We would want to use this chance to express our gratitude to our advisor Jose Alfredo Ramirez, and other tutors Clara Oloriz, Eduardo Rico. We would want to sincerely thank you for your knowledge, counsel, and kind assistance in helping us shape our ideas and this endeavour. We also appreciate the unwavering help from Daniel and Elena, our technical tutors. We value the opinions expressed by each and every outside juror.
We also appreciate the assistance from outside groups including Community Farm Bristol, Sustain, Avon Wildlife Trust, Wakelyns, Wildfarmed, Agile Homes, and Ecococon, whose knowledge and insights were of a great help to the project.
We would like to express our gratitude to our teammate Antonio José Garaycochea, who collaborated with us on this project from January to June 2023. His contributions significantly influenced the project, drawing parallels and making valuable inferences.
Landscape Urbanism
MArch 2023 - 24
Architectural Association school of Architecture
Fig 1 Green Fields of Barley, England
Fig 2 / Urban Farming in La Havana
Source The Guardian
In the UK, approximately 70% of the land is destined for agriculture, with conventional monoculture dominating being the dominant form. Despite such a large proportion of agricultural land, the UK is heavily dependent on international food imports. This reliance on monoculture and international imports contributes to a considerable global footprint and also generates ecological disruptions, such as loss of biodiversity.
Greenbelts, due to their strategic location adjacent to cities—the primary drivers of demand—, are uniquely positioned to address these challenges. This thesis aims to investigate how existing policies can be modified to generate an agroecological transition, placing greenbelts at the centre. This will, in the process, strengthen the bond between urban centres and the surrounding rural areas, as well as redefining “Intensification + Enterprise Stacking” within the context of sustainable agriculture.This transition promises the advantage of shortened supply chains and creating closer connections between local businesses and the land. First, selected precedents that have shaped the proposal will be explained. Subsequently, we will examine the prevailing circumstances causing the disconnect between cities and greenbelts. An exploration into the current policies and their implications on agroecology will follow. Finally, we will explain our proposal for potential policy modifications, with a specific focus on the context of the Bristol Green Belt and its relevance to cereal crops.
Fig 3 / Green belt- UK
Source:https://www.showhouse.co.uk
Marot - Taking the Country’s side
1.3..Cuban peri-urban farming Revolution
Fig 4 / Agroecological farm in UK
Source : Shared Assests
3.1..The 7 year Plan
3.2..ELM Schemes
3.3..Evaluation
Fig 5 / The Community farm, Bristol
Source Jegan
4.1..Overview
4.2..Enterprise Stacking + Intensification
4.3..Case studies
4.4..Community Farm - Bristol
Fig 6 / Bristol’s Green belt
Source Jegan
5.1..Bristol Soil
5.2..Types of Greens in Greenbelt
5.3..Bristol Ecological corridors and policies
5.4..Farm Clusters
Fig 7 / Bristol’s Green belt
Source Jegan
Planning for a Planet of Fields means putting more agriculture in cities a total shift to agroecology making agriculture more pleasant and rural areas a little more urban, encouraging cities to have a sustainable relationship with their hinterlands reorienting national-level planning and laws of value to ensure the priority of humanity is locking CO2 into the Earth, and using agriculture to produce food as use-values for people rather than exchangevalues to enter the maw of Western accumulation. It means drawing on the best of the past, not as curio, retrograde traditionalism, or out of nostalgia, but to find the way to a better future.”(1)
6.1..Overview
6.2..Modification in ELM actions
6.3..Ecological catalogue
6.4..Modified ELM actions across typologies
6.5..Ownership
Fig 8 / Kernza
Source Kernza.org
7.2..Perennial Grains - Kernza
7.3..By-Products of Kernza
7.4..The Case of Bread
7.5..The case of Straw
7.6..Farm Clusters - Kernza
– Max Ajl,
Precedents
Reactions to the Industrial city Sebastien Marot-Taking the Country’s side Cuban peri-urban farming Revolution
The project’s precedents include the prevailing disconnect between cities and their surrounding environments, exploring the causes, and examining various models with distinct objectives. These antecedents, dating back to 1890 and more recently in 1990, serve as the foundation for comprehending the reasons behind such divergence and for exploring models with differing goals. Through a meticulous examination of these historical instances, we have acquired a nuanced understanding, offering a precise rationale and contextual insights within the UK for the implementation of our projects.
Source The Guardian
Fig 2 Urban Farming in La Havana
Reactions to the Industrial city
Both The Garden City and Broadacre City emerged in response to the challenges posed by industrial metropolises, envisioning idealized urban environments that differed in how they integrated elements of rural and urban living.
Ebenezer Howard suggested highly planned, selfcontained communities that combined the best aspects of town and country with the Garden City in 1898. His approach was highly influenced by the idea of decentralization and polycentricity, proposing a “radial distribution of small cities around a larger central city, with each city separated by a form of proto-Green Belt.”(2)A balance between housing, industry, and agriculture was intended to be achieved by this distribution, and the concentric design gave priority to effective transit and the preservation of the natural environment.Within this model the green belt prioritized local agriculture, serving the dual purpose of preventing urban sprawl and also providing a space for farming. However, the vision of a fully self-sustaining garden city was not realized. This was in large part due to the heavily planned topdown approach that it inherently had and that implied financial challenge, changes to housing policy, and vast urban migration (3)
Furthermore, the concept came about at a time when housing and access to open space were of prime importance and, although those are still relevant, policymakers today have a very different context to which they must respond. “While decent housing and access to open spaceare still important, other issues such as social inequality, the exclusion of sectors of society from the opportunities of their neighbours, poor employment prospects, poor quality housing, disparities in health and life expectancy, obesity, air quality, and sustainability are the new ‘wicked issues’ facing urban policymakers.”(2)
In contrast, Broadacre City, initially introduced by Frank Lloyd Wright in 1932, took a markedly different approach. Wright’s strategy leaned towards decentralization, placing a significant emphasis on individualism and the importance of automobiles In Broadacre City, each family is allocated at least one acre of land, allowing them to engage in farming on their plots. However, the extensive horizontal expansion of roads in this model may have hastened environmental degradation.
Fig 9 Garden City, Territorial Map
Source Ebeneezer Howard
Fig 10 / Garden City, Impressions by Sara Dunn
Source The Behance
Fig 11 / Broadacre City Plan
Fig 12 / Broadacre City Perpective
Source Frank Llyod Wright
2. Bishop, P., Perez, A. M., Roggema, R., & Williams, L. (2020). Repurposing the Green Belt in the 21st Century. Repurposing the Green Belt in the 21st Century. UCL Press. https://doi. org/10.2307/j.ctv13xprpt
3. Bates, Lisa K., Housing: Planning and Policy Challenges’, in Randall Crane, and Rachel Weber (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Urban Planning, Oxford Handbooks (2012; online edn, Oxford Academic, 18 Sept. 2012), https://doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780195374995.013.0025
Garden City - Ebenezer Howard
Broad acre city - Frank Lloyd Wright
Fig 13 / Infiltration
Source Sebastian Marot
Infiltration: “This is the approach, engaged in the many ‘urban agriculture’ initiatives, which invests the surplus or neglected surfaces of existing conurbations: wastelands, rooftops, parks, embankments, etc. Without questioning the logic and realities of the current urban condition, these initiatives take hold of food production, supply and consumption in order to initiate collectives and solidarity practices in the uprooted territories ofmetropolises.” (3)
Reactions to the Industrial city
In 2019, Sebastién Marot and his team opened an exhibition titled “Taking the Country’s Side”. In it, they propose four possible urban scenarios for a future relationship between city and countryside,with each one fundamentally differing in its attitude towards growth.(3)The remaining sections of this thesis will worktowards similar visions, but specifically doing so in relation to greenbelt and agricultural policy.
3. Didelon, V. (2022). Sébastien Marot, Taking the Country’s Side: Agriculture and Architecture. Critique d’art.https://doi. org/10.4000/critiquedart.92073
Fig 14 /Negotitation
Source Sebastian Marot
Negotiation: “Agricultural areas are thought of as integral components of cities, which in turn are designed from the territories that feed them. In this perspective of ‘agricultural urbanism’, the approaches of town planning and agriculture renegotiate their respective jurisprudence and renew them in order to reinvent each other.” (3)
Fig 15 / Incorporation
Source Sebastian Marot
Incorporation: “This is the orientation of those who believe that the solution lies in pursuing urban concentration and the intensification of the technological path. Super greenhouses, vertical farms, GMOs, above-ground production, hydroponics. In this futuristic scenario, metropolises become the control towers of a countryside emptied of its inhabitants.” (3)
Fig 16 / Succession
Source Sebastian Marot
Secession: “This is the more radical and willingly agrarian approach of those who question the hegemony of the metropolis. Leaving the city in searchof autonomy. To this nebula of initiatives can be attached a whole series of movements of emancipation and/or community rooting of a political nature,such as the ‘Zones to Defend’ or the groupings of voluntary communes.” (3)
After Cuba broke away from the Soviet Union in 1989, its green revolution agricultural system collapsed due to food and oil shortages. The transportation systems, machinery, and pesticide manufacturing facilities that were crucial to Cuba’s agriculture industry were essentially shut down. Prioritizing organic farming, an emphasis on edible crops, and leverage of peasant labour, The Cuban Government, together with grassroots citizen participation achieved a transformation from conventional farming to what is now posited as the “world’s largest working model of a semi-sustainable agriculture”, with over 35,000 hectares for urban farming(4). Following the crisis, the government supported and subsidised establishments that promoted urban farming and organic practices, including urban veterinary clinics, compost production sites, and agricultural stores.
The agricultural ideologies of Garden City and Broadacre City have remained mostly theoretical, while the Cuban model emerged out of need and has shown to be successful.
Cuba relies less on mechanised transportation than the Garden City, which envisions self-contained communities but fails to incorporate localised agriculture on the same scale. Additionally, the notion of Broadacre City strongly relies on the vehicle.
The Cuban model prospered primarily because it brought together urban organic farming, community involvement, and government support for the industries that these first two depend on, making it more adaptable to abrupt shifts in the socioeconomic landscape..
Cuban Peri- Urban Farming
UK Context (Greenbelts)
Greenbelts in the UK
Soil Grading & Landuse
UK Food sytem
UK Land ownership
England has fourteen greenbelts in total.
The greenbelts in the UK, positioned in close proximity to cities and situated between urban and rural areas, were selected as the contextual framework to elaborate on this concept. Presently, these UK greenbelts serve diverse purposes, including agriculture, recreation, and ecological preservation. The ecology of the greenbelt is heavily altered over the time period as the needs evolved.
Fig 19 Greenbelt
Source https://www.showhouse.co.uk
Green Belts in the UK
12.6 % of the total land in England is designated as Green Belt.
In the UK the Green Belt is a land use designation that surrounds urban centres. Its main purpose is to maintain open green spaces and prevent the city’s uncontrolled outward expansion, but has other tangent effects, such as promoting urban regeneration and helping to reduce demand for local service infrastructure.
In practice, areas that have been designated as part of the “Green Belt” have strict restrictions as to the type of developments that are allowed within them. In general, new developments in these areas are not permitted unless exceptional criteria have been met. However, the area that the green belt covers is subject to revision and can change in response to local council objectives (5), with demand for housing being one of the key drivers in recent times.
Fig
Origins of Green belts
12.6 % of the total land in England is designated as Green Belt.
After World War II, greenbelt policy became a significant component of UK urban planning. Public acceptability and popularity were mostly driven by concerns about the loss of recreational natural green spaces and the increasing significance of sustainability.
Nonetheless, since the policy’s inception, public opinion has changed. Over time, some have come to view what was once thought of as a ring of rural resistance to urbanisation as an urban container, putting aside its natural relationships and quality as a region for the city to manage its resources. This change in perception can be traced to the ideals of the “Garden City” by Ebenezer Howard, towards the beginning of the 20th century, where he emphasized the physical limit of the city, as well as the physical limit of agricultural space.(3)
Some contend that despite its successes— which include containing urban sprawl and preserving rural villages surrounding cities—Green Belts are a contributing factor in the current housing crisis. Greenbelts’ future appears dubious in light of current political perspectives, which favour developing peri-urban territory as a viable site for development over protecting the environment.
Car ownership increases 14 fold.
3. Didelon, V. (2022). Sébastien Marot, Taking the Country’s Side: Agriculture and Architecture. Critique d’art.https:// doi.org/10.4000/critiquedart.9207
Garden City movement – Ebenezer Howard proposes Garden Cities surrounded by Green Belts.
Formation of CPRE, one of whose earliest campaigns was against urban sprawl
First Green Belt proposed in an official planning policy by the Greater London Regional Planning Committee “to provide a reserve supply of public open space and of recreational areas and to establish a Green Belt or girdle of open space.”
Sheffield Green Belt designated by local government.
Town and Country Planning Act, allowed local authorities to control changes in the use of land from undeveloped to developed uses.
40% increase in England’s population
Green Belt policy for England was set out in Ministry of Housing and Local Government Circular 42/55 which invited local planning authorities to consider the establishment of Green Belts in their area.
Metropolitan Green Belt fully designated in local plans.
Completion of M25 motorway, running largely through the Metropolitan Green Belt.
PPG2 amended to add positive objectives for Green Belt land. Current version of PPG2 issued.
Government policy on Green Belts is contained in Planning Policy Guidance 2 (PPG2) which is the current responsibility of the department of Levelling up, Housing and Communities.(6)The five purposes of Green Belts, set out in PPG2, are:
1. To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas,
2. To prevent neighbouring towns from merging with one another,
3. To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment,
4. To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns, and
5. To assist with urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.
According to CPRE, the majority of the area within green belts have mainly been used for agriculture. In principle, this is a use that, not only preserves the green and “open” character of these areas, but it also facilitates the production of food in close proximity to urban centres(7) However, as we will see in coming chapters, due to the nature of the UK’s food system this is not necessarily the case at present.
Apart from agricultural land, greenbelts also include water bodies and recent and historical woods that are important for biodiversity, sequestration of carbon dioxide, leisure activities, and resource management (such as water reservoirs). These regions are made up of tiny urban agglomerations and villages that have managed to retain their historical identity.
Greenbelts as Containers
London’s Greenbelts
Fig 26 By Jegan London
London’s Greenbelt Profile
Bristol’s Green belts Manchester’s green belts
Fig 27
28 By Jegan By Jegan
by Khusbhoo
London’s green belts
Fig 25
Soil Grading
In terms of elevation, England is divided into highland, midland and lowland areas. Lowland being more suitable for agriculture and covering the majority of South eastern UK.
The cropping pattern is also influenced by soil, where Agricultural land grading is an important figure.
The Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) is a system employed within England and Wales, and used to grade the quality of farmland. It revolves around the long-term limitations imposed by either physical or chemical characteristics, considering factors such as climate, soil characteristics, and flood susceptibility.(8)It is a system that becomes instrumental in deliberating planning decisions because the National Planning Policy Framework mandates authorities recognize the benefits of prime agricultural land during development proposal evaluations. The ALC categorizes land into five distinct grades with and that is graded 1 considered to be the most adaptable and able to support a wider variety of crops requiring the lowest input to produce a higher yield:
Grade 1: Premium land of impeccable quality, virtually free from limitations.
Grade 2: High-quality land with minor impediments, potentially influencing crop yield and cultivation processes.
Sub-grade 3a: Respectable quality land, presenting moderate constraints that can guide crop choices and their respective yields.
Sub-grade 3b: Moderately quality-stricken land, grappling with pronounced limitations that dictate both crop choices and yields.
Grade 4: Sub-par land plagued by profound limitations, severely capping the range and yield of crops.
Grade 5: Inferior land, besieged with extreme constraints, relegating its use primarily to perennial pastures or rudimentary grazing, bar occasional pioneer forage crops.
Landuse
Urban areas, which include buildings, roads, and other infrastructure, cover about 6-7% of the UK and these areas are home to a significant majority of the population. With regards to forests and woodlands, they cover about 13% of the land area in the UK, as the island’s large forested areas were cleared over centuries. This percentage accounts for both commercial forestry and conservation efforts.
As mentioned previously, more than half of the UK’s total land is classified as being for agricultural use. This includes both pasture land for livestock and arable farmland. Considering that the ALC grading locates the highest graded land towards the east it stands to reason that most of the arable farmland is also in this area while most of the grazing land is located in the west where there is a generally lower ALC grading. This leads us to the topic of the UK’s food system and looking with more detail at the composition of this agricultural land, as well as its relationship to its immediate context and the rest of the world.
UK Food System
The United Kingdom’s heavy reliance on food imports from far-flung corners of the world is not only unsustainable, but it also disconnects us from the land, the people who cultivate it, and the seasons that govern its bounty.
As is made evident by the National food Strategy, A large part of the Uk’s agricultural land is used to produce animal feed and almost half of the land required to feed the UK is located overseas. The latter is referred to as an “Extended Footprint.” This leads to a heavy dependence on international imports, relying on imports especially for out-of-season produce, certain staples, and specialty products.(9)
Because the cost of farming is outsourced, nationally grown food is very dependant on government subsidies in order to compete, and it ends up being sold at supermarkets with prices that don’t reflect its real cost of production. Along with the environmental impact that these globalized supply chains have, all this puts the Uk in a challenging situation with regards to long term food security.
Global cropland loss 2010-2022
Global cropland gain 2010-2022
UK Import percentages against a country’s total export
Fig 32 /Global Cropland Loss 2010 -2022
Fig 33 /Global Cropland gain 2010 -2022
Fig 31 /Global Cropland gain 2010 -2022
Fig 34 /UK Import percentages
By Jegan
By Jegan
Source National Food Strategy
By Jegan
Global Footprint of UK UK’s extentded footprint Global cropland
Fig 35 /Global Footprint of UK
By Jegan
Apart from concerns related to globalized supply chains, there is an additional issue at hand: These supply chains, driven by market forces, primarily promote the monoculture of crops that guarantee the highest profitability. Such an approach poses serious threats to soil health, accelerates waterway pollution, and leads to a substantial loss in biodiversity.
Despite the east of England presenting optimal conditions for diverse agriculture based on the Agricultural Land Classification (ALC grading), it is disconcerting to observe that a significant portion of this versatile land is dedicated to the monocultural cultivation of specific crops. Primarily, these include oilseed, wheat, oats, and barley, collectively representing a substantial portion of the UK’s cultivated produce.
Since the industrial revolution, England has experienced a notable concentration of its population in cities and urban areas. Presently, the population of England is growing exponentially at a rate of 0.34% per year. The Greater London area alone accommodates over 8 million residents, not only making it the most populous city in the UK but also one of the most densely populated in Europe (10). The chart below illustrates the population of England’s eight largest cities.
Due to this high population density, the majority of the demand that propels the UK food system emanates from cities. This unique positioning of greenbelts enables them to play a crucial role in addressing the challenges associated with a globalized food system. It prompts us to delve into the relationship between cities and their hinterlands.
Fig 36,37 Fig 38,39,40,41 Fig 42,43,44,45
Arable & Grassland Poultry, Cattle, Sheep, Pigs Oats, Oilseed,Barley,Wheat By Antonio By Antonio By Antonio
10. Greater London Authority. (2021). The London Plan 2021. https://www.london.gov.uk/ programmes-strategies/planning/london-plan/ new-london-plan/london-plan-2021
Arable & Monoculture
Population Growth
To what extent may we hope to produce in the Greenbelt the amount of food that is consumed in cities? To solve the difficulties of a sustainable food and agricultural system, Growing Communities offers a concept called “The food zones” in response to this question. The model’s goals are to reduce the amount of energy, fossil fuels, and resources needed for the current food system while also promoting community and job creation in both rural and urban areas..
The model serves as a place hierarchy that distinguishes the best places and methods for sourcing various food kinds. With a focus on growing foods most suited for close proximity, it starts in urban areas and gradually spreads outward, allocating 17.5% of production to the peri-urban area. Seasonal and regional variations give way to the growing of prioritized food items ensuring minimal waste and processing, as well as optimal food distribution(10)
The farms that are envisioned in this paradigm rank as follows:
A) Minimal input, leaning on organic approaches.
B) Small-to medium-sized farms that are primarily human-scaled operations.
C) A range of farming techniques that incorporate different livestock and crop systems.
D) A concentration on human labour, reinforced by wisely chosen technological and mechanical help, all based in rigorous scientific principles.
By Antonio
10. Greater London Authority. (2021). The London Plan 2021. https://www.london.gov.uk/programmesstrategies/planning/london-plan/new-london-plan/ london-plan-2021
1. Urban
Salad, Leafy greens, Fruits
2.Peri-Urban
Fruti and veg : Horticulture, sme field scale
3.Rural Hinterland
Mainly field scale (inc. N fixing legumes). Some arable, livestock, agroforestry, orchards
4. Rest of UK
Mainly arable, livestock, agroforestry
5. Rest of Europe
Fruit and hunger-gap veg
6.Further Afield
Coofe,chocolate, spices, tropical fruit 0%
Fig 47
Growing communities food zones proposal
The issue of concentrated land ownership is linked to the question of how the UK gets its food, as demand dynamics force larger landowners towards intensive farming.
According to who owns England half of the country is owned by 1% of the population and the details of said ownership are prohibitively expensive to obtain(12) However, Recent Investigations by “Who Owns England” have allowed to shed light on the issue.
Council farms
Historically, the purpose of County Farms was to help new farmers enter the capitalintensive agriculture industry. This was accomplished by providing them with facilities and lands, sometimes even at below-market rental prices. These farms were perceived as the ‘initial step’ into and industry where the mean age of farmers is roughly 60 years (11)
AEven though the growth of council farms was most noticeable from the start of the 20th century until World War II, there was a noticeable reverse in the post-1970s age as large areas of these governmentowned smallholdings were sold. It is evident from what has happened that there have been more significant changes in English agriculture in recent years, including the elimination of smaller, privately owned farms and their incorporation into larger, industrial agricultural enterprises. The area used for
council farms decreased from 426,695 acres to just 215,155 acres between 1977 and 2017.
According to Who Owns England, the central government’s fiscal cuts to local authority finances are to blame for the County Farms’ downfall. There is a relationship between the selling of these farms and policies that Margaret Thatcher implemented in the 1980s, and it is currently imperative to buck the current trend by stopping the sales of these farms.
The United Kingdom is experiencing what has been called an agricultural transition, which puts the nation at a pivotal point in relation to all the challenges raised.
03
The Agricultural Transition
The 7 Year plan ELM Schemes Evaluations
In the post-Brexit era, the Department of Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs has introduced a series of new agricultural policies, notably the Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes. While these initiatives signify a positive step forward, they may fall short of fully supporting localized food systems and the concept of food sovereignty. This section aims to illustrate the functioning of ELM schemes based on the most recent proposals and subsequently evaluate their effectiveness. Special attention will be given to their role in fostering food sovereignty and local food systems, examining potential impacts, and identifying the existing gaps that need addressing for the promotion of a more sustainable and equitable food future.
The concepts of food sovereignty and local food systems are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Both underscore the significance of sustainable agricultural practices and equitable access to resources, presenting alternative approaches to the prevailing industrial and globalized food system. It can be viewed as one concept serving as a pathway to the other. Food sovereignty, on one hand, pertains to the right of communities to govern their food and agriculture systems. This involves localized food systems and promotes equal access to resources like land, water and seeds through democratic decision making.(13)
Meanwhile, a local food system is the network through which food is produced, distributed and consumed within a local or regional area, shortening supply chains between producer and consumer. The objective of this is to create resilient networks that include diversified agricultural production and contribute to local economic and social development. (14)
13. Patel, R. (2009). Food sovereignty: What does food sovereignty look like? Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(3), 663-706. https:// doi.org/10.1080/03066150903143079
14. Feenstra, G. W. (1997). Local food systems and sustainable communities. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 12(1), 28-36. https://doi. org/10.1017/S0889189300007165
2021
The 7 Year Plan
In the aftermath of Brexit, the Department for Environment, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs (Defra) has been actively developing a suite of agricultural policies to substitute the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The initial component of this initiative is the “7-year agricultural transition plan,” intricately connected to both the “25-year environmental plan” and the commitments toward achieving netzero emissions by 2050. This plan involves a gradual phasing out of direct payment schemes (BPS), previously under the CAP, and introducing a fresh set of payment schemes known as Environmental Land Management (ELM) schemes.
While payment sums under CAP were largely based on the size of farmland, ELM schemes aim to move towards linking them to certain agroecological farming practices, seeing farmers as stewards of the landscape rather than food producers therefore theoretically moving away from favouring large scale industrial farming operations.(14)
“We know that the move away from Direct Payments will be a big change for some farmers, so we are going to make the changes over a 7-year transition period to give everyone time to plan and adjust. We will be offering help to those who need it to plan and manage their businesses through the transition. (…) We will make the money we save from Direct Payment reductions available through schemes, grants and other types of support for farmers to manage land and their businesses more sustainably.” (15)
ELM Schemes are subdivided into 3 categories: Sustainable Farming Incentives (SFI), Landscape Recovery (LR) and Countryside Stewardship (CS) (Previously referred to as Local Nature Recovery). In coming years, agreements that are part of the EWCO will also be integrated into the ELM framework. Together, these categories contain over 380 actions relating to specific habitats and features which farmers and land managers can perform, either individually or as a part of group of actions, in order to receive a payment in exchange. However all these actions advise farmers adn Landmangers to take seperate action to get access to the incentives
Introduction of ELM Scheme
Consisting of three components: Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI), Countryside Stewardship (CS), and Landscape Recovery.
Launch of the Agricultural Transition Plan,DEFRA introduced the 7-year plan, outlining the future of agriculture in the UK, post-Brexit. Direct payments began to be phased out
2023-2024
Full policy Implementation
New agricultural policy expected to be fully implemented, with the focus on environmental outcomes and public goods. Direct payments continue to be phased out.
Transitions completion 2022
Expansion of ELM Scheme and Other Grant Programs
Expansion of programme with more farmers and more options available.
2025 - 2027 2027
DEFRA investment planned in productivity grants, skills development, and pilot programs to support innovation and technology adoption in agriculture.
Direct payments completely phased out, and replaced with the new support system.
15. GOV.UK. (2023, June 21). Environmental Land Management (ELM) update: how government will pay for land-based environment and climate goods and services. https://www.gov.uk/government/ publications/environmental-landmanagement-update
ELM Schemes
Fig 55 - 7 year transformation plan by Antonio
Each action is linked to one or more types of land cover. Countryside Stewardship (CS) agreements consist of individual actions tailored to local targets and aimed at land managers, which can be carried out in conjunction with food production. Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) agreements organize actions into “standards,” with several standards having levels—Introductory, Intermediate, and Advanced. Farmers need to complete all the actions associated with a specific level to receive the corresponding payment within the standard. It’s important to note that certain actions, independently performed, offer payment upon completion, similar to CS agreements. Currently, there are a total of 10 standards (including 2 crosscutting standards), encompassing both rolledout standards, those in the pilot phase, and those planned for future implementation.
For the intermediate and advanced levels, actions are cumulative, meaning that the higher levels necessitate the completion of actions from the previous levels. Farmers have the flexibility to annually upgrade their Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) standards agreements to elevate levels for existing standards within their agreements. These agreements are specific to individual land parcels, allowing farmers to choose different levels and/or standards for various land parcels, provided they are suitable for the respective land type. For instance, one parcel can be enrolled in the introductory level for “low-input grassland,” the adjacent one in the intermediate level of the same standard, and the next one in the intermediate “arable and horticultural land standard.” Most standards are compatible with at least one other standard, allowing the application of two or more different standard agreements to the same parcel of land, given that it meets the specified requirements.
For example, consider a parcel classified as grassland, located adjacent to a water body.
This parcel can be eligible for enrollment in the “water body buffering standard,” the “improved grassland standard,” and the “improved grassland soil” standard. Additionally, it can apply to the cross-cutting “pest management standard” and the “nutrient management standard.”
In instances where certain actions within the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) standards overlap with actions in Countryside Stewardship (CS), it is not feasible to carry out both simultaneously. The total annual payment value for revenue options is distributed into four equal installments and disbursed on a quarterly basis.
Fig 57 / General Diagram of ELM Schemes by Antonio
Woodland creation / Management
Boundary features
Water quality / Wetlands Orchids
Fig 58 /Countryside stewarship action (Some)
Higher Tier CS actions
Middle Tier CS actions
Even though ELM is an improvement over BPS, farms must have a minimum size of 5 ha in order to be eligible for the programmes; this requirement excludes a number of small holdings. In addition, there may be issues with how the actions interact with one another and how they are categorised.
While SFI agreements are primarily aimed at farmers, CS and LR are designed with land managers in mind. This separates the management of the environment from the production of food, based on the discussion of sharing versus saving land. Farmers are given a list of options by both CS and SFI, but farming that blends in with the environment and restores local ecosystems by producing food and allowing wildlife to inhabit the land is not supported. “While the net payments for most of the standards in the SFI standards were positive, the total impact on the farms’ net profit levels was negative after land taken out of production was considered,” according to an AHBD research of the standards’ impact on the farming industry. (16) The paper goes on to say that unless farmers are currently doing at least some of the necessary steps, it is difficult to be financially advantageous for them to engage in certain standards given their present SFI payment rates. This is mostly because many acts have upfront expenses.
A report by Rob Booth, titled “Farming the Future” can provide key points about the future of farming with which to begin making some inferences as to how ELMs relate to the concepts of Food sovereignty and local food systems. The report puts forward 3 key processes for food systems change:
Research and development (R&D) for new agricultural methods, Production, analysis, and ownership of agricultural data, and Agricultural Knowledge and Information Systems (AKIS). Booth suggests that there are two pathways for agriculture moving forward. In the first, existing concentrated corporate ownership is maintained, as are the inequalities driven by it. In the second, agroecology acts as a driver for social change, where producers and citizens are put in control of food systems through the democratization of local economies and alternative models of ownership
such as co-operatives and community land trusts. According to Booth, within the latter, community knowledge exchange and open, publicly facilitated data are central to driving shorter supply chains in regional food systems, as well as creating jobs and reducing emissions.(17)
From this standpoint, it’s possible to point out that, because CS and SFI standards are so specific, it seems that they might be overly prescriptive and action oriented instead of results oriented. By taking such an approach R/D for agricultural methods is disincentivized regardless of ownership. Secondly, there is no emphasis on actions to help drive regional economies (such as farmer knowledge exchange and participatory politics), thereby limiting the development of local networks and supply chains necessary for a sustainable and equitable food system. In the case of LR, the scheme is competition based instead of action based which avoids the prescriptive nature of SFI and CS. However, in order to participate, one needs to already be an actor with capital, a fact which could potentially continue to consolidate land in the hands of multinationals that look to become net zero through their landscape recovery schemes.
An independent review of the UK’s food sector titled “The National Food Strategy”, suggests the creation of a mixed rural land use framework – the “three compartment model” which equally divides high yield farmland, low yield (agroecological farmland) and semi-natural land in order to strike a balance between food yield and benefits to the greatest number of animal species. In this view agroecological farming and mechanized farming are not viewed as mutually exclusive provided the mechanization takes advantage of technology as well as crop mixing in order to make it less destructive.(18)
Conclusions
While the UK’s ELM schemes mark a move away from the EU’s CAP and towards more sustainable practices, there are still areas that need improvement. There is a lack of emphasis on developing regional economies and local networks,
as well as insufficient support for land reform and access.
The approach to land use provided by the National food strategy could serve as a starting point to help reconcile the need for sustainable intensification alongside agroecology in order to meet local demand and serve as a transition strategy. However, it is also necessary to find new ways for democratic access land by part of communities.
As we’ve seen up to this point, the disconnect between cities and their peri-urban land revolves around 3 main issues:
1. Concentration of ownership
2. Atomized land management schemes
3. Concentrated ownerships & Global supply chains
Agroecology has numerously been mentioned as a key element of this ongoing transition which can break the current dominant sytem, which leads to posit the question “What is Agroecology”?
of SFI actions
16. Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board. (2023, June 21). Assessing the impact of the Sustainable Farming Incentive on farm businesses. AHDB. https:// ahdb.org.uk/assessing-the-impact-of-the-sustainablefarming-incentive-on-farm-businesses
17. Common Wealth. (2022). Farming the Future: Transforming the Ownership of Food Systems Research and Development. https://www.common-wealth.org/ publications/farming-the-future
18. The National Food Strategy. (2021). The Plan. https:// www.nationalfoodstrategy.org/the-plan/
Examples of CS actions
Examples
Fig 60 Ex. of CS actions. By Jegan By Jegan
Agroecology
Overview
Enterprise stacking + Intensification Case Studies
Community farm - Bristol
Agroecology is a farming approach that emphasizes the application of ecological principles to agriculture. It is concerned with the ecological impact of agricultural practices and aims to design and manage sustainable agriculture and food systems that work in harmony with natural systems. By breaking the current dominant system, agroecology produces food in a more sympathetic way, which is beneficial for the environment and society.”
Agroecology
In preceding chapters, we have consistently encountered agroecology as an important part of the solution to food system challenges. This is evident not only in the Cuban farming revolution but also in aspects of the methods endorsed by the new ELMs. Building on this perspective, the forthcoming proposal in this thesis aims to use agroecology as a guide for sustainable growth and food production within the green belt.
But what precisely is agroecology? At its core, it’s an expansive term that encompasses a myriad of techniques. Each technique, however, adheres to a fundamental principle: producing food in harmony with, and complementary to, natural systems.
“Agroecology is a holistic and integrated approach that simultaneously applies ecological and social concepts and principles to the design and management of sustainable agriculture and food systems. It seeks to optimize interactions between plants, animals, humans and the environment while addressing the need for socially equitable food systems within which people can exercise choice over what they eat and how and where it is produced” (19)
Fig 62 / Principles of Agroecology by Jegan
Fig 63 / Community Farm, Bristol
Source Jegan
Enterprise stacking + Intensification
The term “intensified farming” is commonly linked to factory farming, which involves farming practices requiring increased inputs and outputs per unit of agricultural land. In an industrialized society, this typically involves the use of pesticides, fertilizers, and machinery for planting, chemical application, and harvesting (20)
However, within the framework of agroecology, this thesis proposes a redefinition of the term. What if the focus of “intensifying” agriculture shifted from heavy mechanization to emphasizing profound human input? Instead of assessing a farm’s success solely based on crop yield, what if it were evaluated by the social value it generates? Within this paradigm, when “intensification” aligns with agroecological principles, especially in the context of the peri-urban nature of the green belt, it could be characterized by three criteria:
Community and Urban Infrastructure: This involves reimagining models of land ownership, water and waste management, energy generation, public transport, Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDs), and other nature-based solutions.
Enterprise Stacking: This concept entails multiple activities coexisting on a single farm, often referred to as mixed farming. It implies shorter supply chains and the repurposing of agricultural by-products across various industries and businesses.
Agroecological Techniques: This encompasses methods like permaculture, vertical farming, agroforestry, organic farming, and circular systems, among others.
+ Intensification
Monoculture
Agroecology
20. Farm Forward Advisory Council. (2021). Intensive Agriculture: Characteristics, Examples, and Why Is It Bad?
Fig 65 Monoculture vs Intensification by Jegan by Jegan
Base Image Wakylens Farm, UK
Agroecological case studies
To further expand our understanding on these ideas, we mapped out all the agroecological farms in the UK with reference to the ecological layers.
The farms were majorly classifies in 5 categories based on their focus of practises within the farm such as Habitat creation, Inter cropping / Diversification, Cover crops, Soil health / Rotational grazing, Agroforestry.
Following this categorization, three principal farms with varying sizes and methods were selected in order to further clarify and comprehend these concepts and methods.
Urban Cities & Green belts
Forests
Grasslands & Nature reserves
Fig 66 / Natural layers by Jegan
Fig 67 / Agroecological farms of UK by Jegan
Hooke Park, situated in Dorset, South West England, spans 142 hectares near the town of Beaminster, within the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Designated as ancient woodland, the site has a historical background as a deer hunting estate. The educational campus at Hooke Park was established by the Parnham Trust after acquiring the site in 1983.
Hooke park is not an agroecological farm but this case study serves to an important lessons on ecology and closed supply chain. All the wood that is required in the Hooke park is produced within the campus and processed, stored, processed and used within the campus.
Hooke park - case study
Fig 70 Hooke park satellite imagery
Source Google earth
Fig 69 / Supply chain within Hooke park
Fig 68 Pine forests of Hooke park
chipping unit
forest, board leaf and pine tree
Woods from the forest
by : Khushboo Prashant
Source : Khushboo Prashant
Pine plantations generate a dense layer of mulch on the ground, hindering water penetration and leading to surface runoff and erosion. The dense foliage of these evergreen trees further restricts the penetration of light.
The soil profile reveals degraded soil biodiversity.
Horizon A is characterized by a substantial layer of pine leaves, while Horizon B exhibits a narrower band. In contrast, Horizon C features a larger patch with small debris and reduced nutrient content.
These pine forests are grown then harvested after they mature and are used for the needs of the campus.
Horizon C with minimal or no microbiological activities
Horizon A with thick pine leaves mulch.
Fig 71 Soil section of pine forest
By Khushboo Prashant
Pine forest study - Hookepark
Fig 72 Section through pine forest
By Khushboo Prashant
Hooke park is currently pushing towards more diverse production of wood by creating a mixed forest and it is proven to show improved diversity. There is a diverse ground condition because of introduction of broad leaf species. This encourages positive soil heath, micro health, prevents soil erosion, allows other shrubs and undergrowth species to thrive
Due to diversity in grass, shrubs and sunlight penetration on can observe a clear distinction in soil health compared to the previous case.
Mixed forest study - Hookepark
Roots structure of shrubs and grass holding soil
Mulch consists of leaves, shrubs, pine leaves and other organic matter
Fig 73 Soil section of mixed forest
By Khushboo Prashant
Sunlight penetrating through broad leaf deciduous species enhancing the soil biodiversity.
Fig 74 Mixed forest section
By Khushboo Prashant
Wakelyns, an innovative farm spanning 22.5 hectares, was created by the late plant pathologist Prof. Martin Wolfe. It was designed to implement his theories on the role of agrobiodiversity in achieving sustainable and resilient agriculture by integrating trees for timber, energy, and fruit production into an organic crop rotation. Over the past two decades, this farm has been a focal point for research on organic crop production and agroforestry. This review summarizes key theories explored and evidence produced by Martin and researchers from the Organic Research Centre. It proves to be invaluable for any farmer or land manager interested in implementing agroforestry practices on their land.
Hooke park - Case study
Fig 76 Wakelyns satellite imagery
Source Google earth
Fig 75 / Agroforestry & Farming in Wakelyns farm
Source Wakelyns
In Wakelyns they follow a four year cycle which consists of wheat, herbal lays and lentils. On our visit to wakleyns we saw agro-foretsty belts which consists of hazel in majority along with herbal lays.
Shelterbelts, consisting of trees organized in a grid or strips within and along farmland boundaries, function as integral components of agroforestry systems. These structures play a pivotal role in mitigating natural hazards such as sandstorms, wind erosion, shifting sand, droughts, and frost.
Furthermore, shelterbelts contribute significantly to modifying the microclimate by reducing temperature, wind speed, soil water loss, and excessive wind-induced transpiration. This modification results in creating more favorable conditions for optimal crop production. In Wakelyns they follow a four year cycle which consists of wheat, herbal lays and lentils. On our visit to wakleyns we saw agro-foretsty belts which consists of hazel in majority along with herbal lays.
Wheat farming - Wakelyns
Fig 77 / Section through Wakelyns by Khusbhoo Prashant
Agroforesty belts
Agroforesty belts
Agroforesty belts
Wheat
Lentil Herbal leys 1 year 2 year 3 and 4 year
Intercropping encompasses cultivating two or more crops in close proximity to each other. The ultimate objective of intercropping is to enhance the yield per unit of land, achieved by optimizing the utilization of soil resources that would otherwise be allocated to a single crop. Another benefit of intercropping is the reduction in the risk of complete crop failure.(21)
By Khushboo Prashant
By Khushboo Prashant
21. Huss, C. P., Holmes, K. D., & Blubaugh, C. K. (2022). Benefits and Risks of Intercropping for Crop Resilience and Pest Management. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toac045
Agroforesty belts
Agroforesty belts
Agroforesty belts
Herbal lays Herbal lays
Herbal lays
Fig 78 / Section through Herbal leys - Wakelyns
Agroforesty belts
Agroforesty belts
Agroforesty belts
Lentil
Lentil
Lentil
Lentil Herbal lay
Fig 79 / Section through Lentil fields - Wakelyns
The Community Farm, situated in the Bristol Greenbelt (also referred to as the Avon Green Belt), is a non-profit organic farm. The farm is actively involved in cultivating and sourcing food, which is then delivered within Bristol through its highly regarded veg box program. With a focus on promoting well-being, the farm hosts over 1,000 individuals annually for courses, social events, and volunteer opportunities. Additionally, it’s important to highlight that the farm is registered as a community benefit society, the same legal structure often used by Community Land Trusts
Community farm, Bristol - Case study
Fig 81 / Community farm satellite imagery
Source Google earth
Fig 80 / Community farm, Bristol
Source Jegan
The Community Farm, Bristol
The Community Farm sets itself apart from the other case studies in the comparative study. In addition to growing their own food, they serve as a central point for the delivery of items to customers in Bath and Bristol from a number of other smallholdings. The farm receives a substantial amount of its income from the selling of vegetable boxes, which are distributed as part of a subscription service. Apart from serving individual customers, they also have affiliations with 14 nearby eateries located in Bath and Bristol. Although their main distribution area is still the Bristol green belt, it’s important to note that they get the majority of their produce from farms up to 45 km away.
The diversity of the farm goes beyond its use of agroecological techniques. By leveraging its closeness to Bristol and the natural beauty of the area, it encompasses a variety of enterprises, some only loosely connected to agriculture and others wholly unrelated to it. For example, the farm is the site of a music festival every summer. It also does gardening classes and provides team-building activities designed specifically for nearby businesses. The farm is most importantly set up to conduct psychological retreats, which are becoming more and more popular as a means of aiding migrants.
Community Farm - Distribution Diversity
Community farm video:
Fig 82 / Community farm Distribution
Fig 84 / Community farm Video
Fig 83 / Community farm - Community activity by Jegan by Antonio Source - Community Farm
Community Farm - Diversity
Workshop garden Yurt
Multi-purpose
Germination Greenhouse Hedgerows Agroforestry
Market Shop Storage Warehouse
Fig 85 / Community farm - Diversity by Antonio/ Jegan
In order to assess value in ways that go beyond traditional financial measurements, the idea of “Social Value” is calculated. This allows for a more complex understanding of the consequences of particular developments or policies. A Social Value Index was created in order to evaluate the broader advantages gained from the community farm’s diverse operations in comparison to conventional farming methods. This was done by using a variation of the methodology previously employed in the case of a public-commons partnership at Wards Corner, London, also known as the Latin Village. This methodology itself was in turn inspired by a 2020 research paper wherein the authors examined an urban farm near Paris, and translated its social activities and benefits into tangible economic metrics (22)
Four areas were used in the analysis of the social value created by the community farm: direct financial revenue, increased labour and capacity, meeting social needs, and downstream effects. Comparing the community farm to a traditional vegetable farm of similar size, the total social value was determined to be more than twice as high. Despite this, the community farm faces budgetary difficulties and depends mostly on volunteer labour. Another is that the farm’s land area is less than the 5-hectare minimum needed to be eligible for the Environmental Land Management (ELM) programme. Furthermore, even in the event that the farm were included in ELM programmes, many of its significant contributions would not be taken into account by the ELM in its planned actions.
Fig 87 / Community farm - Social value Index by Antonio
Bristol (The Avon Greenbelt)
Bristol Soil Types of Greens in the Greenbelt
Bristol’s Ecological Corridors and policies Farm clusters
This analysis leads into the questions:
What modifications are necessary in order to make this model both feasible and prevalent within the greenbelt?
Can these ideas of Farm intensification and Enterprise stacking be reflected on farms across the green belt?
How can the ideas of Agroecology work together with the current structure of existing policies?
To answer this, it is necessary to first study the composition of Bristol’s greenbelt.
Fig 88 / Bristol Greenbelt
Source Jegan
- Agricultural land
Bristol Soil
“From the red clay soils of the south to the sandy loams of the north, Bristol’s diverse range of soil types plays a vital role in supporting the city’s unique ecosystems and agricultural heritage.” (23)
Due to Bristol’s closer proximity to the ocean, it has a variety of soil types, including clay, loam, and sandy soils. The diversity of natural processes, ecosystems, and fauna are supported by this wide spectrum of soil. Although clay soils, which are common in some areas of the greenbelt, are good at retaining water, they can compact easily and need to be carefully managed in order to keep the soil’s structure conducive to crop growth. The loamy soils offer a balanced mixture of sand, silt, and clay, making them versatile for a variety of crops (24)
Most of the area within the greenbelt has an assigned ALC grade of 3. However, some areas with 1 and 2 grades are also present.
Fig 90 / Bristol - Soil types
Fig 89 / Bristol - Soil Grades by Khusbhoo by Khusbhoo
draining lime-rich loam
and clayey flood plain
and sandy soil
- Agricultural soil
permeable
23. British Geological Survey. (n.d.). UK Soil Observatory. https://www. bgs.ac.uk/map-viewers/uk-soilobservatory-ukso/ 24. Royal Horticultural Society. (2023). Soil types. https://www.rhs.org.uk/soilcomposts-mulches/soil-types
Bristol - Soil Grades
Bristol Soil types
Types of greens in the Greenbelt
The Bristol greenbelt historically stands out in the national context for its horticultural activity. However, since 1985, suburban horticulture in the region has seen a decline by 30% (25) Additionally, there is a significant demand for land among new farmers.
It is clear by studying the land composition of the greenbelt that there are relatively few built-up areas and parks, with about 60% of the overall area classified as agricultural land. According to this figure, the distribution of agricultural land in the Bristol greenbelt is slightly higher than the national average. However, as grazing grasslands make up approximately 40% of this agricultural area, this statistic may be somewhat deceptive.
Examining the crops within the arable categories, the Bristol greenbelt appears to mirror national tendencies. Cereal farms dominate the scene, with primary cultivation of wheat and barley.
25. Carey, J. (2011). Urban and Community Food Strategies. The Case of Bristol. Retrieved from https://www.joycarey.co.uk/ wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Urban-andCommunity-Food-Strategies_The-Case-ofBristol.pdf
Fig 93 / Arable Lands/ Community farm
Fig 94 / Sub-Urban/ Builtup, Bristol
Fig 92 Grasslands, Bristol
Fig 91 / Woodlands -Leight woods
Source Jegan Source Alarmy Source Woodland trust
Source National trust
Woodlands Waterbodies Arable lands Sub- Urban/ Builtup Grasslands Public green areas
Greens of Bristol Green belt
Fig 95 Types of greens in Greenbelt- Bristol by Jegan
Types of greens in the Greenbelt
Woodlands make up about 13% of the green belt region. Within these woodlands, the West England Nature Partnership has identified particular places that may be used to consolidate woodland corridors. They have also identified locations for the creation of corridors connecting grasslands and wetlands; together, they have named this intiative the “Nature Recovery Network.”
“WENP is a cross-sector partnership hosted by Avon Wildlife Trust and funded by North Somerset Council, Bristol City Council, South Gloucestershire Council, Bath & North East Somerset Council, Wessex Water and Bristol Water.” (26)
The strategy outlined by the WENP offers a framework for guiding investment towards the restoration of ecological corridors, taking into account the area’s inherent geography.
Following the examination of ecological corridors’ potential, the study explored the possibility of conceptualizing businesses within a similar corridor framework, which is extended in our last chapter(kernza).
Fragmentation of Woodlands
Fig 96 / Fragmentation of Woodlands by Jegan
Woodlands Potential extension of woodland corridor
Potential Extension of Woodland Corridors.
Fig 97 / Potential Extension of Woodland corridors by Jegan
Bristol (The Avon Greenbelt)
Bristol’s ecological Corridors & Policies
We see the Nature Recovery Network as a joined up network of marine, water and terrestrial habitats where nature and people can thrive. More than a map, it is an active, adaptive spatial plan that identifies the best opportunities to deliver nature’s recovery.(26)
The “Nature Recovery Network” is being extended to include other typologies such as woodlands, grasslands, and wetlands, potentially forming an ecological corridor that could function as a network.
Despite the existence of these strategic networks for ecological corridors, the map of ELM (Environmental Land Management) actions and corridors demonstrates that the areas with potential for woodland, grassland, and wetland corridors do not align with the plots entering any ELM agreements. These schemes are very restrictive, and the actions are limited only to the farm boundaries, not extending across them. Additionally, the specified actions are very general and do not inform farmers/land managers to take specific actions related to the context of the land. This disparity highlights the scarcity of a systematic approach in the current ELM schemes that resonates with the current ecology of the land.
Potential extension of Woodland Corridor
Potential Extension of Grassland corridors
Potential Extension of wetland corridors
Fig 100 / Potential extension of Wetlands
Fig 99 Potential extension of Grasslands
Fig 98 /Potential extension of Woodlands by Jegan by Jegan by Jegan
ELM actions & Ecological corridors
Fig 101 / Ecological corridors & Policies by Jegan
Farm Clusters
Farm clusters are designed to start at the farm level, under the guidance of a lead farmer and a trusted conservation advisor.(27)
The process entails a leading farmer inviting other farmers to collaboratively determine shared ecological goals that can be collectively pursued as a group. Following this, the group selects a facilitator and applies for funding to implement these ideas.
Interviews with existing Farm cluters / Facilitators
Facilitation fund only pays for training. There is no mechanism to pay for surveys, for example. the Landscape recovery programme is the closest to something which works across farm boundaries, but it is quite restrictive. A Landscape Recovery type project in a highly productive farming landscape, would be an achievement
- Tracy Adams
Interviews with a farmer who aspires to be in cluster
A collaborative approach in agriculture could be beneficial. Awareness of the wider context will enhance collaboration. Instead of individual farmers taking the initiative, facilitators could provide information regarding shared assets like machinery, as well as the provision of seeds and materials for habitat establishment.
- David/ Wakelyns Farm
Our interviews with facilitators revealed issues in the current structure of facilitation funds. Currently, these funds only cover training expenses, such as workshops, omitting crucial aspects like tree planting and land surveying. As a result, facilitators and farmers must seek additional funding from sources like local councils, introducing inefficiencies and prolonging project timelines. Moreover, there is a lack of shared access to machinery within the clusters.
options which allow you to link up large scale projects (…) working as a catchment area rather than having individual plots similar to Landscape Recovery.
- Robin Leech
Inviting other Farmers
Deciding on Ideas/ Aims
Choosing a Faciltator
Applying for funding
Policy Proposal
Overview
Modifications in ELM actions
Ecological Catalogue
Modified ELM actions across typologies
Ownership
In response to the 3 issues that were previously mentioned, the specific objectives of the policy proposal are:
1. Consolidation of farm through ecological corridors / Strentening of farm clusters: This can be accomplished by creating context-based clusters that make it easier to take coordinated action throughout the farms.
2. Promoting models of shared ownership: Expanding Bristol’s council role in the transfer of ownership between people.
3. Creating localized business corridors: this will be achieved through enterprise stacking and farm intensification allowing the colloboration of multiple buisnesses within the farm.
Fig 107 / Bristol Greenbelt
Source Jegan
Overview
structure
Atomized Land management schemes
Farmers perform isolated acts on their properties as a result of the current policy and action framework, which is restricted to farm boundaries.
Farms with less than 5.ha are not listed and are not given any incentives.
Farmers are not informed or educated about the kind of activities that need to be conducted on their farms in relation to their particular conditions in order to get the optimal outcomes that would benefit both the farmer and the environment by the ELMs with their lengthy list of tasks.
Proposed Proposal overview
Monoculture, Global supply chain & compounding wealth by a few
Connecting Farms through ecological corridors Localized business corridor, Shared models of ownership.
Concentration of land ownership causes large-scale land privatisations in the case of a transfer of ownership and a trend towards monoculture.
Funding and assistance are not provided to the intermediate industry.
The existing policy framework does not recognise agroecological practices.
At the moment, Bristol councils are not involved in the transfer of ownership.
Consolidation of farm to take combined actions throught the idea of ecological clusters.
Farms of all sizes are incentivised.
Actions informed by policies in reference to the context.
A farm may engage in more than one activity supported by ELM actions to facilitate farm intensification.
Increased funding and assistance for the intermediary industries in order to facilitate enterprise stacking.
Increasing land accessibility for newcomers by transferring ownership of the land through Bristol Council, also to ensure that the community retains ownership as well.
Fig 108 / Atomised land management
Fig 109 / Monoculture & concentrated ownership by Jegan by Jegan
Fig 110 / Connecting farm through ecological clusters
Fig 111 / Localized business / Shared models of ownership by Jegan by Jegan
Modified ELM Actions
The Policy modification in the current structure of DEFRA is done at three levels.
1. At the national level: All agroecological methods must be recognised and taken into account, regardless of farm size, and incentives must be redesigned with the action and impact in mind rather than just the location.
2. City/Green Belt scale: An optional body known as ecological clusters would be formed between the ELMs and all three schemes, based on conclusions drawn from the way present Farm clusters are already operating. This would enable a group of farmers and land managers to work together and implement coordinated actions that would be advantageous to the environment and the individuals.
3. Farm scale: ELM action would be reorganised so that the best course of action for the farm is determined by the context of the land. Based on agroecological principles, producers would be permitted to implement several/combined actions on a single farm at this scale.
working together near
Fig 113 Example Clusters for wetland corridors
Fig 112 Example Clusters for woodland corridors by Jegan by Jegan
Ecological catalogue
The combined actions will be supported by the ecological catalogue with the list of species developed which would advice the farmers/ land Managers the kind of plants for a specific actions in relation to the context.
We created a sample catalogue for each corridor, for example, In riparian corridor, species were divided into submerged, emerged and woodland tolerant to waterlogged conditions were studied and compiled together keeping in mind the fauna species which it supports.
Weeeping willow
Fig
Khusbhoo Marsh Tit
Warbler Otter Cross bill
REplaced
Weeping Willow Oak
Downy Birch
Willow crack Birch
White Beam
Sparganium Emersum
Sagittaria Sagittifolia
Eleogiton Fluitans
Isolepis fluitans
Alopercurus Pratensis
Agrostis Stolonifera
Anthoxanthum Odoratum
Festuca Rubra
Modified Actions across the different land typologies
Exisiting Landscapes
Action & incentives according to the land typologies
Transformed Landscapes
The current ELM activities have been adjusted and reorganised in accordance with the land typologies. Furthermore, there would be no implicit minimum area need for the acts, and the amount could vary based on the needs of a specific land typology. Additionally, this would allow farmers and land managers to collaborate and submit joint applications for incentives. These kind of actions would further add values to enterprise stacking and farm intensification as well.
Wakylens Whitehall
Land Ownership
However, Bristol Council, a long standing organisation, can be used to organise and facilitate these ecological clusters. By supporting these clusters, Bristol Council may be able to get a stronger hold on the farmers, which may facilitate the ownership transfer process.
1. A farmer who is retiring or leaving their land transfers title to the council, after which he will be able to oversee or provide guidance on potential actions.
2. Newcomers can approach the council for land access with a comprehensive proposal or activity plan.
3. The concepts can be implemented on a tiny parcel of council land.
4-Ownership can be transferred with the consent or agreement of all parties.
Sustain, has done a extensive research on actions that has to be carried out by a new entering farmer to get access to the land and the essential toolkit for agroecology but however, does not include the potential of bristol coucil’s role in this process. Our proposal comes from the comprehensive understanding of the research documents by sustain.
Fig 119 Streamlined process of ownership transfer
by Jegan
Streamline Ownership transfer
Kernza
Cereals in Bristol Greenbelt
Prennial grains - Kernza
By-Products of Kernza
The case of Bread
The case of Straw
Farm Clusters - Kernza
The set of proposals discussed earlier would modifications and set of actions that has to be taken within the DEFRA which will directly impact farmers, land managers and the environment directly. But however DEFRA as a body works in isolation and does not resonate with any other industries. To further develop the ideas, we looked at the most cultivated crop such as wheat and other cereals as a case to demonstrate how they may be used in conjunction with the concepts of enterprise stacking and farm intensification.
Source Kernza.org
Fig 122 / Soil Section through Kernza & Conventional wheat
Cereals in Bristol Greenbelt
Cereals account for a large amount of global calorie intake and the majority of agricultural production in the United Kingdom cultivates conventional crops wheat/ other cereal crops. Most wheat and barley are grown as annual crops nowadays, which can be hard on the earth. The standard cereal crops are grown on a sizable portion of Bristol’s agricultural area by industrial cultivation techniques, which have a significant impact on the health of the soil.
Fig 123 / Cultivation of Wheat Source Wild farmed
7107 Ha. of the cultivation land in Bristol’s greenbelt cultivates conventional Wheat.
Wheat / Cereal farms
Potential Extension of Woodland Corridors.
Fig 124 Wheat/ Cereal farms by Antonio Kernza
Kernza is the proprietary name for the grain derived from intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium), a crop under development at The Land Institute. This environmentally advantageous perennial grain has already found its way into limited niche markets within the commercial supply chain.
Kernza grain plants boast extensive root systems, reaching depths of 10 feet or more beneath the soil surface. These roots contribute to carbon sequestration in the soil while efficiently absorbing nutrients and water.
The yield potential of Kernza is swiftly increasing, and post-harvest, the residual leaves and stems can serve as fodder for cattle. In favorable conditions, the elongated Kernza seed heads may contain more seeds than those of annual wheat.
Researchers continuously strive to enhance seed size with each breeding cycle.
The development of new Kernza grain varieties holds the promise of enabling farmers to cultivate it profitably on a larger scale, thereby extending its environmental advantages to contemporary farms and diets(28)
By Khushboo Prashant
28: Kernza® Grain & Perennial Agriculture. (n.d.). The Land Institute. https://landinstitute.org/our-work/perennial-crops/ kernza/ Fig 125 / Kernza growth cycle and anatomy
Krenza
Elongated granins of Krenza
The beard around the head of Krenza grains
The pollination stage
Companion planting is an organic farming approach focused on preserving a natural equilibrium by cultivating plants together that mutually benefit each other. By strategically planting certain combinations, this method promotes pollination, helps prevent diseases, and effectively reduces pest populations in ones farm.
Utilizing ecological processes to replace the reliance on inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides can sustain food production while mitigating the environmental repercussions of agriculture. Researchers at the Land Institute are striving to attain heightened levels of ecological intensification through intercropping, drawing inspiration from models of naturally occurring plant communities. Notably, Kernza is already being intersown with legume species, both in research stations and on farms, exemplifying this innovative approach.
Intercropping Kernza
Conventional Wheat Kernza
Companion Planting with Kernza
Fig 126 Intercropping Kernza
By Khushboo Prashant
Krenza can absorb 370gms of carbon per sq.m of soil per year. Krenza can planted together with Lentils, Legumes, Cloves which can help in nitrogen fixing if the soil. Kernza
The incorporation of Kernza into a monoculture farm involves the conversion of existing wheat farming into an agroecological farm dedicated to cultivating Kernza. The current wheat farms lack consideration for the ecological well-being of the land and its surroundings. The transformation is envisioned over a 15-year period, during which the land transitions from a monoculture field to an agroecological farm. The process commences with the introduction of cover crops and herbal leys to improve the soil quality, which has deteriorated over years of intensive agriculture.
Fig 128 / Cover crops / Herbal leys
Fig 127 / Monoculture Farm with conventional wheat
By Khushboo Prashant
By Khushboo Prashant
Monoculture practice
Starting from the third year, the land can be planted with Kernza and various other essential crops for the farm. Simultaneously, the establishment of agroforestry grids and support for diverse species and ecosystems can commence. The period from year 10 to 15 involves a holistic approach to transforming the land, resulting in a well-established farm with high yields from all the intensification efforts. Concurrently, the introduction of breadmaking industries within the farm, coupled with connections to various other enterprises, aims to create a shorter supply chain and facilitate enterprise stacking.In the graph below, one can observe a proportional ecological gain alongside a yield increase.
Fig 130 Enterprise stacking
Fig 129 / Kernza+ Agroecological intensifcation
By Khushboo Prashant
By Khushboo Prashant
By-Products of Kernza
1273 ha. of the agroecological cultivation of this perennial grain is enough to cover the demand of all the breweries of Bristol.
-based on calculation made by Antonio for the same project.(28)
We have selected three distinct by-products/ enterprises derived from Kernza, namely beer, bread, and straw panels used in construction that can be stacked within the farm. The objective is to examine how the enhanced farms, in conjunction with ecological corridors, can synergize with this enterprise stacking.
In the same thesis, our friend Antonio looked into the case of Beer and finished his work in September 2023. We looked into Bread and Straw and continued our investigation till January 2024. We also examined the main businesses with whom we can collaborate, namely Agile Homes/Modcell for the case of straw panels, Aslan+Pantonia for the case of beer, and Wild Farms for the case of bread. We got into touch with these buisnesses to see how we can execute and our inferences and take away are further expanded in this chapter.
28. Garaycochea, A. J. (2021). Planet of Fields: Design Thesis (Master’s thesis, AA Landscape Urbanism)
Straw panels
Kernza can yield three to five tonnes of straw annually in a hectare.
Kernza’s bread proven to be highly nutritious and had more texture than the conventional bread.
Fig 131 Beer
Fig 132 / Bread
Fig 133 Strawpanels
Source Getty Images
Source Sally’s baking
Source Modcell
225 grams Kernza whole grain flour (2 cups)
225 grams bread flour (1 3/4 cups)
345 grams water (scant 1 1/2 cups)
10 grams salt (1 3/4 tsp)
60 grams sourdough starter (scant 1/4 cup)
225 grams Kernza whole grain flour (2 cups)
225 grams bread flour (1 3/4 cups)
345 grams water (scant 1 1/2 cups)
10 grams salt (1 3/4 tsp)
60 grams sourdough starter (scant 1/4 cup)
300 grams bread flour (2 1/3 cups)
150 grams home-milled Kernza (1 1/3 cups flour)
365 grams water (1 1/2 cups)
10 grams salt (1 3/4 tsp)
60 grams ripe sourdough starter (scant 1/4 cup)
50:50 Kernza and Bread Flour
67:33 Yecora Rojo and Kernza
67:33 Bread Flour and Kernza
Fig 134 Baking with Krenza
Source Perennial pantry.com
Bread - Wild farmed
Wildfarmed revolves around sustainable, minimalinput farming practices, completely avoiding the use of pesticides, fungicides, and herbicides, with a central focus on promoting biodiversity in all aspects. Crop varieties are carefully chosen to align with companion planting strategies, enhancing ecosystems by either offering a secondary crop in the same field or contributing to habitat improvement, protection, or soil restoration.
Grains for Wildfarmed are predominantly sourced from British farms, complemented by a smaller selection from French farms. Fair compensation is provided to farmers, and collaborative efforts are underway to continually enhance and refine lowinput, biodiverse farming techniques in partnership with the farming community.
Break making
Making bread is a fairly simple operation, and the key infrastructure needed for it is the bakery and milling. These facilities are adaptable and can be placed at any farm.
from the farm
Agroecology farms
Cafes
Milling industry
Wheat
Milling
Baking
Packaging Users
By Khushboo Prashant
These maps provide a snapshot from 2012 of the regions in the UK where barley, wheat, oats, and oilseed rape are cultivated. The gradients on the maps represent the percentage of the total farmed area (excluding rough grazing) dedicated to each crop type, with darker shading indicating higher cropping intensity.
The milling industry in the UK is significant due to several factors:
Bread Consumption: The UK has a high consumption of bread and other baked goods, driving demand for flour from the milling industry.
Diverse Applications: Flour is a key ingredient in various food products, from bread and cakes to pasta and pastry. The milling industry caters to the diverse needs of the food processing sector.
Food Processing Hub: The UK serves as a hub for food processing and manufacturing. The milling industry plays a crucial role in supplying raw materials for the production of a wide range of food products.
Tradition and Innovation: The UK milling industry combines traditional methods with modern technology to meet the evolving demands of consumers and the food industry.
Fig 136,137 Wheat production and import
Fig 138 / UK cereal industry mapping Source ahdb.org.uk
UK provisional crop production estimates for 2023: Grain market daily AHDB. (n.d.). Ahdb.org.uk. https://ahdb.org.uk/news/ukprovisional-crop-production-estimates-for-2023-grain-marketdaily#:~:text=ha%20in%20Scotland.-
Strawbale panels - Agile homes/ Modcell
Strawpanel making
In addition to wheat, Kernza yields straw, a byproduct that can be cultivated every year.
Parallely, there is a growing demand in Bristol for environmentally responsible construction, which is why this straw bale building stands out. Agile Homes play a significant role in straw construction in Bristol. Their initial process involves gathering straw and wood, which is then brought into their “Flying Factories” for assembly and transportation to the site. Additionally, these panels can be recycled when the building is demolished.
The “Flying Factories” are essentially temporary structures typically established within a 15-mile radius of the construction site and dismantled upon project completion. The primary concept behind these flying factories
Ecological building society is ready to lend mortgage for these kind of buildings, but it is important to work together as community with a lot of voluntary involvement.
is to reduce carbon emissions associated with transportation. Having them in close proximity to the site allows residents and others to witness the production process of panels made from natural materials, fostering knowledge and awareness within the community.However this idea proved economically inefficient over time and now the panels are made from the centralized manufacturing units.
Based on the conducted interviews, it is understood that this type of construction is widely accepted, that organisations such as the ecological society readily finance these kinds of buildings, and that those engaged in the manufacturing process are also consistently involved in the thoughtful sourcing of materials throught their forest to front door intiatives.
Timber from both new and existing forests is an economically product that could potentially store CO2 in buildings. We source our wood through a Forest to front door initiative (designed to source wood locally). And there is also a pressing need to address the wider benefits such as social value more.
- Craig White Agile homes
Using Bristol’s social value calculator, we can show that for every £1 spend, we add social value index of between 57p-99p,depending on the approach to design, manufacture, assembly and construction that clients want us to use.
-Agile homes.
Flying factories
Despite proving economically inefficient, the concept of the flying factories can still be advanced. Due to the flexibility this infrastructure offers, this enterprise can be stacked on any farm closer to the construction site. Over time, it can evolve into a more permanent structure within a farm, gathering straw from various farms and manufacturing panels on-site before transporting them to the construction site.
-Barbara/ Ecococon
3-5 tons of Straw can be produced by Kernza every year
Fig 141, 142, 143 / Some completed projects by Agile homes
139,140 / Interviews with Agile homes / Ecococon
: Jegan
Strawpanel manufacture & Construction process
Fig 144 / Strawbale panel making process
Fig 145, 146 / Flying factories by Jegan
Manufacture of bread & straw within the farm
Studying the bread and straw panel making process reveals that the key infrastructure required for these enterprises includes milling/ baking facilities for bread and flying factories for straw panels. These enterprises can be efficiently stacked within farms closer to transportation sites. In the case of bread the krenza produced within the farm can be processed within the farm then be transported to the consumers such as restaurants, cafes and nearby residents. In the case of Straw,the process can be streamlined, beginning with
the collection of straw from other farms, processing it within the main farm, and forming a closer supply chain. These farmers can collectively establish a farm cluster, working collaboratively on the same enterprise. Placing these farms in proximity to urban areas would facilitate easier access for people to engage in such practices. To explore this idea, Bristol council farms could be utilized, as councils would significantly benefit from the creation of a new social value index established within these farms.
Fig 147 / Bread + Strawbale stacking process in the farm by Jegan
Council farm NE Somerset +12
farms across the Bristol
Approimately 18 concil farms throughout the Bristol 6 Farms
Fig 148 Coucil farms NE Somerset by Jegan / Antonio
Council farms of NE Somerset
Manor Farm
Poplar Farm
Edelweiss farm Lyncombe Hill farm Haycombe Farm Twerton Hill Farm
To explore and assess the potential transformation of farm landscapes, we have selected a council farm situated in the transect between Bath and Bristol. This area is particularly significant as major residential and commercial developments are currently under consideration. The physical layers of the area have been thoroughly studied, revealing that the farm occupies a crucial junction at the intersection of woodland and wetland corridors.
This farm currently a monoculture farm which cultivates wheat and use indutrial agricultural methods.This farm can be transformed into a intensified agroecological farm which cultivates Kernza and be stacked up with these enterprises which could change the farm’s landscape drastically
Fig 149 / Chosen site and transect
Fig 150 Site layers - Bristol & Bath Transect by Jegan / Khusboo by Khusboo
Transect between Bath and Bristol
Fig 152 / Choosen farm
Fig 151 /Section snippets throught the farm
Source Google earth by Jegan
Section Snippets through the farm
Conventional wheat farming Heavy machinery Invasive cultivation
transformation
In this intensification process, the farm can leverage the proposed modifications to the ELM (Environmental Land Management) actions, allowing for the execution of multiple activities and supporting these types of farms with a new incentive structure. This particular farm would prioritize the cultivation of Krenza, alongside various other crops and agroforestry grids. The involvement of communities and volunteer activities would be integral to its daily operations.
This farm could serve as a central farm for processing collected straw and cultivating Krenza into bread, supplying it to nearby demand areas. This approach could capitalize on the existing infrastructure of the farm to accommodate the new facilities needed for straw and bread processing. Additionally, other areas could be allocated for community-led enterprises like beekeeping and community farming.
Like wise many farms cultivating krenza based on the proximity could be form a cluster and make way for many other enterprises.
The newly intensified farm would derive its values from various factors, including ecological considerations, community involvement, the collaboration of multiple enterprises, and shortened supply chains. Consequently, this would elevate the social value index of the farm, surpassing that of a traditional community farm. In this scenario, the revenue generated through straw panels and bread is more tangible and substantial.
Community managed woodlands Bread baking Polytunnels Straw panel making
Section Snippets through the Agroecological farm with Kernza and enterprise stacking
Straw storage Krenza cultivation
Krenza cultivation Agroforestry grids
This farm has a total value of about £ 4692000 which is almost two times of the community farm.
Farm clusters - Kernza
Farm clusters can be formed by conventional wheat farms and the farmers that gradually transition to kernza farming. These farms carry straw to a main farm for processing and delivery to the designated places. Building the necessary infrastructure will need collaboration between farmers and businesses.
These groups may come together to create a closed supply chain, with the straw needed for construction in Bristol limited to what can be generated inside the green belts. You can watch the example movie, which explains the simplified supply chain procedure, by scanning the QR code.
Straw panels & Woodland corridor
15-25 % of the wood essential for these construction woods required can just be obtained from the green belt in the next 20 years through these established woodland corridors.
Scan here for the full video
Fig 157 QR code for the video
by Jegan
by Jegan
Farm of Enterprise stacking/ Intensification (Milling & Flying factories)
(Tenative)
Kernza Netwrok (Bread + Straw)
Fig 160 Kernza network by Jegan
The networks arising from the combination of Bread + Straw, along with those formed by Beer, come together to create a closed system within Bristol. This integrated network originates from farms situated in the greenbelts, where the produce is processed. This process is closely aligned with ecologically restored and established networks, resulting in a highly productive peri-urban landscape.
For example - A total of 1273 hectares dedicated to agroecological Kernza production is sufficient to meet the beer demands for the entire Bristol region(28). This translates into the potential construction of nearly 800 straw houses using the straw generated within that particular farm.
28. Garaycochea, A. J. (2021). Planet of Fields: Design Thesis (Master’s thesis, AA Landscape Urbanism)
Fig 161, 162 / Beer, Bread + Straw network within Bristol by Jegan
Beer + Bread + Straw Network within Bristol
Epilogue
The project explores the potential of the greenbelt in Bristol through the lenses of Agroecological intensification and Enterprise stacking, particularly focusing on Kernza-derived products. This approach has the potential to harmonize with Bristol’s ecological corridors, with a little is support from the modified policies. Achieving this synergy requires policies that shift away from a generalized mindset and concentrate more on the specific context, people, and ecology.
Similar opportunities exist in the approximately 14 greenbelts within the UK. If examined closely, these areas present diverse lands with unique potential for various enterprises. Such initiatives could bring benefits to ecology, communities, and animals while fostering shorter supply chains. In the words of Max Ajl, it is just bringing agriculture closer to cities and viewing it as a pleasant exchange value rather than merely a food production process.
Fig 158, 159 / Snippets of video (farm clusters & transportation) - by Jegan
Fig 160 / Kernza network by Jegan
Fig 161, 162 / Beer, Bread + Straw network within Bristol - by Jegan
Fig 163 / Combined networks of all three enterprises within Bristol - by Jegan
Fig 164 / Chew valley lake Bristol
Source : Chewvalleydairy.co.uk
Bibiliography
Ajl, M. (2021). A People’s Green New Deal. A People’s Green New Deal. Pluto Books. https://doi. org/10.2307/j.ctv1p3xjwp
Bishop, P., Perez, A. M., Roggema, R., & Williams, L. (2020). Repurposing the Green Belt in the 21st Century. Repurposing the Green Belt in the 21st Century. UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j. ctv13xprpt
Bates, Lisa K., ‘ Housing: Planning and Policy Challenges’, in Randall Crane, and Rachel Weber (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Urban Planning, Oxford Handbooks (2012; online edn, Oxford Academic, 18 Sept. 2012), https://doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780195374995.013.0025
Didelon, V. (2022). Sébastien Marot, Taking the Country’s Side: Agriculture and Architecture. Critique d’art.https://doi.org/10.4000/critiquedart.92073
Great Britain. Ministry Of Justice. (2021). Local authority green belt: England 2021-22 - statistical release. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ local-authority-green-belt-statistics-for-england2021-to-2022/local-authority-green-belt-england2021-22-statistical-release
Department for Communities and Local Government. (2012). National Planning Policy Framework
Campaign to Protect Rural England. (n.d.). All you need to know about the Green Belt
LRA. (n.d.). Agricultural Land Classification1
DEFRA. (2020). National Food Strategy. https:// www.gov.uk/government/publications/nationalfood-strategy-independent-review-final-report
Patel, R. (2009). Food sovereignty: What does food sovereignty look like? Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(3), 663-706. https://doi. org/10.1080/03066150903143079
Feenstra, G. W. (1997). Local food systems and sustainable communities. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 12(1), 28-36. https://doi. org/10.1017/S0889189300007165
GOV.UK. (2023, June 21). Environmental Land Management (ELM) update: how government will pay for land-based environment and climate goods and services. https://www.gov.uk/government/ publications/environmental-land-managementupdate
Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board. (2023, June 21). Assessing the impact of the Sustainable Farming Incentive on farm businesses. AHDB. https://ahdb.org.uk/assessing-the-impactof-the-sustainable-farming-incentive-on-farmbusinesses
Common Wealth. (2022). Farming the Future: Transforming the Ownership of Food Systems Research and Development. https://www.commonwealth.org/publications/farming-the-future
The National Food Strategy. (2021). The Plan. https://www.nationalfoodstrategy.org/the-plan/
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). Overview | Agroecology Knowledge Hub | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations1
Farm Forward Advisory Council. (2021). Intensive Agriculture: Characteristics, Examples, and Why Is It Bad?
Huss, C. P., Holmes, K. D., & Blubaugh, C. K. (2022). Benefits and Risks of Intercropping for Crop Resilience and Pest Management. https://doi. org/10.1093/jee/toac045
Almeida, M. (2023). Urban agriculture and its economic impact: A case study of an urban farm near Paris. Journal of Urban Economics, 103, 103115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2022.103
British Geological Survey. (n.d.). UK Soil Observatory. https://www.bgs.ac.uk/map-viewers/ uk-soil-observatory-ukso/
Royal Horticultural Society. (2023). Soil types. https://www.rhs.org.uk/soil-composts-mulches/ soil-types
Carey, J. (2011). Urban and Community Food Strategies. The Case of Bristol. Retrieved from https://www.joycarey.co.uk/wp-content/ uploads/2016/01/Urban-and-Community-FoodStrategies_The-Case-of-Bristol.pdf
West of England Nature Partnership. (n.d.). Home. Retrieved from https://wenp.org.uk/home/
Farmer Clusters. (n.d.). About us. https://www. farmerclusters.com/
Kernza® Grain & Perennial Agriculture. (n.d.). The Land Institute. https://landinstitute.org/our-work/ perennial-crops/kernza/
Garaycochea, A. J. (2021). Planet of Fields: Design Thesis (Master’s thesis, AA Landscape Urbanism)
“Starting a Farmer Cluster.” 2018. Farmer Clusters. July 10, 2018. https://www.farmerclusters.com/ advice/starting-a-farmer-cluster/.
Heron, Kai. 2023. Farm Subsidies and the Green Transition Interview by Adam Calo. https:// podcasts.google.com/feed/Fishman, Robert. 2016. Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century Ebenezer Howard, Frank Lloyd Wright, and Le Corbusier. Cambridge, Mass. The Mit Press [C.
“Funding Information.” 2020. Farmer Clusters. June 15, 2020. https://www.farmerclusters.com/ facilitation-fund/funding-information/.
FFAC. 2021. “Intensive Agriculture: Characteristics, Examples, and Why Is It Bad? | FFAC.” Ffacoalition. org. December 14, 2021. https://ffacoalition.org/ articles/intensive-agriculture/.
