• No results found

COST Ac(on ‘Urban Agriculture Europe’: Report from a research network and related case studies in Oslo

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Share "COST Ac(on ‘Urban Agriculture Europe’: Report from a research network and related case studies in Oslo"

Copied!
41
0
0

Laster.... (Se fulltekst nå)

Fulltekst

(1)

COST  Ac(on  ‘Urban  Agriculture  Europe’:  

Report  from  a  research  network  and   related  case  studies  in  Oslo  

 

Sebas(an  Eiter  –  Dept.  of  Landscape  Monitoring  

 

«Food  in  the  city»:  Conference  on  Urban  Agriculture,  Trondheim,  12th  April  2016  

(2)

Urban  Agriculture  (UA)    

–  A  «hidden  champion»  

–  Neglected  for  decades  by  urban  and  agricultural   policies  

–  (Urban)  Farmland  as  poten(al  building  ground   –  Agriculture  as  rural  ac(vity  

(3)

Global  challenges  

–  Urbanisa(on   –  Food  security  

–  Sustainable  development  

27.04.16   3  

(4)

Ques(ons  

–  How  can  UA  contribute  to  a  smart,  inclusive  and   sustainable  development  of  European  ci(es?    

–  How  can  UA  create  vital  urban  spaces  that  have  new   social,  cultural  and  ecological  quali(es  and  are  

economically  viable?  

27.04.16   4  

(5)

Metabolism Waste recycling, CO2 sequestration, soil and climate, …

Business

Specialisation to urban needs, local market sales, economic

diversification, … Governance

Community activities, education, social policy,

Space

Open space access, green infrastructure, cultural heritage, … Phenomenon

Definition, Typology, Policy Agenda, …

2

3 1

5

4

Working  groups  

(6)

Timeline  and  Geography  

(7)

Defini(on  

(8)

Book  content  

European  typology  

Actors  model    

Urban   metabolism   model   Business     model  catalogue  

7  case  study  regions    

(9)

Urban  vs.  non-­‐urban  agriculture  

Different  dimensions  

    Urban  agriculture   Non-­‐urban/other/“normal”  agriculture  

Spa8al   Close  to  city    

i.e.  either  profi(ng  from  proximity  to   local  urban  market  or  suffering  from   press  through  development  of  built-­‐up   areas  (residen(al,  business/industrial,   transport  infrastructure)  

Distant  from  city  

Func8onal   Food  and  non-­‐food  produc(on   (educa(on,  adventure,  amenity,  …  –   incl.  riding,  hun(ng,  fishing  etc.,   catering/hostelling)  

Food  produc(on  only    

(and  “automa(cally”  included  non-­‐

consumer-­‐oriented  goods  like  ecosystem   services)  

Market   Mainly  local  consumers     (direct  marke(ng?)  

Mainly  non-­‐local  consumers     (regional,  na(onal,  interna(onal)  

Origin   Introduced    

(when  spa(ally  close  to  city)  

Remnant    

(when  spa(ally  close  to  city  –  s(ll  urban   acc.  to  criterion  spa(al  then…)  

Actor   Hobby  farmer   Professional  farmer    

(both  full-­‐(me  and  part-­‐(me)   Stakeholder/beneficiary   Food  and  non-­‐food  consumers   Food  consumers  only  

9  

(10)

UA:  Two  main  levels  

Urban  farming   –  Professional/  

commercial  

–  Business  model  

adapted  to  profit  from   vicinity  of  city    

–  Local  products   –  Local  services  

–  Non-­‐professional/    

non-­‐commercial   –  Usually  limited  

economic  dependency   on  products  

–  Oien  social  purposes   Urban  food  gardening  

(11)

Urban  farming:  8  types  

11  

(12)

Urban  food  gardening:  6  types  

12  

(13)

Non-­‐professional   gardening  

dominates  in  

intraurban  areas.    

 Professional  

farming  dominates   in  periurban  areas.  

 Professional   farming  is   interested  in   developing  new   business  models   for  intraurban   areas.  

 New  alliances  

from  government,   civil  society  and   the  market  occur.  

 

UA  Actors  

(14)

Differen8a8on  –     Crea(ng  dis(nc(ons    

Diversifica8on  –  

Going  beyond  core  ac(vi(es    

The  Commons  –    

Sharing  resources  &  products  

Experience  –   Selling  experiences,  less  products      

Urban Farmers AG

Maison Forte

Ortoloco

Noordholland

Daktuin Zuidpark Rooftop garden

Low  cost  –   Using  intelligently  synergies    

UA  Business  Models:  “Living  labs”  for  

innova(ve  and  sustainable  farming  

(15)

Required  by  the  European   Commission  

–  From  ornamental  to  

produc(ve  nature  based   solu(ons  

Green  Infrastructure  

(16)

–  Enhance    stakeholder  and  ci(zen  ‘ownership’  of  green   infrastructure  

–  Help  to  redefine  a  city’s  social  iden(ty  in  a  globalized  world    

Agricultural  Heritage  

(17)

Metabolism:  A  more  circular  economy  

(18)

UAE  Online  Atlas:  An  overview  

hmp://www.urban-­‐agriculture-­‐europe.org/  

(19)

–  European  UA  observatory?    

–  Detect  innova(on  and  cri(cal  developments?  

–  How  to  sustain  the  tool?  

UAE  Online  Atlas:  Future?  

(20)

First policy recommendations: The “Barcelona Declaration”

©  Frank  Lohrberg  

(21)

Barcelona  declara(on:  UA  and  the  CAP  

We  recommend  to  the  EU  Commission  and  to  the  Council  of  Europe  to   –  recognize  UA  as    

•  a  driving  force  for  innova8on  in  the  whole  agricultural  sector    

•  a  cultural  resource  for  quality  of  urban  life  and  wellbeing  

–  raise  awareness  for  UA  and  its  special  condi(ons,  poten(als  and  demands   –  promote  research  on  UA  

 

We  recommend  specifically  to  the  EU  Commission  to  

–  define  specific  objec8ves  on  UA  related  to  the  characteris(cs  of  different  forms  of  UA   –  include  UA  issues  in  the  mission  statement  of  the  Directorate-­‐General  for  Agriculture  

and  Rural  Development  (DG  Agri)  

–  install  an  advisory  group  on  UA  at  DG  Agri  

–  ins8tu8onalize  UA  within  one  of  DG  Agri’s  units  

(22)

UA  and  Social  and  Environmental  Policies  

Growing  Communi8es  Through  Growing  Food   (Contextualising  UA  as  a  policy  field)  

   

UA   can   address   many   issues   on   the   poli8cal   agenda,   but   is   s8ll   not   widely   recognised  as  a  tool  to  solve  social,  economic  and  environmental  problems:  

 

–  Unemployment   –  Social  exclusion   –  Poverty  

–  Educa(on  

–  Climate  change  mi(ga(on   –  Preserva(on  of  biodiversity   –  Valorisa(on  of  cultural  heritage  

     

(23)

Policy  sectors  

–  Agriculture  and  Food  

–  Trade,  Industry  and  Fisheries   –  Educa(on  and  Research  

–  Climate  and  Environment   –  Local  Government  and  

Modernisa(on  

–  Health  and  Care  Services   –  Jus(ce  and  Public  Security  

Which  ministries  could  share  responsibility  for  different  types  of  UA?  

23  

(24)

NIBIO’s  UA  projects  in  Oslo  

Overall  resource  mapping  (GIS)  (Bria(co  2015)  

Detailed  resource  mapping  (soil  &  users)  (Gil  Ruiz  2016)   –  Allotment  gardens  (Veen  2014,  Veen  &  Eiter  in  prep.)  

(25)

Inventory  of  free/abandoned  areas  in   Oslo  and  possibili(es  for  UA  

Chiara  Bria(co  

 Short-­‐Term  Scien(fic  Mission    

 Norwegian  Forest  and  Landscape  Ins(tute  (now:  NIBIO)  

Dept.  of  Agriculture,  County  Governor  of  Oslo  and  Akershus     Dept.  of  Environment,  Oslo  municipality  

(26)

26  

(27)

Digital  Map  Layers  

Environ.  

Dept.  

(BYM)   Pollu(on  

Exis(ng   urban  

agri-­‐

culture  

Admini-­‐

stra(ve   divisions     Urban  

equip-­‐

ment   (parks  

etc.)   Skog  +  

landskap   (NIBIO)  

Agri-­‐

cultural   soil   quality  

Buildings   (FKB)  

Land   resources  

(AR  5)   Farms    

(pt-­‐data)   Basic  

maps  

27  

(28)

Systema(c   mapping:    

overlay  analyes  

 

   

Different  types  of  UA   ê  

Different  demands  to   area  /  land  resource    

(29)

Poten(al  for  Urban  Agriculture  on  former   farmland  at  Bredtvet  and  Gaustad  

A  study  of  soil  resources,  current  land  use,  and  users’  and   stakeholders’  desires  and  perceived  challenges  

Cris(na  Gil  Ruiz    

(30)

Study  areas  

–  Gaustad   –  Bredtvet  

   

Landowner:  Norwegian   Na(onal  Property  

Administra(on  (Statsbygg)  

27.04.16   30  

(31)

Methods  

Soil   resources  

Current   land  use   Perceived  

opportuni(

es  and   challenges  

31  

Semi-­‐structured   interviews  with  

users  and   stakeholders  

Auger  sampling  

Transect  walks   in  the  area  &  

informal   interviews  

(32)

Users  

“Groups  of  people  from  the  neighborhood  who  could  be   interested  in  using  the  land  at  Bredtvet  and  Gaustad”  

 

–  Target  groups:  Ins(tu(ons  adjacent  to  areas     –  Spa(al  approach:  1.5  km  radius  

32  

(33)

Soil  (Bredtvet)  

-­‐  106  daa  (10.6  ha)   mapped    

-­‐  Marine  clay  soils:  

Drainage  needed  for   regular  agriculture   -­‐  Mostly  good  soil  

quality  

-­‐  1  spot  very  high   -­‐  2  spots  lower  

33  

(34)

Land  use  (Bredtvet)  

34  

Leisure  area  

Green   corridor  

Historical   site   Spontaneous  

food  garden   Educa(onal  

area  

(35)

-­‐  Suitability  for  many   types  of  UA  

-­‐  Greenhouse  and  food   garden  at  prison?  

-­‐  Pond  on  Eutric  Gleysol?  

-­‐  Connect  with  exis(ng   projects  in  Oslo?  

27.04.16   35  

UA  poten(al  

(Bredtvet)  

(36)

Conclusions  

–  Different  types  of  UA  can  adapt  to  current  land  use   -  People  are  willing  to  get  involved  in  projects    

-  Needs    

- Project  leaders  /  facilitators   - Ins(tu(onal  involvement     - Funding  

- Cross-­‐sectoral  coopera(on:  public  administra(on,   ci(zens  and  private  ins(tu(ons  

36  

(37)

Allotments  in  Oslo:  Social  rela(ons,  diets   and  wallets  

Esther  Veen  

–  Short-­‐Term  Scien(fic   Mission  

–  Social  effects  of  urban   agriculture  

–  Rela(ons  /  contacts   –  Food  pamerns  

(Foto:  Esther  Veen)  

37  

(38)

Case  studies  and  methods  

                                                                             Geitmyra                              Nedre  Stovner    

–  Ques(onnaires     –  Interviews  

–  Visits/observa(on  

38  

(39)

Findings    

–  Vegetables  and  social  rela(ons  are  both  essen(al   elements  of  the  gardening  experience  

–  The  garden  is  an  extension  of  the  home  

–  Invi(ng  people,  getng  together  

–  A  beau(ful  place  to  spend  (me,  recrea(onal  space    

–  All  respondents  meet  and  talk  to  others  

–  The  garden  as  mee(ng  place  is  most  important  for   people  who  par(cipate  rela(vely  limle  in  society.    

–  The  harvest  is  of  more  importance  to  respondents  from   Nedre  Stovner.    

39  

(40)

Norw egian  and   Dutch  gardeners:  

qualita(ve  matrix  

40  

 

In  two  gardens   importance  of   both  factors   interrelated    

Neighbourhood   difference  within   Norway  

(41)

Thank  you  for  your  amen(on!  

[email protected]    

Special  thanks  to  Frank  Lohrberg,  Wolf  Lorleberg,  Dona  Pickard,  Lionella  Scazzosi,  Axel  Timpe,   Chiara  Bria(co,  Cris(na  Gil  Ruiz  and  Esther  Veen  for  slide  templates!  

Referanser

RELATERTE DOKUMENTER