorities,
citizens, technology and others are the components of sustainability transitions (Geels, 2011).
Sustainability transitions, as stated by Maye (2017), "are fundamental processes of social change that are needed to
address the complex and interrelated problems affecting food systems”. As any other transition, is a gradual —
sometimes radical (Rotmans, 2009) — change from one state to another (Pitt, 2016) and a period where societal systems need to be restructured in order to fight current (food) systems that are demonstrating flaws (Rotmans, 2009). Ideals, such as the ones proposed by the Government of The Netherlands in their Sustainable Food Policy (2009), are fundamental to encourage sustainable production and consumption (Pitt, 2016). It is known that climate change, resource scarcity and other current environmental problems are making pressure on the existing food system and there is an urgent need for new approaches to “reduce urban footprints and make cities
sustainable” (Thomaier, 2014). UA has emerged as one solution in response to these pressures and it has been
gaining popularity for the past 8 years (Shamshiri, 2018) as "one of the most exciting concepts of sustainable
development” (Drescher, 2001) since it englobes different sustainable solutions, as mentioned before in this paper.
This “multiple functions" characteristic of UA is believed to be the reason of its potential to prosper in modern and developing cities (Mubvami, N.D).
UA has been spreading in many countries around the world, especially in developed ones (Dimitri, 2015), such as United States, Canada, Australia and England (Corbould, 2013) and according to McClintock (2017) this has been happening because growing food in cities has not only an important role in contributing to urban sustainability, but also to food security. The Netherlands is also one of these countries (Van der Schans, 2010) and counts with the support from the Dutch Government on sustainable food production. The Government of The Netherlands encourages producers and consumers by raising awareness about the impact food production has on the environment, and offers support to farmers and companies, for example, by offering funds for research and by
“removing obstacles in legislation” (Government of the Netherlands, 2018b). The Hague, the third biggest city in The
Netherlands (Misachi, 2018) with around 500.000 thousand inhabitants (Statista, 2018), shows to be very engaged with sustainability and UA projects (Gemeente Den Haag, 2017b) and counts with a great support from The Municipality for these initiatives (Gemeente Den Haag, 2017a). Maye (2017) states that municipal authorities are playing an important role in food policy, along with urban social movements — and in The Hague this seems to be put into practice. UA is available in the city in many forms and brings numerous benefits to the city as it (a) shortens the food supply chain; (b) educates children to learn where their food comes from; (c) promotes integration and
cooperation between neighborhood residents and (d) contributes to sustainability in the city (Gemeente Den Haag, 2017a).
According to Mr. Voorma (Interviewee C), the Municipality of The Hague was asked to write a food policy that mainly focused on raising people's awareness on food, health and sustainability. The policy, according to him, also stands out that UA initiatives within the city (such as grassroots initiatives) must be supported by the Municipality since they are able to stimulate awareness while also bringing kids and adults closer together with their food. In 2013, the Municipality of The Hague, in collaboration with the City Council, has launched the Stadslandbouw Den Haag (Urban Agriculture The Hague). The City Council was very interested in knowing more about UA and Mr. Voorma was asked to raise all the UA initiatives happening in the city (Personal Communication, April 24, 2018). He created a digital map of all UA activities in The Hague and while in this process, realized that the "Municipality should facilitate
knowledge and network for the people willing to launch these initiatives” (Personal Communication, April 24, 2018).
This, as stated by interviewee (C), has led to a switch on the approach of the Department of City Management from developing educational programmes to schools, to asking people what they need (and facilitate it) and offer knowledge and information to the whole neighborhood. According to Mr. Voorma (Personal Communication, April 24, 2018), all Dutch Municipalities struggle with the same problem, they are aware of the value of these initiatives that are going on throughout the cities, however they do not have capacity to deal with all of them. "UA is a new
subject in this Municipality (Den Haag) but it has received support and over the past few years more time has been dedicated to it” (Personal Communication, April 24, 2018).
Image 02 — UrbanFarmer Den Haag | De Schilde Building Photographed by Martijn Zegwaard. Source: Impact City, 2016.
The Stadslandbouw and the New Farm(Stadslandbouw, 2018) project were raised by a cooperation between the Municipality of The Hague and The City Council. This project consists in transforming De Schilde building — a total of 10.000 sq. meters — into a center for inner-city food production (vertical farming) and food awareness (Personal Communication, April 24, 2018). Today the building — located in an industrial area of The Hague (Personal Communication, April 24, 2018) — is occupied partially by UF, and in the future, the intention is to occupy it with multiple tenants and transform it into a “multi-story urban farming hotspot” (UrbanFarmers, 2016). As stated by Mr. Voorma (Interviewee C), a team was built to coordinate the occupation of the abandoned building with more initiatives and more start ups and the aim is to turn the building also into an innovation center for research and growth programmes. The first tenant, UF, won a contest to occupy the rooftop and the 6th floor of the building. According to Mr. Voorma, UF had a business case that fit the purpose and was under positive circumstances (Personal Communication, April 24, 2018) — “UrbanFarmers was awarded the rooftop and the 6th floor for construction
and operation of a commercial aquaponic facility” (UrbanFarmers, 2014). The space occupied by UF is known today as UF002 De Schilde and it is Europe’s largest commercial rooftop greenhouse (UrbanFarmers, 2014). The Municipality
of The Hague finds these projects important and encourages (a) a more sustainable food production and logistics by facilitating innovation in this area; (b) a greater food awareness among the residents of The Hague; (c) education about fresh and healthy food; (d) creation of new job positions; (e) positive impact on the local neighborhoods; and (f ) recognition of The Hague as an innovative city (Stadslandbouw, 2018).
The Hague, also known as the Dutch Political Capital, is located just a few kilometers from Westland — a region known as one of the world's most important centers when it comes to greenhouse horticulture (Westland, 2018). Being close to the Westland has brought many benefits for the implementation of UF002 De Schilde and also some challenges, since producers from Westland have greater (and cheaper) production (Personal Communication, April 25, 2018) and many incentives from Dutch Government and Municipality (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). The Westland is not only responsible for producing and distributing high-quality vegetables, flowers and plants, but also for developing and exporting their innovative ideas and expertise (Westland, 2018) — probably one of the reasons why UF seek for partnerships with producers and companies from this region to reach its “successful story of
food growing in the city" (UrbanFarmers, 2014). Different partnerships (and a UF consortium) were created for the
project and construction of UF002 De Schilde (UrbanFarmers, 2016) and the farm became ready for operation in March 2016 — and started to produce in September of this same year (UrbanFarmers, 2016). In The Netherlands, the whole process (since Stadslandbouw contest started until their first harvesting) took around 3 years and the total cost of the farm was of € 2.8 million (Personal Communication, March 22, 2018b).
02. UrbanFarmers - UF002 De Schilde
"We believe it’s more convenient, healthier, fresher and sustainable to grow and breed food where it’s eaten: nearby where people live, in cities”
UrbanFamers believes in the Fresh Revolution — offering consumers fresh high quality products with less food miles and less footprint (UrbanFarmers, 2018). It is a "technology company specialized in building commercial food
production units in cities” (UrbanFarmers, 2016) and it was founded in 2011 by two Swiss, Mr. Roman Gaus and Mr.
Andreas Graber (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). Their first farm is UF 001 LokDepot, a small unit (pilot) built in Basel, Switzerland — with 250 sq. meters and annual production of 5 tons of vegetables and 800 kg of fish — with the intention to prove that the idea of a rooftop farm using aquaponics system could work (UrbanFarmers, 2018). This "laboratory farm” was a step towards the creation of UF 002 De Schilde, the case study of this paper.
Mr. Negrão (Interviewee E) has described how UF002 De Schilde works using aquaponics technology. The system complies two different techniques (hydroponics and aquaculture) and it is entirely circular — since it recirculates water from the fish tanks to the plants and back (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). This allows it to use only 10% of the amount of water that would be use in other agriculture systems (UrbanFarmers, 2016). According to interviewee (E), the system is completely automatic and controlled by a software developed custom-made for UF
002 De Schilde. The software is connected to many sensors and alarms that help to control temperatures, lighting,
nutrients, pressures etc. The aquaculture room at UF002 De Schilde is located on the floor underneath (sixth floor) the greenhouse and it is considerably small compared to the usual size of aquaculture productions, produces 350 kg of Tilapia per week (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). According to interviewee (E), the water from the tanks is always circulating and it goes through different processes of filtration that are responsible for oxygenating the water; removing CO2 and ammonia (bio-filter with bacterias) and sterilize the water (UV filter), etc. Usually, filter tanks are built vertically but due to structural limitations of the building they had to be built horizontally at this farm, in order to spread the total weight along the slab (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). According to Mr.
Image 03 — Crops inside the vegetable greenhouse at UF002 De Schilde Photographed by Roberta N. Goulart (Author) Source: Private
Voorma (Interviewee C), this building where UF002 De Schilde is installed used to be a production house for Philips and supported heavy machinery in the past — which was a positive factor to make the project viable — but even so the area for the aquaculture needed reinforcement in the slab, which now is able to sustain 900 kg per sq. meter (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018).
At UF002 De Schilde there is one fish harvest and two harvests of vegetables and greens per week. Products that have more than a week of harvest, according to interviewee (E), are transformed into other products (pates, smoothies, ketchups and chutneys) that will be used and sell on the farm's cafe/shop. The fish, after harvest, goes to a processor in the port of The Hague (Scheveningen) where it is sliced and cleaned and than sent back to the farm, where the packages for consumers will be prepared. The only package of fish that is 100% prepared at the farm is the one that has the whole fish (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). As stated by interviewee (E), the farm today only sells their products locally, directly to restaurants and retail stores (b2b) and to consumers (b2c) through the local cafe/shop at the farm, where other local products from different producers are also sold, and if there is any food that UF is not able to consume, they donate it to local social institutions.
UF002 De Schilde is not in the best location to sell their products — "from one side there is competition with the Scheveningen Port, that has a great offer of saltwater fish, and from the other side there is the Westland" (Personal
Communication, April 30, 2018). Interviewee (E) has mentioned that there are many retailers (and consumers) interested in UF’s products (while others find their prices prohibitive) so they tend to focus on those who cherish their products and are willing to pay for it — "Several studies have explored consumer preferences for locally produced
food. Motives for “buying local” include perceived quality and freshness of local food and support for the local economy. Consumers who are willing to pay higher prices for locally produced foods place importance on product quality, nutritional value, methods of raising a product and those methods’ effects on the environment, and support for local farmers” (Martinez, 2010). UF realized along the years that in order to sell to its final consumers, it is better to have a
greater variety of products — today there are 20 different species being cultivated at UF002 De Schilde— yet it is important to keep a correct amount so there is still a significant production of each (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018).
According to Mr. Negrão (Interviewee E), the estimated production is supposed to be equal during all seasons, since the farm is a CEA (Game, 2015). However, in the winter of 2017-2018, the production was lower because UF could not turn the lights on during winter due to a Dutch law regarding “light (visual) pollution” from greenhouses. The farm was built without “energy curtains” on the sides — mandatory in the Netherlands— so it had its productivity significantly reduced. From 2021 these curtains (top screens) will also be mandatory on the rooftop of all greenhouses in the country — which will also help on avoiding energy loss from the greenhouse (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). Interviewee (E) has stated that there are many barriers when implementing a
"UF goal is to make food arrive faster in people’s plate” (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018).
rooftop farm using aquaponic technique and one of them is dealing (and mixing) with different professionals (suppliers). Yet, according to him, UF seems to have managed to find one supplier that will be able to built their whole farm and integrate all systems, which if works, would make the process much easier.
The greenhouse was built as a standard Dutch greenhouse with glass and steel and shading nets covering the rooftop surface— double glass was used in the whole building to support strong winds and cold weather — and the cost of the greenhouse construction represents the highest value within all in the implementation of the farm (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). According to interviewee (E), this greenhouse, unlike most Dutch greenhouses, has no shading from neighbors (since it is in the 7th floor); loses more heat than a regular greenhouse and it cannot open more than 60% of its window’s angles (both due to strong winds). All the maintenance that a greenhouse needs (e.g. cleaning and repairs on the outside) is more challenging and costly in a rooftop greenhouse, since it requires specialized companies (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018).
Even though UF002 De Schilde is a CEA (Game, 2015), it is not blinded from pests — “An environment that is 100%
controlled it is something very hard to achieve” (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). In this case, firstly, because
the farm is not equipped with mosquito nets, usually used in greenhouses so it is possible to open the windows and keep insects away. Secondly, because it receives a great number of tourists (200 to 300) that enter the greenhouse every week. Closing the greenhouse for them would not provide the whole experience UF wants to provide for their visitors, like walking in between the crops and harvesting (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). Interviewee (E) believes that the net is far more effective than prohibiting visitors inside the greenhouse, plus it would not be viable to ban visitors since tours (and events) in the farm represent around 50% of the farm's revenue today (Personal Communication, March 22, 2018). Mr. Negrão (Interviewee E) also mentioned that at UF002 De Schilde there is no use of chemicals pesticides and the control of the pests is made closely by 4 agronomists that use biological methods such as UV lamps, insects and traps with water, soap with pheromones. Chemical pesticides could not only harm the production and quality of the crops but also jeopardize the fish production, bio-filters (since these have bacterias on it) and insects (including bees) that are part of the greenhouse ecosystem (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018).
UF002 De Schilde attracts a great number of visitors because it is unique in Europe. It is seen as a touristic attraction
in the city and it is also visited by municipal and governmental authorities (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). According to interviewee (E), "the intention is not to send the products to consumers (e.g., subscription boxes) but to
bring consumers to experience the farm and its events…there is a strong symbiosis between agriculture and hospitality”.
However, it is unknown that future farms will have the same profile and peculiarities as this one. For example, in a possible future project in Zurich, the intention is to build a non-rooftop farm — and since the Swiss market has different demand from the Dutch, it is possible that the farm could survive only from products sales (Personal
“UF002 De Schilde must be seen not as a finished product of UrbanFarmers but a product under development”
Communication, April 30, 2018). In Brazil, for example, UFBRA will use the UrbanFarmers brand and be a subsidiary of UrbanFarmers AG (UFBRA, 2016) and it will be independent from the company. In this case, Mr. Pacheco and Ms. Marinho would be responsible for building and developing the farm (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018), unlike the other UF units.
According to interviewee (E), it is important to mention that agriculture in the Netherlands is usually a family business subsidize by the Government — growers are entitle to benefits (e.g., gas and electricity with low costs). UF runs under an agriculture license, however it does not profit from these benefits due to the zoning area it is located, plus the farm pays surcharges in water, since the meter of the building it does not fit the present activity — "both
situations could be facilitated by the Municipality” (Personal Communication, April 30, 2018). Although running in a
different “business model” than other farms in the Netherlands (e.g. from Westland), UF maintains a good horizontal relationship (Thomaier, 2014) with them and rely on some of them as suppliers of seeds, biological pests control, etc. When asked about difficulties in finding labor to work at the farm, interviewee (E) mentioned that UF does not receive many curriculum from students in Dutch Universities (presuming that student there will run their families business) and that workers at the farm have diverse nationality, come from different areas, yet always showing great enthusiasm to learn about the business and become urban farmers.
03. Urban Agriculture in São Paulo - Brazil
Image 04 —Example of large-scale agricultural production — monoculture soy bean plantation at Mato Grosso do Sul in Brazil Source: Rural Pecuária (2016).
Brazil leads the world’s farming productivity (Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento, 2017) and it is one of the five largest exporters of agri-food in the world (Kingdom of The Netherlands, 2016). The state of São Paulo, for example, accounts for almost 20% of the Brazilian Agribusiness GDP and it is the largest producer of sugar cane, ethanol, oranges, latex, coffee and fruits in the country (Governo do Estado de São Paulo, N.D.). It is known that these large scale producers (Image 04) are located in rural areas across the state along with smaller producers, yet there is a (small) portion of food producers within the urban and peri-urban areas and in São Paulo (Portes, 2016). Nowadays, it is possible to notice the existence of many community and urban gardens in these areas — some with commercial purpose (Map 01) — and it is possible to notice that in the past few years, as in many cities around the world (Buehler, 2016), UA has gained forced in São Paulo, and it has been manifesting in many ways and with different purposes (Britto, 2013). In late 2017, a national policy on UA was approved and brought as main goals (a) increase food and nutritional security of vulnerable urban population; (b) propitiate the occupation of underused urban spaces; (c) generate alternative source of income and activity for urban population; (d) articulate food
Map 01 — Locations (black dots) where Commercial Agricultural Production is happening inside the metropolitan area of São Paulo. Source: Instituto de Pesquisa e Inovação em Urbanismo (IPIU) — Portes (2016)
"We know that healthy eating is important. But healthy eating also depends upon people being able to obtain adequate amounts of nutritious food “
