1
Business models in Urban Agriculture answering cost pressures and societal needs
Bernd Pölling1, Wolf Lorleberg1, Francesco Orsini2, Francesca Magrefi3, Femke Hoekstra4,
Henk Renting4, Mattia Accorsi2
Abstract – Urban Agriculture has to adjust to the
urban environments by using the existent opportunities, by dealing with urban disadvantages, and where
possible by turning the urban location into market
asset. Businesses, which ignore urban demands and
conditions, struggle to maintain economically viable,
give up or do not develop beyond the start-up phase.
The conducted European survey, which follows a
standardised questionnaire scheme, aims to detect
characteristic business models, success factors and
problems. The survey consists of in total 80 case
studies revealing a variety of business models, which
are all by itself unique, but show also some similarities. The cases are attached to six Urban Agriculture
business models: cost reduction, differentiation, diversification, shared economy, experimental and
experience. Urban Agriculture is often focusing on
one of the six business models, but many cases were
found to use elements out of more than one business
model. The survey confirms that new business concepts have emerged on established (peri-)urban
farms and also on initiatives of UA newcomers. 1
Keywords – business models, innovation, Urban Agriculture Europe, Urban Green Train.
INTRODUCTION
Business models of farms located in and around
agglomerations have to be different from those
located in rural areas to stay economically viable on
the long term. Urban Agriculture (UA) has to adjust
to the urban environments by using the existent
opportunities, like proximity to consumers, by dealing with urban disadvantages, like fragmentation
and missing planning capability due to insecure land
management, and where possible turn the urban
location into a marketing asset, for example by place
building. This integration into the urban socioeconomic and ecological system distinguishes UA from
its rural counterpart (Mougeot, 1999). Businesses,
which ignore urban demands and conditions, struggle to maintain economically viable, give up or do
not manage to develop beyond the start-up phase.
“For an urban environment, agricultural production systems that take advantage of the close proximity of resources and consumers, such as those
offering fresh, value-added, specialty products would
be most appropriate” (Lovell, 2010). Additionally,
South-Westphalia University of Applied Sciences, Department of
Agriculture, Soest, Germany (poelling.bernd@fh-swf.de;
lorleberg.wolf@fh-swf.de)
2
Agricultural Sciences Department of the University of Bologna, Italy
(f.orsini@unibo.it; mattia.accorsi@unibo.it)
3
STEPS srl, Bologna, Italy (fmagrefi@stepseurope.it)
4
RUAF Foundation, Leusden, The Netherlands (f.hoekstra@ruaf.org;
h.renting@ruaf.org)
1
high-value crop production and marketing apart
from regular commodity markets are added by the
provision of various services to diversify farm businesses (Gardner, 1994).
METHODOLOGY
The main aim of this empirical survey is to get a
better idea of Urban Agriculture’s economic strategies in general and characteristic patterns of UA
business models. The survey on UA’s business models is based on farm interviews in Europe. The questionnaire follows a standardised scheme to detect
business models, success factors and problems.
RESULTS
The survey consists of in total 80 UA case studies
from 11 different European countries. The survey
includes city-adapted commercial farms as well as
private and public gardening initiatives with direct or
in-direct economic contributions. The analysed interviews show a variety of business models, which are
all by itself unique but nonetheless reveal some
similarities. Based on these similarities the case
studies were grouped in six business models: cost
reduction, differentiation, diversification, shared
economy, experimental and experience.
Cost reduction perhaps represents the business
model closest to rural farming. However, also farms
located in agglomerations’ peri-urban fringes use
this low cost approach for profitability, and in the
urban context specific expressions have emerged.
Common are specialisation in high-value crops (horticulture) and methods to reduce costs, like using
available and cheap urban surplus resources.
A frequently applied business model in urban
areas is differentiation to create distinctions in production, processing and/or marketing. Farms integrate processing and distribution stages for vertical
integration of the valued added chain. As differentiation from the bulk market, the often exploited direct
sale with premium prices for specific product features (super-fresh, ethnic, tasteful, etc.) is based on
personal, transparent and reliable producerconsumer relationships.
Enterprise diversification is another characteristic
UA business model, which is strongly contrasting the
cost reduction model. Diversified UA enterprises in
parallel effectuate activities in some or even many
business fields, including also services close to agricultural production, like agro-tourism, care farming,
training or landscaping measures. Within the diversification business model the survey results reveal two
2
perspectives: Firstly, rather many urban farms diversify their business into new – often serviceoriented – fields and secondly, non-agricultural enterprises which step into farming as newcomers, e.
g. social care institutions, which use agriculture to
diversify their businesses.
Experimental UA is based on initiatives that explicitly integrate technological innovation processes
that are suited to respond to urban contextual settings. Innovation may be in production (e. g. aquaponic systems or artificial lighting for indoor cultivation), but also in the processing (e. g. recycle of the
urban waste products), or in the functions (e.g. revitalisation of urban brownfields). An important
characteristic is also that technologies often are still
in development and the applied ‘vanguard’ technology can even be part of the marketing.
As an expression of the new economy, since a
few years initiatives based on ‘shared economy’
increasingly gain importance. Required resources to
run UA in the form of a shared economy model, e. g.
CSA, are jointly mobilised and managed, including
land, labour, credit, tools, machinery, network contacts and knowledge.
Experience represents the sixth business model
that was distinguished on the basis of interviews.
This model focuses on providing authentic and
‘memorable’ experiences by selling rather a story
(experience) than only a product. Place-making and
training or leisure activities (for example gastronomic experiences) are important elements that in
this model are combined with food production.
These six UA business models address the special
urban conditions by making use of the advantage of
nearby costumers, by compensating negative urban
influences, and in some cases also by valorising
specific urban contexts such as strong social networks and generating social and ecological benefits
(van der Schans et al., 2014). Although UA is often
focusing on a specific business model, many cases
were found using elements out of more than one.
DISCUSSION
While economies of scale is still an important ‘rural’
business model in farming to stay competitive under
intense cost pressures in the food sector, UA business models have to distinguish by adjusting to
specific urban contexts and move away from mainstream commodity market and global prices mechanisms. The conducted European survey confirms that
new business concepts have emerged on established
(peri-)urban farms and also by initiatives of newcomers in UA. The specific challenging, but also
enabling urban conditions encourage innovations in
farming, and result in the appearance of business
models that in many respects are different from
rural farms. Product differentiation and enterprise
diversification are the prevailing business models
within this survey, but new forms of and new actors
in UA raise experimental, shared economy and experience to newly emerging business models.
Business model classification supports the investigation and learning of UA developments. On the
one hand, the survey identifies farms, which adapt
to the cities in different ways. The term UA means
for them “a fundamental re-orientation from the
rural towards the urban environment” (van der
Schans, 2010). On the other hand, however, UA
initiatives are also increasingly driven by newcomers
and interest groups outside farming. For example
care institutions, housing companies or start-up
businesses; some step in from another profession
into farming for business diversification reasons,
while others start non-commercially or out of social
considerations. Often they bring in new business
ideas, competences and networks, and the implications of these and differences from ’rural’ business
models still are insufficiently understood.
CONCLUSION
The observable growth and differentiation of business models in UA clearly reflects the evolution the
sector is experiencing. As many of these experiences
develop spontaneously in the most diverse and geographically distant urban environments across Europe, the study of their success factors, bottlenecks
and specific training and policy requirements may
guide current and future entrepreneurs in their project and organizational choices.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The interviews were carried out by members and
supporters of EU-funded COST-Action “Urban Agriculture Europe” and Erasmus+ project “Urban Green
Train” (URBAN GRreen Education for ENTeRprising
Agricultural INnovation).
REFERENCES
Gardner, B.L. (1994). Commercial Agriculture in
Metropolitan Areas: Economics and Regulatory Issues. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review23(1):100-109.
Lovell, S.T. (2010). Multifunctional Urban Agriculture
for Sustainable Land Use Planning in the United
States. Sustainability2010(2): 2499-2522.
Mougeot, L.J.A. (1999). Urban Agriculture: definition, presence, potentials and risks, and policy challenges. Cities Feeding People Series Report31.
Renting, H., Hoekstra, F. and Dubbeling, M. (2015).
State-of-art of UA entrepreneurship: Comparative
analysis of business opportunities. Final Report O1A1 Erasmus+ project URBAN GReen Education for
ENTteRprising Agricultural Innovation.
Thebo, A.L., Drechsel, P. and Lambin, E.F. (2014).
Global assessment of urban and peri-urban agriculture: irrigated and rainfed croplands. Environmental
Research Letters(9)114002.
van der Schans, J.-W. (2010). Urban Agriculture in
the Netherlands. Urban Agriculture magazine(24):
40-42.
van der Schans, J.-W., Renting, H. and van Veenhuizen, R. (2014). Urban Agriculture and Innovation.
Urban Agriculture magazine(28):3-10.