Growing Opportunities in Boston

Kathryn Entner

An analysis of the current urban agricultural movement in Boston

P.AD 910 Independent Study Suffolk University Spring 2013

Page |1

Contents

Introduction...page 2 Urban Farming in America, Then and Now...page 2 Benefits of Urban Farming...page 5 Urban Farming in Boston.....page 9 Inputs and the Production Process of Urban Farmingpage 13 Public Policy......page 20 Urban Farming as an Industry....page 24 Conclusion.....page 28 References.page 29 References for Figures.page 31

Page |2

Introduction Farming is no longer reserved for rural areas. City dwellers have picked up their trowels and are joining in the urban agricultural movement that has spread throughout the country, and Boston is no exception. Home to many different organizations, the city boasts many initiatives and programs from all sectors that encourage farming within Boston in a variety of ways. This study serves as a snapshot analysis of what the movement and industry currently looks likes in Boston as of this spring of 2013, and where it is heading. While it is impossible to study an entire industry that only focuses on Boston since most organizations have a scope beyond the city limits, this study will concentrate on those organizations that have a focus in the metro Boston area. The analysis will begin with an overview of what urban agriculture in America has looked like in the past and what the current movement involves, followed by the benefits of urban agriculture, a review of several organizations involved in Boston, the production process, and an industry analysis. Urban agriculture is defined in Boston as the use of a Lot for the cultivation of food and/or horticultural crops, Composting, Aquaponics, Aquaculture and/or Hydroponics generally for income-earning or food production activities1. This cultivation includes the use of rooftop farming, both open-air and enclosed structures such as greenhouses, as well as ground level production. While Boston does not consider farming for personal consumption, either in community gardens or on private residential land, to be included in the definition of urban agriculture, this study will include these activities since the goal is to analyze farming in its many variations throughout the city. For the purpose of this study, the keeping of hens and other livestock will not be addressed; however bees are included because of their relationship with crop production. Also, despite sometimes having different connotations and implications, the terms agriculture and farming will be used interchangeably in this study.

Urban Farming in America, Then and Now Urban farming is not a new development within the United States or even Boston. The most notable nation-wide movement was the use of Victory Gardens during World War I that encouraged communities to garden for their own consumption2. Since most of the commercially produced food at this time was

1 2

City of Boston, Changes in draft Article 89 since March 7, 2013 Working Group Meeting , p.3 City of Boston, Open Space Management Mission: Community Gardens

Page |3 sent abroad, the community gardens were a crucial effort that was brought back again during World War II. By the end of the war, an estimated 20 million gardens were established across the country, producing 40% of Americas vegetable supply. The Fenway Victory Gardens in Boston are the oldest and only victory gardens to remain in use since it began in 19433. The 1970s and 80s saw an increase in community efforts to preserve property rights and encourage community gardening in Bostons neighborhoods4. These efforts have continued over the past few decades, setting the stage for the trends in the food movement that have been growing in the past few years. The Buy Fresh Buy Local movement can be used as an indicator of the overarching national trend to purchase more local food. Since it began in 2003 by the FoodRoutes Network, the campaign states that its purpose is dedicated to reintroducing Americans to their food the seeds it grows from, the farmers who produce it, and the routes that carry it from the fields to their tables 5. This shift toward slow food, as opposed to fast food, and the knowledge of how food is grown and where it is sourced is something that has arguably been lost in the commercialization of our modern food system 6. There are many factors for the recent push for local food: there are environmental concerns over production and transportation, skepticism of commercial agriculture, and a desire to support local economies and therefore local farmers. Those who are interested in purchasing local food can expect fresher produce of higher taste quality than the commercially grown options, although buyers will typically pay a premium for the better flavor 7. The term locavore has become ubiquitous when discussing food systems and pref erences in America. It describes a person who chooses a diet consisting of food harvested within a 100-mile radius, a term first popularized during the World Environment Day in 20058. While the average American will most likely not describe themselves as a locavore, the desire for and interest in local food has begun to reshape the food industry, and with it urban agriculture. On the other end of the income spectrum, urban agriculture has also been reshaped as it addresses a very different need. There are significant shortages when it comes to having access to fresh food, and millions of Americans live in what has been referred to as food deserts. These areas have recently been redefined by the USDA as low-income areas where a significant number or share of residents is far from a supermarketusing mile and 1-mile demarcations to the nearest supermarket for urban areas9. There are several valid reasons why grocery stores move out of urban areas, beginning with the issue of cost and
3 4

Nordahl, p.136 City of Boston, Open Space Management Mission: Community Gardens 5 Buy Fresh Buy Local 6 Nordahl, p.10, 115-6 7 Steucek, Guy. 8 Ladner, p.12 9 Food Access Research Atlas, USDA

Page |4 availability of land. Grocery stores need to provide at least some space for parking as well as the store itself, and if someone has access to a car then they are also capable of driving a few more miles to a more desirable location for the store. In low income neighborhoods there is less per-capita spending on food, and often a declining population, neither of which make up for the meager 1-5% profit margins that the store can expect10. While the debate about whether the lack of access to a grocery store is synonymous with a lack of nutrition in ones diet will be saved for another research project, the fact remains that there are gaps in our current food system that leave out a significant portion of our population. Although Boston is more fortunate than a few other American cities when it comes to the number of food deserts, it is at the top of the list with Philadelphia for the fewest supermarkets per capita as of a 2001 study by the Food Trust11. The USDA recently developed an interactive Food Access Research Atlas, identifying the low income and low access layers in different segments of each county. Using and onemile increments to measure the distance a resident needs to travel to a supermarket in low income areas, Boston has only two one-mile segments in East Boston, but it does have many mile segments, although favorable when compared to Detroit or Los Angeles. The segments in Boston are mainly congregated in Roxbury, Dorchester, Jamaica Plain, and Mattapan, and for this reason many of the organizations that work to address food access issues are located in these neighborhoods (see map)12. Valerie Burns, the

Figure 1: USDA map indicating low income and low access segments
10 11

Ladner, p. 221-222 Ladner, p.218 12 Food Access Research Atlas, USDA

Page |5 president of Boston Natural Areas Network which owns many community gardens around Boston, says that they note an increase in community gardening when the economy is not faring well 13. Since there was already a concern to bring farms to these neighborhoods to provide fresh food for the residents, this could help explain the more recent increase of interest in community gardening, especially if these low income neighborhoods have felt the economic strains of the recent recession. Whatever the blend of factors may be, the result of this trend has been an increased desire for urban farming in order to supply the dense populations of city dwellers with more fresh and local food. Every city seems to take on urban agriculture in its own style to fit its particular needs and environment. In Portland, the municipal government has proactively encouraged farming within the city in a variety of highly visible ways. Several of these initiatives have included allowing fruit trees to be grown in public spaces, having harvesting parties that help prevent waste from these trees, and implementing programs that teach residents how to garden and encourage the production of local food 14. Detroit has begun to take back some of the citys numerous vacant lots , and many urban projects are transforming these plots into farming projects. The project with the most news coverage recently has been John Hantzs controversial plan to convert 200 acres of vacant lots first into lumber production, and then to expand into fruits and vegetables. The goal of this project is to reduce the number of vacant lots in Detroit in order to create scarcity of land to help rejuvenate the city15. The nature of urban farming in Boston has taken on its own form and identity, and this will be revealed through the identification of the groups and organizations that are involved in the movement and how they hope to change the future of farming in Boston.

Benefits of Urban Farming There are many benefits to urban agriculture beyond the aforementioned desire to increase our knowledge of how food is grown. There is also a growing concern over food security fueled by several recent incidences of e.coli and salmonella outbreaks in produce which sickened hundreds of people and called into question the safety and reliability of our centralized food system. The reasoning follows that a decentralized system of many small, local farms and garden plots simply could never have the potential of infecting that many people over so large a geographic area 16. While soil contamination is a large issue for urban farmers, which will be discussed in more detail later, the idea of sourcing ones food locally will help to reduce the exposure to such incidences that many people have become fearful over.
13 14

Gaines, Nancy. Nordahl, p.54, 112, 118 15 Dolan, Matthew 16 Nordahl, p.27

Page |6 Food security concerns are not limited to just safety issues, but also the reliability of food production. Subject to weather conditions and the growing season, producing crops can be a gamble unless there is some form of control over these conditions. In 2008 alone, California experienced one of the driest seasons in 80 years which hurt the many farms that spring, while Iowa suffered from heavy rains that ruined over 20% of their grain production 17. Not only do these irregularities hurt the farms, but they also usually result in increased food prices in order to make up for lost revenues. Greenhouses have allowed farmers to extend their growing season which in many areas can be vital in order to have the ability to grow at all. One such extreme case can be found in the Inuvik Community Greenhouse, located 125 miles north of the Arctic Circle in Canada which provides residents the ability to garden indoors despite the short growing season outside 18. Not only do greenhouses give colder climates longer growing seasons, but they also provide a climate-controlled environment where growing crops is not conditional on optimal weather conditions during the season. Although Boston is not quite as far north as Inuvik, it would still benefit from the benefits of an extended growing season that a greenhouse would supply. Marie Mercurio from the Boston Redevelopment Authority points to greenhouses as the future in farming, not only in Boston but across the country and internationally, for their extended seasons and controlled climates, as well as their ability to protect the produce from air pollution that is a concern in cities19. Greenhouses often can use hydroponic technology, a method of growing plants without soil but rather nutrient-enriched water, and this efficient use of resources with the optimal growing conditions can equate to much higher yields: One acre of hydroponic greenhouse can produce 600,000 pounds of food per year; thats ten times what a one-acre field could produce and theres no wasted fertilizer20. In urban areas where the cost of land, or a rooftop, will be significantly higher than in rural areas, the ability to produce more crops throughout the year makes greenhouses a more attractive option for the urban farmer. Vertical farming, which expands greenhouses in height rather than in floor space, is particularly beneficial to urban farming since it maximizes the use of the costly square footage. In Chicago, The Plant, a former meatpacking plant, is now home to an aquaponics system that cycles the waste from fish tanks to fertilize the vegetables in hanging rafts, and the clean water back to the fish tanks, which are also grown for consumption. In Sweden, a twelve story, triangular greenhouse named Plantagon will utilize

17 18

Nordahl, p.19 Ladner, p.64 19 Mercurio, Marie 20 Ladner, p.63-4

Page |7 mechanical tracks to carry the plants from the top floor down to ground level where they will be harvested, efficiently utilizing sunlight exposure on their way down 21. A green roof, one that is open-air as opposed to a greenhouse, offers many benefits to the building owner and the surrounding city. A green roof is a system of layers that is laid over an existing roof the top layer being vegetation of some type (see image)22. This layering helps to insulate the building which decreases the costs of heating and cooling, reduces its combustibility, and helps to preserve the roofs waterproof membrane, increasing its average lifespan two to three times. These benefits will help reduce the maintenance costs of the building as well as earn it LEED points for its environmental benefits. A green roof will also help to reduce the storm water runoff from the building, and this runoff can be used in the irrigation system for any gardening on the roof. Also, since the layering covers the black rooftop which is subject to intense temperature fluctuations during summer months, the green roof can help reduce the Urban Heat Island effect, where a city retains heat particularly in summer, since it keeps a more consistent
Figure 2: Green roof layering system

temperature23.

Urban farming on the ground will also have many environmental benefits, mainly around the reduction in greenhouse gases (GHG) that are produced on urban farms in comparison to conventional farming. Urban farming typically does not use large machinery which contributes to GHG emissions, and since soil naturally absorbs carbon, this will offset, and perhaps even help to reduce slightly, the CO 2 emissions in a city, depending on the amount of farms24. Bees are an important aspect of any type of agriculture, pollinating over 130 crops, including fruits and vegetables, as well as the alfalfa and hay that livestock consume, affecting over $20 billion of Americas food production each year. Honey bees have suffered from a disease which has decreased their

population, requiring many farmers to purchase the hives and bees necessary to complete their agricultural production. This is true for urban farmers as well as commercial farmers, and both will benefit from the pollination of their crops as well as the honey and wax produced in the hives 25.

21 22

Fletcher, Owen Higher Ground Farm 23 Recover Green Roofs 24 Growing Green, p.16 25 Wilson-Rich, Noah; A Good Beesness

Page |8 The greatest social potential for urban agriculture is its ability to turn vacant or unused plots of land into something that benefits the local community. Mentioned earlier, Detroit is the prime example of a city that is burdened with excess land, estimated at over a quarter of the citys square mileage, which strains Detroits already limited resources and real estate values. Taking advantage of the cheap land, urban gardens have flourished in the past few years, totaling almost 900 gardens in 201126. However, beyond just getting rid of these eyesores by putting the vacant lots to use, gardening in undesirable urban neighborhoods helps to strengthen the community as well as reducing violence. In 2000, Philadelphia began to reclaim and maintain about eight percent of the citys vacant lots by planting trees, installing fences, and providing regular maintenance. They began to see a reduction in violence near these areas, and it was not simply because the lots were no longer available as hiding places for guns. The number of calls to the police over minor public disturbances increased greatly near these areas as the residents began to feel more connected not only with the land but also with their neighbors. This reclamation of the community can also be seen at Chicagos Growing Home project, which is located in one of the poorest neighborhoods in the city. The farm sells most of its produce on the other side of town, but its employs the local residents, some of whom may be unable to find other employment because of past records. Growing Home started with the intention of bringing fresh produce to this food desert but has since modified its mission due to the lack of customers. They now use food as a tool to change individual lives and to change the community, which can be seen through the efforts of one employee, a former convict, who is helping is family and neighbors to build gardens in their own backyards27. While not every initiative may hire former criminals, the potential job creation is certainly another benefit that urban agriculture brings. The Conservation Law Foundation published a study in 2012 that examined the economic development potential for farming in the Greater Boston area. Their research is based on the use of fifty acres, which is about the equivalent of the Boston Commons, and well below the estimated 800 acres of private and publicly owned land that would meet the requirements for urban farming. The report finds that these fifty acres would create between two and five direct, on -farm jobs per acre, or 130-220 total jobs; create additional jobs in the agricultural services sector (equipment sales, composting and soil inputs, and food processing)[and] generate approximately 1.5 million pounds of fresh produce for sale into local marke ts28. While this may not seem like very many jobs, the effect would be scalable for additional acreage added. Also, many of the available spaces are in low-income

26 27

Voigt, Kate, p.545 Kotlowitz, Alex 28 Growing Green, p.4

Page |9 neighborhoods which would be beneficial to those communities if the farming followed the same principles as Chicagos Growing Home project.

Urban Farming in Boston As the Fenway Victory Gardens can attest, farming has long been a part of Boston s history and is positioned to become thoroughly integrated into its future. While the following is in no way a

comprehensive list of every organization and business that is involved, this section will highlight several that are currently involved in urban agriculture in Boston. The ones that are covered were chosen for their prominence in the city or as a representation of the other similar organizations. One non-profit that has helped to shape and influence what urban agriculture has looked like over the past few decades is the Boston Natural Areas Network (BNAN). Since it was established in 1977, BNAN works across the public, private, and non-profit sectors, along with community groups, with the mission to preserve, expand, and improve urban open space through community organizing, acquisition, ownership, programming, development and management of special kinds of urban land Urban Wilds, Greenways and Community Gardens29. Of the 172 community gardens in Boston, BNAN owns 59 of these, and leases plots in the gardens to community members. Rented out at $20-80 year, which covers the cost of water and other fees associated with the land, a recent study estimated that about $450 of produce could be grown from a plot each year. Focusing on neighborhoods such as Mattapan and Roslindale that have very few gardens, BNAN encourages production for the individual or familys own use and advocates for the community to become involved in the gardens, incorporating them into the neighborhood and becoming invested in it. BNAN also hosts numerous educational programs, open to the public and for all ages and all types of urban lands, many of which focus on teaching people farming skills such as their Master Urban Gardener and Seed, Sow & Grow programs 30. They also offer

educational programs on healthy cooking, composting, community organizing, and one that even teaches Boston Public School teachers about gardening with students, along with a plethora of other events that encourage the introduction of and participation with the many green spaces within the city 31. The Food Project is another organization that has strong roots in Boston s food system since it began in 1991. Also a community-based non-profit organization, the Food Project farms in Lincoln, Beverly, Boston, and Lynn. They grow produce that is both donated to hunger relief organizations and sold at
29 30

Boston Natural Areas Network Chaffee, Karen 31 Boston Natural Areas Network

P a g e | 10 farmers markets and community supported agriculture (CSA) shares that are available at each farm location as well as several other locations within the city. Though also supported by many volunteers, the Food Project focuses on their youth programs to teach responsibility, leadership, and an understanding of food accessibility in their community with an intentionally diverse group of teenagers 32. City Growers is a for-profit organization that farms on many small, formerly vacant lots around Boston, and aggregates together their production to sell to restaurants, local markets, and their affiliate, City Fresh Foods, which provides meals to schools, elder services, child care services, and other institutional meals33. With the intention to help revitalize the communities where their farms are located, City Growers uses a model that is both economically and environmentally sustainable. With farms in Dorchester, Roxbury, and a future site in Mattapan, their goals include job creation and increasing the food security and access for these communities34. Recover Green Roofs is a for-profit company located in Somerville that provides design consulting, installation, and maintenance services for green roofs and living green walls across New England and New York. Using the layering process discussed earlier, the green roofs all have environmentally conscious designs that address issues such as preventing nutrient runoff from the soil. Most of Recovers clients are restaurants that use the green roofs to garden for their own use; however they also have many schools, homes, businesses Recovers create residential and that services green other use to

roofs

specific to each ones needs. Ledge Restaurant in Dorchester is one of their highlighted clients, using their rooftop

garden to produce much of the vegetables and herbs

Figure 3: The rooftop garden at Ledge Restaurant

that

are

then

brought downstairs to their

32 33

Food Project, The Growing Green, p.8 34 City Growers

P a g e | 11 kitchen and served in the restaurant 35. Both Ledge and Recover work closely with Green City Growers who provided the installation of the garden at the restaurant and continues to deliver maintenance services for the garden. Green City Growers partners with Recover on many rooftop projects in the Boston area, but the former also has ground-level services for many schools, businesses, and residential gardens. Providing the initial equipment such as raised beds, cold frames, and the fencing to keep out critters, Green City Growers also offers the services to install and maintain the gardens for those who lack the farming knowledge or even just the time but still wish to receive the benefits from the gardens. They also provide educational programs that teach students of any age how to grow their own vegetables and maintain their gardens36. Higher Ground Farm is another for-profit rooftop farm, located atop the Boston Design Center in the Seaport district, and is set to be the second largest rooftop farm in the world. Working with Recover to build the farm, Higher Ground will begin its first growing season this spring with the expectation to grow about 100,000 pounds of food during the season37. The farm will sell the produce to local, high end restaurants, as well as having CSA shares for local residents to purchase. Higher Ground plans to be very community oriented: they have a partnership with the Boston Collaborative for Food and Fitness to subsidize share for those who cannot afford the full payment. They also give the option to purchase and donate shares of produce to the South Boston Community Health Center38. ReVision Urban Farm is a part of ReVision Family Home, a shelter for homeless mothers in Dorchester and a division of Victory Programs which is a non-profit that focuses on services for the homeless population in Boston. When the home was started in 1990, they also began to help farm the community garden next door,

eventually taking over the stewardship of the garden while providing food for the shelter and job training for the women. The farm has now expanded to include the vacant lot across the
Figure 4: Lettuce growing in the greenhouse at ReVision Farm
35 36

Winterer, Mark Green City Growers 37 Feshazion, Faivan 38 Hennessey, Courtney

P a g e | 12 street from the house which now includes a greenhouse, as well as a lot in another part of Dorchester. ReVision hosts a youth program over the summer, internships for shelter residents, and many educational programs throughout their community to teach farming skills. ReVision also partners with a few other local farms to pool together their combined produce to sell at farmers markets, their farm stand, and a CSA offering. The CSA shares can be purchased at two different price points, the full cost of the share or a price-adjusted share for lower-income needs, to allow for anyone who desires the fresh produce to have access to the shares, regardless of income39. Although it is a Montreal-based company, Lufa Farms has been searching for a building to establish a Boston location to expand its large-scale rooftop greenhouse operations 40. Utilizing different growing methods that maximize the growth of each plant, Lufa employs science and technology to create a variety of growing climates within the same greenhouse, all while avoiding the use of pesticides and managing their water and energy use as efficiently as possible. Their produce is then sold through CSA shares to individuals, restaurants, and catering services all year long 41. Freight Farms is another company that looks to maximize food production in a controlled environment, but rather than greenhouses, this company uses recycles shipping containers. Fitted with LED lights and a drip irrigation system, Freight Farms sells the containers that can fit in almost any space, such as a parking lot or rooftop, and have the added benefit of being able to be stacked one on top of another to maximize ground space, and thus food production42. Many farms around Boston also are home to bee hives, and there is one company that will not only provide the thousands of honey bees and their hive, but also the routine care if the farmer prefers. Best Bees has hives all over the city and even on Cape Cod, at universities, private residences, and many businesses including the Fairmont Copley Plaza and the Four Seasons Hotel 43. They also partner with Green City Growers to bring the hives onto many of those farms, including Ledge Restaurant 44. Using non-aggressive Italian honeybees which good honey producers, the farmers will not only benefit from the honey and wax production, but also the pollination that the bees will provide to their produce. A non-

39 40

Olivetti, Jolie Kirsner, Scott 41 Lufa Farms 42 Kirsner, Scott 43 Wilson-Rich, Noah 44 Green City Growers

P a g e | 13 profit organization, Best Bees uses the proceeds from its operations in their research to find a vaccination for the disease that has been declining the honeybee population45. Overall, the endeavors in Boston are typically on a smaller-scale than what can be seen in some cities such as the Brooklyn Grange in New York, the worlds largest open-air rooftop farm, and The Plant in Chicago with its aquaponics system. Higher Ground Farm, though, may begin to change that archetype, as well as Lufa if it does establish a branch in Boston. Since most of the farms are too small to sell directly to grocers or provide enough to meet the demands of a restaurant, a few businesses help to aggregate multiple farms production and then distribute it around the city. One such company is FoodEx who connects buyers with sellers and then provides the logistics and distribution with their fleet of seven trucks. FoodEx recently partnered with Oregon based FoodHub, which will provide the online portion of what they are calling an online dating site for the local food industry 46. Previously, FoodHubs platform was primarily producer driven but the joint venture looks to also include a buyer side platform to increase the transparency about order and shipping costs47. Metro Pedal Power also provides delivery service by bicycle around the city for a variety of courier service needs which include some farms and CSA share delivery48. Providing an eco-friendly option for distribution, they operate all year long, and Chef Peter Davis from Henriettas Table Restaurant is just one customer who commends their reliability regardless of the weather49.

Inputs and the Production Process of Urban Farming The following graphic is a chart that attempts to map out the various aspects and inputs involved in the supply chain for the urban agriculture sector in Boston. Just as it was stated before, this is not an attempt to include every business and organization currently operating in the city, but rather it serves to organize and detail the vertical steps of the supply chain 50. The inputs into the production process for urban farming can be divided into three categories: materials, informational resources, and funding. The materials needed to begin farming vary from the seeds, soil,
45 46

Wilson-Rich, Noah FoodEx 47 Dietz, Jonathan 48 Metro Pedal Power 49 Davis, Peter 50 The chart also does not include the value-adding process, which would come either before or after the distribution process. While some farms participate in value-adding, such as turning raw vegetables into salsa, the majority of the farms that are covered in this study did not mention that they do this, and I chose not to include it to keep more of a focus on the growing and selling of raw produce.

P a g e | 14 and fertilizer needed for the actual crop production, to the equipment such as any shovels, wheelbarrows, and irrigation systems. If raised beds, a greenhouse, or green roof is utilized, then the construction of these will also need to be considered. Green City Growers is one such supplier for raised beds, cold frames, and other growing equipment51, whereas Freight Farms can provide the shipping container for a greenhouse52. Also, since many of the farms also include a bee hive to make the most of their crop production, this would be another input into the start of the farming process.

Hospitals Hotels Ledge Restaurant The Food Project City Growers ReVision

The Food Project Green City Growers Higher Ground Farm ReVision Ledge Restaurant City Growers Best Bees

Katsiroubas Customers Own Company

Grocers

Capital Investments Bank Loans Crowdsourcing Grants Donations

Restauran
Public Schools Hospitals Universities

Funding

Inputs

Production Process
Figure 5: Supply chain map for urban agriculture

51 52

Green City Growers Freight Farms

Buyers & Retail

Metro Pedal Power

Aggregation & Distribution

Consultants Design Magazines & Websites Workshops/ Programs

Informational Resources

City of Boston Universities

Farmers & Production

Private Residences

Land Owners

Seeds Soil/Fertilizer Equipment Construction materials Bees

Materials

ISD
BRA
BNAN

Public Policy BPHC MA FPC

Farm to School Program SNAP/BBB
FoodEx/Food Hub

BWS
Individuals (Community Gardens)

Farmer's markets / stands

P a g e | 15 Many urban farmers are new to the industry, and even those familiar with farming may not have all the expertise to transition to the urban environment. As a result, there has been a surge in informational resources available for anyone wishing to become involved, from the individual who wants to grow basil on their kitchen sill to the more commercial farmer. ReVision farm and BNAN are among many other organizations that offer workshops and other programs that are open to the public that teach basic farming skills for those who have a backyard or community garden plot 53. There are also numerous books and magazines that the burgeoning farmer can subscribe to for all the latest information and techniques, most notably Urban Farm magazine which encourages self-sustainability for urban dwellers 54. Then of course there are websites that can be found by the dozen that will provide any aspect of information or chronicle the experiences of other urban farmers. For those who are involved in agricultural production beyond the basic hobby level, there are other resources such as consultants in design, engineering, or other highly skilled areas which will benefit more commercial productions. Particularly if a farm requires any

construction such as a greenhouse or if it is located on a roof, then these types of projects would need a consultant such as Recover Green Roofs to help assess the needs and requirements for such a project before construction or farming were to begin. Many of these farming projects require a solid foundation of capital funding before they can begin. Whether the organization is for profit or not, urban farming is expensive, and particularly for the projects that will not see profits from the produce grown, funding is essential to the start of any organization. In the not-for-profit sector, there is an estimated $5 million in grants and donations each year in Boston toward farming55. Many of the other farmers have had to look to bank loans to get their enterprise started, and some have gotten very creative with their fundraising. Although they are for-profit companies, both Higher Ground Farm and Freight Farms have raised over $20,000 and $30,000, respectfully, on the fundraising website Kickstarter56. Some of the farms that require immense construction and have high tech systems to help increase production have begun to seek out capital investments, and vice versa. Venture capitalists are beginning to look at urban farming ventures as a means to disrupt traditional commercial agriculture. Investing in such projects and helping to scale up urban production was the theme at one venture capitalist conference in Silicon Valley, Agriculture 2.0 57. While Boston is not at the forefront of these high-volume productions, it is noteworthy that the national movement may be headed in that direction, especially if companies such as Lufa Farms intend to establish multi-city operations.

53 54

Olivetti, Jolie; Karen Chaffee Urban Farm 55 Gaines, Nancy 56 Lets Raise the Roof (Farm)! 57 Woody, Todd

P a g e | 16 The production process in urban farming can be categorized into four subdivisions: the land owners, farmers and production, aggregation and distribution, and the buyer and retailers. This chart is an oversimplification of the processes because each organization and farm operates on a different model than the next; it does, however, help to bring some clarity to the various factors involved in the process. The land owners were given their own category since many of the farms and gardens are on land that is under some type of contract to be used by the farmer or organization. As it was noted earlier, BNAN owns the land where many community gardens exist, leasing plots to the residents in those communities, while the organization does not do the farming itself 58. The city of Boston also owns several of the plots of land that is now being used for farming: in an initiative to encourage more urban agriculture, several city-owned plots were given to a few organizations including ReVision Farm and City Growers on a five or ten year lease59. Many institutions have sought to utilize their grounds and rooftops to help source some of their food, in particular universities and hospitals, as well as some up-scale hotels. Then there are several organizations that own, in part or entirely, the land in which they operate, including the Food Project, City Growers, and ReVision Farm. Ledge Restaurant could also be included in that list since the farm is located on the roof of the restaurant, although it is unclear whether they own their property or lease. Some organizations lease the land, or roof, where they are located, such as Higher Ground Farm which leases the rooftop from the Boston Design Center 60. Other organizations, such as Green City Growers, do not own or lease the land they farm, but rather are hired to provide the farming set up and maintenance at the business, school, or restaurant that owns the land and desires the garden 61. This is the same for Best Bees who sets up the hive on the property and then provides maintenance services and honey harvesting for the business or home owner62. Once the produce has been harvested, if it is not being used on-site, for example some of ReVisions production supplies the shelter itself, then it needs to be transported elsewhere. Sometimes there also needs to be a step to aggregate together the produce from many small farms in order to fulfill the demand of a customer. FoodEx provides both of these services, sometimes picking up the produce from the farm, and sometimes the farmers bring the produce to their warehouse. Once the food has been collected from its various sources, FoodEx delivers to their buyers which include many Whole Foods grocery stores,

58 59

Chaffee, Karen Olivetti, Jolie 60 Hennessey, Courtney 61 Green City Growers 62 Best Bees

P a g e | 17 independent markets, North Eastern University, Salem State University, and the public schools in Weston, Belmont, and Brookline63. Katsiroubas Bros. is another food distributor in Boston that focuses on local food producers and vendors, working closely with their producers to establish strong working relationships64. ReVision and the other farms that they partner with coordinate their own aggregation of the produce for the CSA shares, and then transport it themselves since they own a van 65. Higher Ground Farm will begin its CSA by having the customers come to their site in the Boston Design Center to pick up their share of produce, thereby eliminating the need for any distribution66. The last step and category of the production process are the retailers or other buyers of the produce. Farmers markets in Boston have more than doubled in the past few years, from 13 in 2004 to 28 in 2011 67. The Boston Public Market Association, which looks to open in June of 2014, will be an indoor, 30,000 square foot market that will be operated year-round right next to Faneuil Hall68. An indication of the growing interest in local and fresh food and the number of farms in the city, the markets are one of the more visible retailers for the local produce. Another would be farm stands on the farms own property; however the stands seem to typically serve residents in its immediate vicinity rather than being the destination that customers seek out such as the markets or grocery stores 69. There are neighborhood grocery stores that source their produce locally, as well as the Whole Foods grocery chain, which FoodEx delivers to 28 locations in New England70.
Figure 6: Door advertising the Boston Public Market

Many restaurants boast menus full of locally sourced ingredients so that they can serve fresh food of the highest quality, and often for the sustainable economic and environmental reasons as well. Peter Davis has been the chef at Henriettas Table in Cambridge since he began the restaurant in 1995, and he takes pride in offering the highest quality meals and his support of local farms. He works closely with his suppliers, addressing everything from the seeds for the upcoming season to the volumes in each order to
63 64

Dietz, Jonathan Ruuttila, Eero, et al. 65 Olivetti, Jolie 66 Hennessey, Courtney 67 Farmers Markets 68 Boston Public Market Association 69 Olivetti, Jolie 70 Dietz, Jonathan

P a g e | 18 keep costs down71. Recover Green Roofs cites these relationships as one of the many reasons restaurants are interested in green roofs: the ability to have this relationship with the farmer, or in Ledges case the ability to harvest your own food, creates marketing value for the restaurant and it benefits the quality of the work environment for the chefs72. Institutions that serve meals regularly are also on the purchasing end of this movement, including many hospitals and universities. Public schools are also becoming more involved with the help of the

Massachusetts Farm to School program. Fostering the relationships and benefits from supporting local farmers and providing nutritious school meals, the program now has over 250 participating school districts and 110 farms73. Some schools participate in an urban ring buying group where they combine their orders together so that they can purchase in volume74. Since each organization operates on a different model, there are some farms that may only participate in two or three steps of the production process, or a single company may provide more than one service, which is why a few may be listed under more than one category. Ledge restaurant, for example, since it has its own rooftop garden, could be listed under each category: the restaurants rooftop is the garden, the chefs help to harvest the food which is then carried downstairs to the kitchen and cooked to serve in the dining area. On the other hand, those who lease plots in community gardens harvest food for their own consumption, thereby only participating in the first two steps of the process. Each organization operates according to who their end customer is and in a way that serves their mission and goals. One could argue that many of the organizations involved in the various stages of the supply chain provide another output other than produce, and that would be education. Some organizations have very structured programs, such as the Food Project, BNAN, and ReVision Farm, since education is a part of the organizations mission to teach skills, educate about farming and nutrition, outdoor appreciation and stewardship, or other similar goals. Best Bees has interns from local colleges throughout the year, and Higher Ground Farm has plans to also take on interns once the farm has developed75. Green City Growers considers education to be part of their companys strategy to help grow business since they often speak at different events and conferences 76.

71 72

Davis, Peter Winterer, Mark 73 Growing Green, p.45 74 Ruuttila, Eero, et al. 75 Wilson-Rich, Noah; Hennessey, Courtney 76 Rose, Lyndsey

P a g e | 19 Some of the education has been much less formal, and often is necessary in order to win over community support. While many residents may approve of the concept of urban farming, occasionally resistance can be found when it is in close proximity to residential areas, spurring not-in-my-back-yard (NIMBY) sentiments. ReVision Farm has maintained good relations with the neighbors near the shelter and greenhouse throughout the years, however since their other plots of land are in other parts of town they make a specific effort to introduce themselves to abutters and attend neighborhood associations to address any concerns77. Recover Green Roofs does education in their marketing and design phase to help dispel any fears of leaking roofs and structural concerns 78. Best Bees not only hosts interns and educates the new bee owners how to care for the hives, but founder Noah Wilson-Rich has given numerous talks and interviews about the company and his research in order to inform the public about bees and their importance to agriculture, most notably featured on TED talks79. Many of these organizations are also involved in some capacity with the Boston Redevelopment Authority in helping to influence and draft a new article to address zoning regulations for urban agriculture. After reviewing the sector, those who are involved and the customers they are serving, it is difficult to say whether the urban farming movement is trending in a particular direction of both mission and end customers. The farming efforts in Boston seek to address both food access concerns in low-income areas as well as serving the niche preferences displayed by the locavore movement and other similar, more expensive options. While the non-profit organizations tend to get more interest and news coverage because of their good efforts, there are far more for-profit ventures and restaurants, though they may be on a smaller scale than the many acres of the Food Project. Boston is home to both trends within the urban farming movement, and while it may not be important as to which trend is more popular, it is interesting to note that many of the organizations are involved in both aspects. Higher Ground Farm was started with the intention of providing fresh produce to a local food pantry along with selling to high-end restaurants and their purchased CSA shares80. and ReVision Farm sell CSA shares at both standard and subsidized price increments. The Food Project The two farms

also sell to restaurants or on farm stands that help to sustain their production of food for their shelter or local food pantries81. City Growers mission is to help revitalize the communities in which they grow through job creation and access to fresh food82. One process supports the other, and in Boston the efforts

77 78

Olivetti, Jolie Winterer, Mark 79 Wilson-Rich, Noah 80 Hennessey, Courtney 81 Olivetti, Jolie; The Food Project 82 City Growers

P a g e | 20 are intertwined. It may be perhaps because the people who are involved in producing fresh food believe that everyone should have access to it, or because the community efforts to increase food access are only sustainable when balanced by selling to upscale retailers and restaurants. One journalist, Richard Longworth, sees an ulterior motive by some advocates for the local movement: Youve got a lot of the locavore trendy people, who just hate big farming, who are using this, who are using the misery of people in big citiesI know a lot of people who are hungry who are not interested in local farms 83. It may be too early to tell if this movement is a trend that will fade, or if it will continue to gain momentum and present a real challenge to commercial agricultural production. Either way, public policy is changing in favor of urban farming, and only time will prove whether these practices really are sustainable and have the purchasing support of the public.

Public Policy In 2002, an Executive Order established the Massachusetts State Sustainability Program which encourages sustainable practices by the government. Over the past decade, this program has influenced public policy across the state, including a grant to the Boston metropolitan area from the Environmental Protection Agency in 2005 to encourage sustainable regional planning84. Since then there have been numerous programs initiated to stimulate both local farming and purchases. Previously mentioned, a pilot farm program took a few plots of city-owned vacant land, and has leased them to City Growers and ReVision Farm on either five or ten year leases to help increase their production 85. The Buy Local Groups have encouraged residents to change their purchasing behavior 86. Massachusetts also authorized farmers markets to accept Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to encourage lowincome families to purchase fresh produce. Taking the program even further, Boston teamed up with the Food Project to create the Boston Bounty Bucks Program, which matches SNAP purchases at farmers markets, dollar-for-dollar up to ten dollars87. As the previous chart describes, there are many programs and offices that influence and regulate the steps of the farming process, as can be expected for any industry and especially for one that involves the production and selling of food. The Inspectional Services Department (ISD) and Boston Public Health Commission (BPHC) are two major offices that are involved in the oversight of the farming industry
83 84

Files, Emily Goldstein, Mindy et al. 85 Mercurio, Marie 86 Buy Fresh Buy Local 87 Amuda, Aisha

P a g e | 21 since they cover many aspects that urban farming reaches. The Massachusetts Food Policy Council (MA FPC) is another, more recently added council that has been charged with analyzing each step involved in order to improve coordination among state agencies that regulate all aspects of the food system 88. For those who are involved in the farming, however, the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) is the main office that has oversight over this step in the production process. As cities and suburbs developed in the early 20 th century, pushing agricultural production farther away from residential and commercial areas, zoning was then also adapted to these specific land uses, separating one from another89. The BRA has taken on the task of drafting new zoning regulations in Article 89 that will facilitate urban agriculture in the city. Community gardens are not included in the rezoning since there already exists a zoning district, Open Space-Community Gardens (OS-CG), which allows people to farm for their own personal consumption. Headed by Marie Mercurio and Tad Read, the project planning team developed a working group consisting of local farmers, experts, advocates, and neighborhood representatives to consult on the drafting of the article. Representatives from BNAN, the Food Project, and City Growers are a few of the participants in the working group that help to advise the BRA through this process90. The BRA has hosted open public meetings each month for the past year at City Hall to discuss the revisions and implications. This spring Article 89 will be brought out into the neighborhoods for review and feedback, with the expectation to go before the BRA Board and Zoning Commission for review this summer. This process of having the neighborhoods review the article is in line with Mayor Thomas Meninos intention to allow each neighborhood to be a part of the approval process, rather than a blanketed approach by the city. The article intends to not only shape and foster urban agriculture, but it is also a part of the economic planning of Boston and will be used as a long-term planning initiative to bring about the many benefits associated with the farms, including community building, education, beautification, and access to local food91. The rezoning group acknowledges that urban agriculture occurs on land that is already zoned for commercial or residential use, so rather than creating an open space zoning district specifically for agriculture, similar to the one already in use for community gardens, the article seeks to change the allowances for commercial or residential zones. This will allow for agriculture to take place in

conjunction with commercial and residential zones, rather than being exclusive to just one purpose which
88 89

Growing Green, p.47 Nordahl, p.3 90 Working Group Meeting #13 91 Mercurio, Marie

P a g e | 22 is what the OS-CG zone specifies92. Depending on the existing zoning for the land, the size of the farm, and whether it will be at ground level or on a rooftop, the new zoning would make the possibility of a farm either allowable or under conditional use, previously having been deemed a forbidden use (see charts). The article will also put specific requirements on the placement and requirements for the varying aspects involved with farming such as the proximity of bee hives, hens, and compost bins to property borders and the allowable height of a greenhouse structure 93.

Figure 7: Proposed zoning allowances in Article 89, Urban Farm at ground level

The article will also include soil safety protocols since plants absorb nutrients as well as contaminants from the soil in which they are grown. Since Article 89 addresses the regulation of produce grown to be sold to the public, this is a concern particularly for growing in an urban environment. City land has been exposed to decades of building and construction materials that could potentially leave behind traces of chemicals and materials in the soil which could be absorbed by crops, including heavy metals such as lead and pesticides. Even raised beds and other growing methods that require importing clean soils have the potential to be re-contaminated due to the run-off of water from other areas or wind that transfers contaminated soil94. Since the standards that soils will have to meet are still being developed by the BPHC, the draft for Article 89 does not currently include it. During the March open meeting, a representative from the BPHC presented their initial draft of protocols for soil safety. There was much concern from the attendees, representing many of the organizations previously mentioned, over the frequency and cost of the testing standards that were proposed. It was mentioned that these standards were much higher than other residential lands, and that the soil in the urban lots were essentially being treated as hazardous waste

92 93

Working Group Meeting #13 City of Boston, Changes in draft Article 89 since March 7, 2013 Working Group Meeting 94 Growing Green, p.19, 20-21

P a g e | 23 sites95. The draft testing protocol states that commercial farmers must have their soil tested once per year, the first time requiring a sample for every 1,000 square feet, and the following years would require one sample for every 5,000 square feet of growing area 96. Despite the intent to protect the public from consuming produce grown in soil that may have been exposed to hazardous building materials, the costs associated with this level of testing would be unaffordable by many of the small farms in the city, even those that operate as for-profit ventures, and subsequently would be deterring to any new farmers97. As a result, the soil safety protocols are still under review to find an agreeable measure to use as a standard. The other part of Article 89 that has a great impact on the farmers is the Comprehensive Farm Review (CFR). Required for any ground level, rooftop farm or greenhouse, the CFR was created to ensure that Urban Farms are sited and designed in a manner that is sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood98. The CFR will require a site visit from the BRA to the farm to ensure that regulations will be followed. The fire department had also recently expressed concern over issues of having dry plant matter on a rooftop farm and planned to conduct an analysis to be included in the CFR. Boston Water and Sewer (BWS) is not included in the CFR since it is a separate commission from the rest of the city, but would also be a requirement in order to get approval for a farm 99. The review process is stated to take no longer than 45 days, which is a shorter time frame than an approval process has been previously, and once this is completed and the farm deemed appropriate, the BRA will submit its approval to ISD100. Marie Mercurio from the BRA acknowledges that Boston is somewhat behind many other major cities in America in regards to having regulations already established for urban agriculture, a sentiment felt by many of those involved in this movement. However, the amount of research that has gone into each aspect of Article 89, from the soil safety protocols to the fire departments concern for a rooftop farm code, far exceeds what most other cities have addressed. For better or worse, Boston has approached this topic much more conservatively, which is typical for the city, and it hopes that those affected by the rezoning will be better off because of the precautions that it is taking. Mercurio also mentioned that people have been appreciative that the BRA has allowed the public to be receptive to the idea of having

95 96

Working Group Meeting #13 City of Boston, Draft Soil Safety Protocol for Urban Farms 97 The exact costs for the testing were not defined; during the meeting several possible testing sites and fees were presented as possibilities, none of which were favorable to the attendees. 98 City of Boston, Changes in draft Article 89 since March 7, 2013 Working Group Meeting, p.10 99 Working Group Meeting #13 100 City of Boston, Changes in draft Article 89 since March 7, 2013 Working Group Meeting , p.11

P a g e | 24 urban farming become a part of their neighborhoods through the review process, rather than pushing the issue forward 101. Mark Winterer from Recover Green Roofs agrees that despite the slow process to bring about the changes in zoning laws, it is important that the process is done well. He pointed to the fire departments desire for a new code for rooftops as the largest challenge that Recover now faces: the Boston fire chief would like a fire protection engineer hired to asses each roofs combustibility and prevention. Since this would be an added cost, either directly to Recover or indirectly through their clients, Winterer noted that although it would unrealistic to expect, it would be beneficial if Boston had a structural engineer that could provide the city with any analysis needs. He also mentioned that Newton and Reading have in place a method to charge building owners for storm water runoff, since it costs the cities to treat the water, and Boston could implement a similar system to charge for storm water utilities. This would not only incentivize building owners to have green roofs, but would also bring in more revenues for the Boston Water and Sewer Commission102. Jolie Olivetti, the farm manager for ReVision Farm, expressed some concern over the nature of all the regulations surrounding farming. Since ReVision has been operating for many years before there were more formal requirements, she says that some of the policies could potentially be a barrier for some of the smaller farmers. Beyond the number of regulations that farms now have to adhere to, there is also no singular department that will provide the information that a beginning farmer would need to get started, and Olivetti believes that a streamlined process would be helpful to those wishing to get involved 103. Article 89 will certainly have many restrictions and requirements on any future urban farming in Boston, however by making it an allowable use in many areas this will remove the foremost barrier, being the current status of forbidden use in the city. Mercurio believes that many people are waiting to see the outcome of Article 89 before they get started on any projects, and she hopes that the rezoning will open the doors for many newcomers to farm in Boston104.

Urban Farming as an Industry It is very difficult to be profitable in any type of farming, and urban agriculture only presents more challenges and costs than traditional, large-scale agricultural productions. To start, the cost of land is
101 102

Mercurio, Marie Winterer, Mark 103 Olivetti, Jolie 104 Mercurio, Marie

P a g e | 25 much higher in cities, even those with recessed land values such as Detroit, and it is typically only available in small lots in between buildings, rather than the acreage that could be bought for a fraction of the price in rural areas. Even those farms such as City Growers that utilize many smaller plots to aggregate together their production face the challenge that the plots are usually not close to one another and often may be in different neighborhoods. Once the land is secured, then begin the challenges around zoning codes for any structures, soil quality, and the many other regulatory hurdles the farmer may face before they plant any seeds. If the farmer plans to develop a rooftop farm, this presents a whole other set of regulations that they need to ensure the building meets for weight load capacity, water proofing, and fall protection, which only an estimated 5-15% of the existing buildings in Boston meet 105. Greenhouses, irrigation systems, hydroponics, and any other system or structure that will help increase production also means higher starting costs, and either more loans or fundraising which are required in order to begin. Some believe that over time technological advances will help to bring down the costs associated with greenhouses and other capital-intensive farming techniques, but how long this will take is uncertain106. Once the farm is finally growing and harvesting, even if they are able to sell CSA shares, which help to guarantee cash flows for the season, or restaurants that are willing to pay full price for the fresh produce, it is still hard to remain profitable since food can only fetch so high of a price. Even for the traditional, commercial food productions, it is an extremely competitive field where profit margins are typically so low that it is often challenging to maintain profitability 107. Despite all these barriers, there are many people and organizations that are willing to take the chance and be a part of the urban farming movement, and there remain many opportunities for entrepreneurs to become involved. A few organizations have approached their business models creatively in order to keep costs low or find a niche in the farming market. Higher Ground Farm will focus on growing the basics, greens, tomatoes, and herbs, rather than branching into more exotic produce which some CSA shares offer. This will not only maximize the use of their space for those crops that will remain in demand, but also ensure that CSA purchasers will remain satisfied with what they receive in their shares 108. Green City Growers has eliminated the need for costly land or rooftops since they provide the farming equipment and services for gardens on the hiring resident or businesses property 109.

105 106

Winterer, Mark Fletcher, Owen 107 Introduction to the Food and Beverage Industry 108 Hennessey, Courtney 109 Green City Growers

P a g e | 26 Since selling produce does not come with a high profit margin, farmers could look to other specialty crops that do have higher profits, and Mark Winterer of Recover suggests that marijuana could be one such plant110. This is a feasible opportunity that could soon be considered if the legal progress toward increasing allowances for marijuana continues. Possession of up to an ounce of marijuana has already been decriminalized and is now just subject to a civil violation and fine. Also, a bill has been filed for Massachusetts to allow the possession and cultivation of marijuana to adults 21 years and older, and to be regulated like alcohol, following the example of Washington and Colorado111. Although this cash crop may have higher prices than other typical produce, the professional growers of marijuana in Washington and Colorado are finding that this too is a hard market to stay profitable. The surge of interest in growing marijuana now has an estimated 2,000-4,000 producers, which has led to a decline in price because of the competition. Facing the same startup costs as any other farmer, marijuana growers also have strict state regulations, including extensive background checks for the managers, which will all take away from the profit margins112. Depending on if and how Massachusetts was to legalize the use and production of marijuana would certainly affect the profitability of growing this plant. There remains a lot of potential for urban agriculture, particularly in Boston, as long as there are vacant lots, unused rooftops, and people who are interested in sourcing their food nearby. There is especially potential for capital investors to back these ventures, whether it is directly in farming, another step in the production process, or an input to the industry. Investors are interested in the transformation of the food industry and backing those entrepreneurs who will be able to provide both strong returns on their investment and potentially a new order to our food system. While this may be quite idealistic at the current state of the urban farming industry, if the shift to urban production can prove to be substantial and have the publics support, then a shift in policy regarding agricultural subsidies may also help urban farmers to turn a profit. If the government recognizes the small-scaled farms as equally important to providing our food supply, then urban farmers may be able to apply for state or federal subsidies to ensure that the farms stay in production. The urban farming sector has a very distinct characteristic to it, and that would be the relatively noncompetitive and very collaborative nature of the many participants involved. The movement is still comparatively new to Boston, so while this may be due to the fact that the competition among the urban farmers is still growing, it is more likely because every organization relies on strong working relationships with their partners in the industry. Most of the organizations are very mission-oriented,

110 111

Winterer, Mark Marijuana Policy Project 112 Campoy, Ana

P a g e | 27 even those who are for-profit, and that helps to encourage them despite the many barriers the organizations face. It is also a very labor-intensive industry to work in, even for those who are not doing the actual farming, but Chef Davis says that when you really believe in the importance of local food, all the extra work is worth it113. That sentiment is felt throughout the city, and it lends to a distinct culture to those involved in urban farming. Michael Porters Five Forces are used to analyze the competitiveness of an industry and whether or not it is an attractive market to enter. Since the urban agricultural movement is gaining momentum, this analysis will provide anyone who may be interested in entering this sector with an overview of its general environment. The analysis reviews the bargaining power of customers, bargaining power of suppliers, threat of substitute products, threat of new entrants, and the competitive rivalry within the sector. The bargaining power of the customer is very high. Customers can be considered businesses such as grocers and restaurants as well as the people who purchase from them. Even upscale retailers are price sensitive, and grocers and their customers are even more sensitive to increases in costs. There are no costs to the shoppers to purchase produce from another grocery store or farm stand, and unless a retailer has a formal contract or agreement their ability to switch suppliers is also simple and at little or no cost to the retailer. The bargaining power of suppliers is moderate. Certain inputs such as highly skilled consultants and labor costs are high, as well as the technologies and equipment that may be used. The fact that Boston still has relatively few farmers involved in urban agriculture, however, suggests that the suppliers do not have much power to be able to leverage one farm against another and are subject to the demands and quantity that the farms need. The threat of substitute products is high. Not only do urban farms have to compete with traditional farms whose prices are generally lower, but fresh produce as a food category has to compete against all other food types in the grocery store as well as restaurants including fast food chains. Particularly in food deserts where there are no grocery stores, in contrast fast food restaurants tend to be more prevalent. The threat of new entrants is moderate. There are significant barriers to enter the market considering the low prospect of profitable returns and this does provide some protection for those already established. New ventures that are able to secure capital investments or have an established working business model such as Lufa Farms will find it much easier to enter the market. With the increasing popularity and

113

Davis, Peter

P a g e | 28 interest among investors to consider urban agricultural endeavors, this will potentially ease the entry for many new businesses. The competitive rivalry within the sector is low. As it was described before, those currently involved with urban farming in Boston feel that the movement is new enough that there is plenty of business to be shared among the different organizations. Coupled with the collaborative nature and desire to keep strong business relationships among the organizations suggests that it will take a while for the industry to grow strong enough to begin to break down this culture and make the competition more aggressive. Competition against traditional farming remains strong, though the urban farmers have countered this by finding the niche retailers that wish to source locally. A business looking to start in this industry in Boston is presented with many challenges, but there remains plenty of opportunity for entrepreneurs. Having adequate funding or investors is crucial along with a sustainable business model. The successful company will be able to find a niche role for them to play in the system, either as a part of the production process or providing a specialty input or other function.

Conclusion This is an exciting time to be evaluating the current status of urban farming in Boston. On the precipice of launching a new zoning code that will usher in new organizations with differing missions and goals, this will also begin to shape how urban agriculture will grow and become incorporated into the city. In order for this industry to become a sustainable and permanent part of the local food system, there will need to be even greater public support and perhaps more policy changes that will allow the organizations to flourish. The educational efforts that most of these organizations provide will also be fundamental to encouraging these shifts. Boston, along with the many other cities that are home to such farming efforts, stands to benefit from the many opportunities that this industry would bring as it continues to grow and mature.

P a g e | 29 References A Good Beesness. FinancialTimes.cc. BeesFree Inc., 28 Feb. 2012. Web. 12 April 2013. <http://financialtimes.cc/bees/gen/pdf/beesfree_inc_general_report.pdf>. Amuda, Aisha. Boston Farmer Market Incentive Programs: Increasing Access to Fre sh and Local Produce. TheFoodProject.org. The Food Project, Feb. 2011. Web. 31 Dec. 2012. Annear, Steve. Boston to get very first roof -top farm, will be second largest in the world. Bostinno.Streetwise.co. BostInno, 14 Nov. 2012, Web. 8 April 2013. Best Bees. BestBees.com. BB, 2013. Web. 14 April 2013. Boston Natural Areas Network. BostonNatural.org. BNAN, 2006. Web. 12 April 2013. Boston Public Market Association. Boston Public Market.org. BPMA, n.d. Web. 12 April 2013. Buy Fresh Buy Local. FoodRoutes.org. FRN, n.d. Web. 12 April 2013. Campoy, Ana. The Pot Business Suffers Growing Pains. The Wall Street Journal 20-21 April 2013, Eastern ed.:A1, A12. Print. Chaffee, Karen. Personal Interview. 5 March 2013. City Growers. CityGrowers.WordPress.com. CG, n.d., Web. 12 April 2013. City of Boston. Boston Public Health Commission. Office of Public Health. Draft Soil Safety Protocol for Urban Farms. BostonRedevelopmentAuthority.org. Boston Public Health Commission, 5 Feb. 2013. Web. 8 Feb. 2013. City of Boston. Boston Redevelopment Authority. Office of Economic Development. Changes in draft Article 89 since March 7, 2013 Working Group Meeting. BostonRedevelopmentAuthority.org. Boston Redevelopment Authority, n.d., Web. 25 April 2013. City of Boston. Parks and Recreation Dept. Office of Public Property. Open Space Management Mission: Community Gardens. CityofBoston.gov. Boston Parks and Recreation Dept. Sept. 2002. Web. 1Jan. 2013. Davis, Peter. Personal Interview. 27 Feb. 2013. Dietz, Jonathan. Personal Interview. 21 Feb. 2013. Dolan, Matthew. New Detroit Farm Plan Taking Root. Online.WSJ.com. The Wall Street Journal, 6 July 2012. Web. 24 Jan. 2013. Farmers Markets. CityofBoston.gov. CB, 2013. Web. 14 April 2013. <http://www.cityofboston.gov/food/farmers/>. Feshazion, Faiven. Urbanites combat climate change with rooftop farms. Tv.MSNBC.com. MSBNC, 23 Feb. 2013, Web. 7 March 2013. Files, Emily. The sprouting of the urban agriculture movement in Fenway. Boston.com. The Boston Globe, 14 Dec. 2012. Web. 1 March 2013.

P a g e | 30 Fletcher, Owen. The Future of Agriculture May Be Up. Online.WSJ.com. The Wall Street Journal, 15 Oct. 2012. Web. 7 March 2013. Food Access Research Atlas. United States Department of Agiculture, 1 March 2013. Web. 12 April 2013. <http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-access-research-atlas/about-theatlas.aspx#.UXnZu7WG2uI >. FoodEx. ORFoodEx.com. ORFE, n.d. Web. 12 April 2013. Food Project, The. TheFoodProject.org. TFP, n.d. Web. 14 April 2013. Freight Farms. FreightFarms.com. FF, 2012. Web. 12 April 2013. Gaines, Nancy. Urban Growth: In Boston, farm -to-table doesnt have to leave your street. Improper.com. The Improper Bostonian, n.d. Web. 1 Jan. 2013. Goldstein, Mindy, Jennifer Bellis, Sarah Morse, Amelia Myers, Elizabeth Ura. Urban Agriculture: A Sixteen City Survey of Urban Agriculture Practices Across the Country. Law.Emory.edu. Turner Environmental Law Clinic at Emory Law School, 1 June 2011. Web. 1 Jan. 2013. Green City Growers. GrowMyCityGreen.com. GCG, 2012. Web. 26 April 2013. Growing Green: Measuring Benefits, Overcoming Barriers, and Nurturing Opportunities for Urban Agriculture in Boston. CLF.org. Conservation Law Foundation, July 2012. Web. 1Jan. 2013. Hennessey, Courtney. Personal Interview. 27 March 2013. Higher Ground Farm. Higher-Ground-Farm.com. HGF, 6 Nov. 2011. Web. 28 April 2013. Introduction to the Food and Beverage Industry. PlunkettResearch.com. PR, 2013. Web. 28 April 2013. <http://www.plunkettresearch.com/food-beverage-grocery-market-research/industry-trends>. Kasdon, Louisa. Homegrown and Hyper-Local. StuffBoston.com. Phoenix Media Communications Group, 11 June 2012. Web. 28 March 2013. Kirsner, Scott. Firms plant hopes on urban garden space. BostonGlobe.com. The Boston Globe, 1 July 2012. Web. 1 March 2013. Kotlowitz, Alex. There Grows the Neighborhood. MotherJones.com. Mother Jones, July/Aug. 2012, pp.38-42. Web. 7 March 2013. Ladner, Peter. The Urban Food Revolution. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers, 2011. Print. Lets Raise the Roof (Farm)!. Kickstarter.com. KS, 15 March 2013. Web. 28 April 2013. <http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/highergroundfarm/lets-raise-the-roof-farm>. Lufa Farms. Lufa.com/en. LF, 2013. Web. 28 April 2013. Marijuana Policy Project. MPP.org. MPP, 29 April 2013. Web. 29 April 2013. <http://www.mpp.org/states/massachusetts/>. Mercurio, Marie. Personal Interview. 7 Feb. 2013. Metro Pedal Power. MetroPedalPower.com. MPP, 2009. Web. 16 April, 2013.

P a g e | 31 Nordahl, Darrin. Public Produce: The New Urban Agriculture. Washington: Island Press, 2009. Print. Olivetti, Jolie. Personal Interview. 12 Feb. 2013. Recover Green Roofs, LLC. RecoverGreenRoofs.com. RGF, 2013. Web. 18 April 2013. Rose, Lyndsay. Personal Interview. 25 Feb. 2013. Ruuttila, Eero, Anthony Grein, Paul OConnor, Hannah Matthews, Jamey Lionette. Buyer Seminar SBN Buy Local Food Trade Show & Seminar. Seaport World Trade Center, Boston. 19 March 2013. Steucek, Guy. Hooray for Urban Farming. LancasterFarming.com. Lancaster Farming, 23 March 2013. Web. 8 April 2013. Urban farming taking root in Boston. WCVB.com. WCVB The Boston Channel, 10 Aug. 2012. Web. 1March 2013. Voigt, Kate A. Pigs in the Backyard or the Barnyard: Removing Zoning Impediments to Urban Agriculture. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review 38.2 (2011): pp.537-565. Web. 7 March 2013. Wilson-Rich, Noah. Personal Interview. 15 Feb. 2013 Winterer, Mark. Personal Interview. 26 Feb. 2013. Woody, Todd. Silicon Valley investors place bets on sustainable ag. Grist.org. Gri st: A Beacon in the Smog, 27 March 2010. Web. 1 March 2013. Working Group Meeting #13. Boston Redevelopment Authority. City Hall, Boston. 7 Feb. 2013. Urban Farm. HobbyFarms.com. HF, 2013. Web. 16 April 2013. References for Figures Title page picture: Peltz, Lauren. Personal Photograph. Date unknown. Figure 1: Food Access Research Atlas. Map. Ers.USDA.gov. United States Department of Agriculture, 28 Feb. 2013. Web. 28 April 2013. < http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-access-researchatlas/go-to-the-atlas.aspx#.UX_KUbWG2uI >. Figure 2: Entner, Kathryn. Personal Photograph. 16 Feb. 2013. Figure 3: Ledge Kitchen & Drinks Restaurant Dorchester, MA. Photograph. RecoverGreenRoofs.com. Recover Green Roofs, LLC, 2013. Web. 28 April 2013. < http://recovergreenroofs.com/?projects=ledgekitchen-drinks-restaurant-boston-ma >. Figure 4: Entner, Kathryn. Personal Photograph. 12 Feb. 2013. Figure 5: Entner, Kathryn. Chart. April 2013. Figure 6: Entner, Kathryn. Personal Photograph. 18 April 2013. Figure 7: City of Boston. Boston Redevelopment Authority. Office of Economic Development. Changes in draft Article 89 since March 7, 2013 Working Group Meeting. BostonRedevelopmentAuthority.org . Boston Redevelopment Authority, n.d, p.6. Web. 25 April 2013.