Financing City Farms in

City farms as a form of urban is a recent but increasingly important urban Young and phenomenon in the United Kingdom. The future old volunteers of lies in the ability to adapt working on and mainstream it into prevailing development the pond themes such as education, community cohesion, social inclusion and biodiversity.

n explicit definition of urban agriculture in the UK is hard to come by although writers A Trust oodlands Farm appear to equate it to the use of W urban sites primarily for cultiva- tion and food production. Howe (2001) reminds us that such food ❖ promote environmental, plant each individual gardener, allot- production in cities is practised in and animal education; and ment renter or a group of these. back gardens, window boxes, ❖ contribute to urban regenera- Only non-commercial urban agri- community gardens, greenhouses, tion, health, recycling and inno- culture is permitted on allotments. urban farms and allotments. In vation. Vegetables and fruit are the main practice, urban agriculture in the products from allotment gardens. UK is associated with any activities Garnett (1996) provided what that promote food growing and remains the most prevalent typol- Compared to allotments, city farms enhance Agenda 21 (Iles, 2001). ogy of urban agriculture sites in have a recent history in the UK, are the UK, namely: that it occurs on a less documented and a less visi- allotments, urban/city farms, ble feature of the urban landscape, City farms play an increasing role community gardens and orchards, but are slowly playing an increas- in the urban sustainable agenda local authority and tenanted ing role in the urban sustainable farms, gardens and yards, school agenda. Most of the city farms grounds and prison grounds. In were set up by groups of enthusi- This reference to sustainability terms of numbers of units and of asts on formally derelict land or and agenda 21 broadens the defin- people involved, allotments are waste ground. An estimated 3 mil- ition of urban agriculture from the most prevalent, the most visi- lion people per year are involved in mere concerns for food produc- ble and well-documented form of city farms alone (Iles, 2001). Their tion and rearing to any urban agriculture in the UK. Iles emerging significance is not so use of urban space in ways that: (2001) estimates that there are much in terms of food production ❖ contribute to social inclusion; some 65 city farms, 1,200 commu- but in their role as community ❖ contribute to biodiversity; nity gardens, about 70 school resource for social inclusion, biodi- farms and over 300,000 allotment versity, environmental education Greenwich in London plots in the country. and heritage (Howe, 2001; FCFCG, 2002). They have been selected for Allotments are small pieces of land documentation in order to high- largely owned by and rented from light the different perceptions that local authorities throughout the urban agriculture can embrace as UK. The majority of the allotments well as to fill a gap in the UK’s is owned by the local authority urban agriculture literature that is (Bradford 100%, Leeds 90%) with currently synonymous with allot- the remainder in private or com- ment gardens. munity ownership (Howe and Wheeler, 1999: 17). This local LONDON CITY FARMS authority dominance is a country- London has about 17 city farms, wide pattern. However, local only three of which are fully local authorities only provide the infra- authority owned and managed 1. ______structure such as fencing, road Except for these three, the rest are Beacon Mbiba, Urban and Peri-Urban Research access and water points. Resources run by independent charitable Network (Peri-NET), South Bank University, UK for the actual agricultural activities trusts that are community led and ✉ [email protected] are largely the responsibility of managed by a management com-

20 UA-Magazine Table 1: Diversity of London City Farms - Two Examples

Variable/Feature Woodlands Farm Vauxhall City Farm mittee. Whereas allotments have a history of over 300 years, none of the city farms in Size About 90 (ninety acres) About 1 (one) acre London is over thirty years old. Their Location Outer London, London Inner London, London umbrella organisation, the Federation of Borough of Greenwich Borough of Lambeth City Farms and Community Gardens (on border with London (FCFCG) was set up in 1980 and the Borough of Bexley) London office was only recently estab- Poverty Levels One of the deprived One of the poorest lished in 2000 with meagre resources for areas in London outer London Boroughs two part-time members of staff and office (and the UK) support (FCFCG, 2002: 5). Management Structure Registered Charity and Registered Charity and Company Limited By Company Limited As highlighted in the last row of Table 1, Guarantee by Guarantee the direct contribution of government Turnover About £160,000 £140,000 and local authorities to city farm Staff Volunteer management 12-member management resources is low. Figure 1 depicts the committee, one full-time committee; four full-time sources of resources for Woodlands Farm officer, several task staff, two part-time in 2001, indicating that there was no grant committees and staff and 26 volunteers from the local authority. The major com- volunteers ponent of resources required for farm Activities Offers wildlife, environ- Offers educational, training, operations comes from charities, private mental sanctuaries, and social and recreational donations and locally generated revenues. educational, training and opportunities to a variety of Also very significant is the role of regular social opportunities to a groups and individuals in volunteers on these farms whose contri- variety of individuals and the urban communities bution reduces the employment budget groups in the community Work Placements are very considerably. The Federation of City offered annually in associa- Farms and Community Gardens (FCFCG, tion with colleges such as 2002) estimates that there are over 1,000 Bromely College - the regular volunteers per year on London trainees get National city farms. Through volunteering, part- Vocational Qualification nerships and in-kind donations, high val- Certificates in animal care ue inputs are given that would normally (Level 1) that enable them be unaffordable by the city farms. to get employed full-time elsewhere SUSTAINABILITY OF Source of Funds 20% LA and the rest 30% LA, 40% Trusts FUNDING SOURCES from donations, charities and Charities, 10% other. and private sector. At least £65,000 The future of lottery funding At least £100,000 for for annual running costs. Farms receive significant funding from annual running costs. the Lottery Fund for both capital invest- ment and running costs. Bids for these funds are made to the Community Fund, groups should put an emphasis on how The Heritage Lottery Fund and the New their projects promote existing develop- Opportunities Fund. The farms have to ment policy. In the case of the UK, the 13% Rents compete against many other project bids farms have to “speak the language of” old receivable from all over the country. In the 2002- people, children, education, social inclu- 10% Fund–raising 11% 2007 period, The Community Fund gave sion and the disadvantaged. Fees received its priorities as children, young people, black and ethnic minority groups, Competitive bidding

13% Subscriptions refugee and asylum seekers, older people Many of the city farms in London are and donations and people in areas disadvantaged by under-resourced and would close down if 35% social and economic change. This is the grants from charities were to disappear Heritage Lottery Fund framework in which farms like Vauxhall (FCFCG, 2002). However, even these 18% Grants Farm secured funds for its project for grants are accessed through competitive refugees and asylum seekers. However, bidding using problematic criteria that funds from these public sources are not favour high profile and high return very secure and allocations are depen- schemes (Howe, 2001). They favour highly 0% Interest and receivable dent on prevailing political opinions and organised groups with the skills and pressures brought to bear on the Fund knowledge base to produce good bids. In Figure 1 Typical sources of income Managers. To reduce social friction and contrast, small community groups wanti- for year 2001: Woodlands Farm enhance continued support, community ng to set up community gardens or to

April 2003 21 improve their local allotments will not find is a need to strengthen the financial and this easy. In the UK, community groups management capacity of those that exist. should consider pulling their resources Clearly, the tenure security of the city together, especially where they are pursu- farms is of concern and it needs to be ing related or common project themes and guaranteed by the government through combine forces to prepare bids for sub- government grants, or where this is not mission to key funding organisations. immediately possible, for the local author- Community groups should also consider ities to guarantee a long-term lease to the more sharing of skills in fund-raising. sites. It is with this security that members oodlands Farm Trust oodlands Farm

of the community and business can invest W Environmental health, safety and built their efforts into the projects. Members of Woodlands Farm Trust at work development threats As in cities of the developing world, urban agriculture in London faces challenges and Community groups should consider constraints with access to land being the pulling their resources together most critical. Other challenges have to do with infrastructure, soil contamination, theft, vandalism, access to inputs and mar- Resources and matching up or after-school activities especially in the keting of produce. Public health and safety Resources for urban agriculture project summer. Following the Johannesburg concerns regarding these farms were activities do not necessarily have to be in Earth Summit in 2002, where education heightened during the Foot and Mouth the form of money. They can be in other was put forward as one of the priority epidemic in 2000-2001. Although no cases forms of materials, services and expertise. development sectors, community groups of the disease were reported on any Companies are a good source of support. need to integrate this aspect into their pro- London city farms, the farms had to be Most would like to show that they care jects and to articulate it clearly when seek- closed to the public for a long time about community needs and are not ing support from both government and (FCFCG, 2002). Since then, the public “rogue capitalists”. Most company work- international development organisations. remains wary about working with farms. ers are ordinary family people who For farms that keep livestock, there is understand the need to survive and if Community motivation and volunteering increasing opposition from animal rights approached appropriately will be happy Sustainable development is about commu- campaigners and rising insurance costs. to offer community funding as a way to nity empowerment and capacity-building. Thus, to survive, urban agriculture and city advertise their businesses. City farms should be seen as multi-func- farm projects have to continue to maintain tional spaces where a variety of inter- high health and safety standards as well as Education and training linked community-driven projects take publicity campaigns to reassure the public. Urban agriculture is not just about food place. This enables expansion of activities Joint project campaigns would be a more production. In cities, environmental, edu- with minimal manpower and financial cost-effective way to deal with these issues. cational and recreational dimensions are costs to the farms. Since ownership of very important and can be a major source assets is crucial, the groups should be given Security of tenure of income. Despite the varied origins of opportunities to own the land on which Given that in the UK start-up costs of the farms (in some cases they are explicit they operate. This is also critical for com- these farms are in excess of £150,000 while sustainable Agenda 21 projects), the munities in developing countries where minimum annual running costs are at least emerging trend is that educational activi- communities continue to lose their land £50,000, any projects will need significant ties are now the dominant feature. resource assets. Volunteers contribute sig- support from government or local authori- However, the potentials in this sector are nificantly to these community projects and ties. Existing farms are struggling to raise far from exhausted. The levels of utilisa- this has to be encouraged in all contexts. the required funds and therefore, before tion and direct involvement of schools any new farms can be contemplated, there could be much higher, like regular lessons, Income-generating activities Although city farms in the UK cannot legally operate commercially, any income they generate from sales and services has REFERENCES to be ploughed back into project activi- - Crouch, D. 2000. Reinventing Allotments for the twenty-first Century: The United Kingdom Experience. Paper presented at the International Society for Horticultural Science 523: XXV International Horticultural Congress, Part 13: New and ties. Currently, income from this source Specialized Crops and Products, Botanic Gardens and Human- Relationship. Online: http://www.actahort.org/books/523/523_18.htm remains below 5%. Potentials for further - Crouch, D and Ward, C. 1988. The Allotment: its Landscape and Culture. Faber and Faber, London. income-raising opportunities need to be - Crouch, D, J Sempik and R Wiltshire. 2000. Growing in the community: a good practice guide for the management of allotments. Report for the Department of the Environment, Transport and Regions, The Authority, The tapped but mindful of the need not to Local Government association and the Shell Better Britain Campaign, London. reduce access by the poor. - Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens. 2002. Future Directions of City Farms in London. A Study Funded by the Mayor of London. Greater London Authority (www.london.gov.uk) and Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens, London. - Garnett, T. 1996. Harvesting the cities. Town and Country Planning 65 (October): 264-266. Notes - Howe, J. 2001. Nourishing the city. Town and Country Planning. 29 - 31. 1) The three local authority owned city farms in - Howe, J and Wheeler, P. 1999. Urban Food Growing: The Experience of Two UK Cities. Sustainable Development 7: 13-24. London are Newham City Farm, Hounslow - Iles, J. 2001. Social Participation and the Role of City Farms and Community Gardens. Urban Agriculture and Sustainable Urban Farm and Brookes Farm in the London Cities Conference: Urban agriculture, landscape and the sustainable city. 29th June 2001, The University of North London. Borough of Waltham Forest. - Woodlands Farm Trust. 2001. Report of the Trustees and Financial Statement for the Year Ended 31 March 2001. London.

22 UA-Magazine