**2. Hong Kong urban rooftop farming in a high-density city**

Within HKU's broad-based "edible roof" initiative which examined the rooftop farming phenomenon across Hong Kong, this specific research study examined eight urban rooftop farms within Hong Kong (including enterprise, social enterprise and individually oriented modes) to determine the nature and scale of the social values that urban rooftop farms could generate.

**105**

**Figure 1.**

*Google earth).*

*Social Value of Urban Rooftop Farming: A Hong Kong Case Study*

Hong Kong is an extreme example of high-rise high-density urban settlement, with severe contest for ground-level space, very high land values and a passive governance structure. Although HKSAR Government's New Agricultural Policy 2014 and Hong Kong 2030+ strategic planning statement do acknowledge urban rooftop farming practices within the general concept of urban agriculture, intention has focused primarily on economic productivity, and no specific institutional, regulatory or technical support is offered to the small-scale grassroot organizations that practice farming. Despite this, more than 60 urban rooftop farms have spontaneously appeared in the city since 2008 covering some 15,000 sqm of previously underutilized roof space [5]. The majority of the farms are located on industrial or institutional buildings within the older urban districts (**Figure 1**). Based on a definition of the physical and operational limits of rooftop farming practices and subsequent suitability assessment of all existing buildings in the territory, the potential farmable roof spaces that might exist within the city have been estimated at approx. 595 ha [5]. Although typically small-scale and disparate, these spaces are all in close proximity to large urban populations and collectively offer an expansive opportunity for generating social value (and

its attendant economic advantages) if activated for rooftop farming [33].

Physical and operational characteristics of the three modes of urban rooftop farming in Hong Kong were identified through systematic site survey and typological study (**Figure 2**). Social enterprise farms aim to promote social change through a sustained commercial business [34]. Social enterprises, such as City Farm and Fun n Farm, generate social impacts by renting out the planting plots to the public. Planting plots typically consist of shallow free-standing black plastic crates filled with lightweight soil, with bamboo or plastic pipe frames above supporting screen netting [33, 35]. Crops are selected and taken care of by farmers, although daily watering is undertaken by farm managers. Training courses (for different skill levels) and related social and craft activities are commonly offered. Farmers rent any number of boxes per month, depending on their ambition and commitment. All farms report extensive

*Locations of urban rooftop farms in Hong Kong, as of 2016 (data source: Mathew Pryor ongoing research and* 

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89279*

#### *Social Value of Urban Rooftop Farming: A Hong Kong Case Study DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89279*

*Agricultural Economics - Current Issues*

**Green roof**

√ √ Social

**Rooftop farms**

√ √ √ Community

√ √ √ Urban

√ √ √ Social

√ √ Social group

*Social value framework for urban rooftop farming.*

benefits

√ √ Improve mental health

√ √ Promote sustainable living √ √ Increase organic food knowledge

√ √ Experience health habit and diet √ √ Education Increase environmental

√ √ Gain practical skills by working

√ √ √ Provide visual aesthetic value √ √ √ Increase space using

recreation

improvement

√ √ Good for urban or building

empowerment

integration

√ √ Enhance parent and children

√ √ Create social solidarity among

√ √ Enhance community

√ √ Develop leadership √ √ Provide job opportunity to

√ √ Enrich aging life

√ √ Form social networks

√ √ Extension of the life expectancy

√ Diverse the multifunctions of

**Category Factors Social benefits**

Health Improve physical health

awareness

and demand

communities

comfortableness

of roofs

roof spaces

retrofitting

satisfaction

participation

communities

relationship

diverse groups

in urban rooftop farms

Provide extra open space for

Serve as a planning tool to fill vacant spaces in cities

Improve users/residents' life

Empower marginalized groups

**URF social value framework**

**Urban agriculture**

**104**

**Table 1.**

**2. Hong Kong urban rooftop farming in a high-density city**

social values that urban rooftop farms could generate.

Within HKU's broad-based "edible roof" initiative which examined the rooftop farming phenomenon across Hong Kong, this specific research study examined eight urban rooftop farms within Hong Kong (including enterprise, social enterprise and individually oriented modes) to determine the nature and scale of the

Hong Kong is an extreme example of high-rise high-density urban settlement, with severe contest for ground-level space, very high land values and a passive governance structure. Although HKSAR Government's New Agricultural Policy 2014 and Hong Kong 2030+ strategic planning statement do acknowledge urban rooftop farming practices within the general concept of urban agriculture, intention has focused primarily on economic productivity, and no specific institutional, regulatory or technical support is offered to the small-scale grassroot organizations that practice farming. Despite this, more than 60 urban rooftop farms have spontaneously appeared in the city since 2008 covering some 15,000 sqm of previously underutilized roof space [5]. The majority of the farms are located on industrial or institutional buildings within the older urban districts (**Figure 1**). Based on a definition of the physical and operational limits of rooftop farming practices and subsequent suitability assessment of all existing buildings in the territory, the potential farmable roof spaces that might exist within the city have been estimated at approx. 595 ha [5]. Although typically small-scale and disparate, these spaces are all in close proximity to large urban populations and collectively offer an expansive opportunity for generating social value (and its attendant economic advantages) if activated for rooftop farming [33].

Physical and operational characteristics of the three modes of urban rooftop farming in Hong Kong were identified through systematic site survey and typological study (**Figure 2**). Social enterprise farms aim to promote social change through a sustained commercial business [34]. Social enterprises, such as City Farm and Fun n Farm, generate social impacts by renting out the planting plots to the public. Planting plots typically consist of shallow free-standing black plastic crates filled with lightweight soil, with bamboo or plastic pipe frames above supporting screen netting [33, 35]. Crops are selected and taken care of by farmers, although daily watering is undertaken by farm managers. Training courses (for different skill levels) and related social and craft activities are commonly offered. Farmers rent any number of boxes per month, depending on their ambition and commitment. All farms report extensive

#### **Figure 1.**

*Locations of urban rooftop farms in Hong Kong, as of 2016 (data source: Mathew Pryor ongoing research and Google earth).*

**Figure 2.**

*Typological study of urban rooftop farm in Hong Kong (photo taken by Mathew Pryor and ting Wang).*

waiting lists. The depth of soil and exposure to wind limits species choice to some extent, but a wide range of leafy greens, climbing plants, root vegetables and herbs can be grown. Enterprise-oriented farms are operated by private companies and business or large institutions (universities, schools, hospitals) located on their own premises. Access to the farms is restricted to employees or institutional members. They are similar in physical form and nature to social enterprise farms but additionally provide leisure and social space for employees, with tables, chairs, etc. Individual rooftop farms were very small-scale and only found on residential buildings. Their form was typically more complex and less ordered, and both the form of the planter and the crop species were far more diverse. As they depend solely on the individual owner's willingness and availability, they were seen as being more vulnerable.

#### **3. Research design**

Based on this understanding of the local context, the research study was structured around a participant opinion survey and semi-structured interviews with the operators from five selected farms. The survey aim was to validate the preliminary urban rooftop farming social value framework and to quantify the intangible social values from the perspective of the users, including those with and without experience of farming. Subjects were randomly selected from the five farms and from the surrounding residential communities, respectively. A total of 108 answers were collected.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with farm operators from the five farms, in order to understand the monetary influence of social values in urban rooftop farming and to verify the findings from survey. Questions focused on topics such as modes of operation and costs, as well as physical arrangement and planting types. Farm cost data was used in cost-benefit analysis and "willingness to pay" based on contingent valuation methods and perception preference methods. As willingness to pay is influenced by the perceived utility, personal preference of use and socioeconomic environment of the subjects, the survey was designed to obtain the information about various degree of willingness and payments, preference of social values developed in framework and personal socioeconomic information including gender, employment, education and income levels.

#### **4. Findings**

The majority of respondents (77%) perceived social values to be the most important benefits of urban rooftop farming, compared with environmental values

**107**

**Figure 3.**

*Perception distribution.*

*Social Value of Urban Rooftop Farming: A Hong Kong Case Study*

**4.1 Social values with a preference for personal socialization**

empowerment (25%) were of less importance by respondents.

(58%) and economic benefits (10%). Women and the middle-aged (30–50) were found to be the predominant users of urban rooftop farms—by both number and time. This finding was confirmed through farm membership records and observations of farm managers. Meanwhile, the majority of farm participants were from

The perception of social values was complex, with individuals expressing degrees of perception toward the six different factors (**Figure 3**). However, personal socialization benefits were identified most strongly among the six factors. Health (53%) and education (62%) were the factors most perceived by respondents that directly link to the personal enhancement in social statues. Planning social welfare (40%), social group integration (40%), community recreation (35%) and social

Disparity of social benefit preferences reflects the difference between personal experience values and group conceptual values. Personal health and education are the most direct feelings obtained through daily activities; however, individuals perceive larger scale community and collective benefits indirectly. For instance, though social group integration was not perceived as very significant on the whole, the indicators for enriching the life of the aged and enhancing intergenerational relationships were perceived as highly significant because of the close personal feelings attached. "Developing leadership" and "providing job opportunities"

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89279*

middle- to high-income groups.

#### *Social Value of Urban Rooftop Farming: A Hong Kong Case Study DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89279*

*Agricultural Economics - Current Issues*

**3. Research design**

**Figure 2.**

waiting lists. The depth of soil and exposure to wind limits species choice to some extent, but a wide range of leafy greens, climbing plants, root vegetables and herbs can be grown. Enterprise-oriented farms are operated by private companies and business or large institutions (universities, schools, hospitals) located on their own premises. Access to the farms is restricted to employees or institutional members. They are similar in physical form and nature to social enterprise farms but additionally provide leisure and social space for employees, with tables, chairs, etc. Individual rooftop farms were very small-scale and only found on residential buildings. Their form was typically more complex and less ordered, and both the form of the planter and the crop species were far more diverse. As they depend solely on the individual owner's willingness and availability, they were seen as being more vulnerable.

*Typological study of urban rooftop farm in Hong Kong (photo taken by Mathew Pryor and ting Wang).*

Based on this understanding of the local context, the research study was structured around a participant opinion survey and semi-structured interviews with the operators from five selected farms. The survey aim was to validate the preliminary urban rooftop farming social value framework and to quantify the intangible social values from the perspective of the users, including those with and without experience of farming. Subjects were randomly selected from the five farms and from the surrounding residential communities, respectively. A total of 108 answers were collected. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with farm operators from the five farms, in order to understand the monetary influence of social values in urban rooftop farming and to verify the findings from survey. Questions focused on topics such as modes of operation and costs, as well as physical arrangement and planting types. Farm cost data was used in cost-benefit analysis and "willingness to pay" based on contingent valuation methods and perception preference methods. As willingness to pay is influenced by the perceived utility, personal preference of use and socioeconomic environment of the subjects, the survey was designed to obtain the information about various degree of willingness and payments, preference of social values developed in framework and personal socioeconomic information

including gender, employment, education and income levels.

The majority of respondents (77%) perceived social values to be the most important benefits of urban rooftop farming, compared with environmental values

**106**

**4. Findings**

(58%) and economic benefits (10%). Women and the middle-aged (30–50) were found to be the predominant users of urban rooftop farms—by both number and time. This finding was confirmed through farm membership records and observations of farm managers. Meanwhile, the majority of farm participants were from middle- to high-income groups.
