63 Landwirtschaft
Refine
Document Type
- Master Thesis (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Agriculture (1)
- Environment (1)
- Good agricultural practices (1)
- Maize (1)
- Market participation (1)
- Supply chain (1)
- Sustainable (1)
- Upgrading (1)
Institute
Urban Agriculture (UA) is identified as a sustainable solution to address urban food security challenges compounded by the exponential increase in urban population. Moreover, UA largely mitigates the negative impacts associated with conventional agriculture systems such as soil degradation, high resource usage, crop sensitivity towards climate change, and high fertilizer usage. UA is often complimented for its significant potential for producing higher yield nevertheless, for extensive use of UA, an in-depth understand- ing of its environmental impacts is required. For any UA methodology, environmental performance acts as a promising factor in promoting agriculture sustainability. This study performs critical analyses of available literature on UA techniques using Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA). LCA provides a comprehensive understanding of UA’s environmental footprint across different stages of its life cycle. LCA facilitates the quantification of eco- logical impacts associated with various UA approaches, including vertical farming, roof- top farming, hydroponics, aquaponics, and aeroponics. This study utilizes a systematic review methodology, incorporating the PRISMA model, to conduct a comprehensive data collection process aimed at identifying the LCA of diverse UA methods and their associated impacts. The review addresses the following questions: How does LCA help in quantifying the environmental impacts of UA? What is the environmental performance of different UA techniques?
The findings demonstrated that nearly every form of UA exhibited a notable advantage in yield, and efficiency in water usage and land usage. Specifically, aeroponics stands out for its superior performance in yield and water usage efficiency, albeit with elevated energy demands. Hydroponics and aquaponics showcase advantages in reduced water usage and fertilizer requirements. Vertical farms, due to their structural and Controlled Environment (CE) prerequisites, present as energy-intensive systems with higher Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. In contrast, rooftop farms, making use of under-utilised urban spaces, emerge as a balanced system with moderate energy consumption and GHG emissions.
The environmental impact of UA techniques varies based on factors such as structure, operational components, crop selection, and the integration of innovative technologies, resulting in diverse outcomes when compared to conventional soil-based farms. This review recommended an extensive LCA of UA techniques, innovation to existing methodologies, urban reforms, and increased awareness about UA.
The attempt to integrate Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) into the procurement standards of maize supply chain has been led by the Thai Feed Mills Association since 2015 to mitigate environmental impacts of maize production in the North of Thailand. Maize production was condemned by researchers and civil society as one of the culprits of deforestation and haze crisis. Up to now, maize in compliance with GAP in the North of Thailand is mostly produced as part of the Mega Farm Project and limited to a handful of farmers and planted areas. With rather unclear and unpromising circumstances, this study aims to examine the progress of GAP implementation and the market participation of farmers who adopted GAP. By using qualitative and quantitative research methods, it tried to find the reasons for the slow progress and limited coverage of GAP maize production. The results show that market incentives, institutional support, and farmers’ resource endowment are key determinants of GAP adoption and market opportunities. Although the government’s support under the Mega Farm Project has made GAP adoption accessible, affordable and achievable, the stagnation in GAP implementation and adoption is caused by a lack of market incentives, enforcement of regulations, engagement of the private sector, and government’s resources. Farmers’ market participation as a result of GAP adoption has not substantially changed over time. Their market access and prices received remained the same. Their market opportunities have not significantly been enhanced owing to the lack of market incentives for sustainable maize production, insufficient institutional support on harvest and post-harvest management, and farmers’ limited capacity to upgrade and reach an economy of scale.