Maria Roy
Khulna University, Research Assistant of SustainableRapid and uncontrolled urbanisation is posing severe environmental issues to cities in the developing countries. Biophilic urbanism, an emerging concept of urban planning that aspires for regenerative sustainability. Urban agriculture, among the several features of biophilic cities, can generate direct short-term economic gains. This study on a city of a developing economy aims to inquire about the scope of urban agriculture at the neighbourhood level. The research applied semi-structured interviews of the residents, visual observation, mapping, review of relevant policy documents and key informant interviews. The results indicate that existing community-led practices are offering vegetables and shades. There are spaces to incorporate urban agriculture as well. Given that the government and non-governmental organizations support this concept, it is remarkable that residents are willing to embrace urban agriculture in a more organized manner. Supportive regulatory frameworks reflect political will toward biophilic urbanism, but institutional support is still required for effective implementation. The findings of this study suggest that biophilic urbanism could be implemented in the urban areas of developing economies.
1. Introduction
Cities around the world have transformed from wildness to dense urban areas in the process of industrialisation and economic globalisation. Rapid and unprecedented urbanisation is making cities vulnerable to ecological and environmental degradation and natural hazards (Wan & Wang, 2014). Because of the consequences of unregulated urbanisation, gradually, people have become disconnected from nature (Dickinson, 2013). Even street designs of recent years weakly permit pedestrian or cycling for the children (Chawla & Derr, 2012). As a result, people’s well-being is at risk (Youzhen & Longlong, 2012; Srinivasan, O’fallon & Dearry, 2003). Children are increasingly suffering from ‘nature-deficit disorder,’ physical and mental health issues, and societal ills (Dickinson, 2013, p.136) (Anakwenze & Zuberi, 2013).
Nature has the potential to shape human character in a positive manner. According to WHO, the natural living environment helps people lead a healthy life with their full potential. Green atmosphere plays a vital role in reducing aggressive behaviour, and connectivity with nature lessens the crime rate (Reeve, Desha, Hargreaves & Hargroves, 2015). Natural settings in the urban area help revive blight areas by attracting communal gathering that helps to build social connection and provides health benefits (Beatley, 2011). Surrounding ecosystem, as community resources, will protect the community from natural stress and provide food and shelter (Beatley, 2011). Integration of nature into cities will help reduce the energy demand and improve air and water quality (Reeve, Desha, Hargreaves & Hargroves, 2015).
Environmental conservation, connectivity with the place and healthy living are the prime concern of contemporary urban planning. Modern-day theories like New Urbanism, and Traditional Neighbourhood Design (TND) and Smart Growth are the planning initiatives to overcome the growing urban challenges. These initiatives, however, are not enough to address issues like urban sprawl, social and cultural segregation, decreasing biodiversity, scarcity of financial and human resource, health issues and lack of security.
Beatley (2011), being concerned about human health and natural well-being, initiated the concept of ‘biophilic urbanism’ (Beatley, 2011, p.46) to find nature-based solutions for the crisis of modern cities. The concept aims to achieve regenerative sustainability by incorporating people with nature and the economy. From social stability, economic feasibility to ecological protection, biophilic urbanism incorporates many other benefits, including sustainability, liveability, and city resilience (el-Baghdadi & Desha, 2017). However, most of the biophilic forms provide long-term and indirect benefit like reducing Urban Heat Island effects, mitigating climate change effects, improving air and water quality as well as increasing biodiversity. Additionally, some benefits of biophilic elements cannot be quantified in a currency like stress reduction, which are the significant challenges impeding its implementation in cities, especially in developing countries (el-Baghdadi & Desha, 2017; Littke, 2016). However, among the forms of ‘biophilic cities’ (Beatley, 2011, p.45), a very few forms related to ‘urban agriculture’ (Toth, Rendall & Reitsma, 2016, p.5) in building scale, neighbourhood scale and city-scale provide direct and short-term benefit to people such as food security, employment, and economic return. According to Tibesigwa, Visser, Collinson, & Twine (2016) agricultural practice in urban area could add five capitals to a community, including human, physical, financial, social, and natural.
Major cities of Bangladesh are observing rapid and uncontrolled urban expansion (Roy, Sowgat, Islam & Anjum, 2021). The capital city, Dhaka, has lost a vast amount of green space over time to accommodate the growing population (Byomkesh, Nakagoshi, & Dewan, 2012). This spontaneous urban growth has created a number of serious urban issues, including high-density urban living with scarce urban greens, air pollution and social and spatial divisions (Roy, Sowgat & Mondal, 2019). Key cities are at high risk of climate change-induced urban challenges, which requires safeguarding and preserving the natural environment and reconciling economic development’s demand towards sustainability (Du Plessis, 2012). Along with citizens, urban planning practitioners and theorists need greater acceptance of biophilic urbanism. Nevertheless, there are limited studies that looked at implementing this concept in cities of developing economies (Reeve, Desha, Hargroves, Newman & Hargreaves, 2013). Studies are focused on city-scale initiatives; yet to offer adequate insights for implementing biophilic urbanism in city core and in the building blocks of cities where crises are acute.
This research explores the scope of urban agriculture in urban neighbourhoods of Khulna to inquire about the applicability of this concept in urban Bangladesh. To make this concept more acceptable and people-centric, we have explored residents’ perspectives about and existing urban agriculture practices. This mixed-method case study research has also investigated supportive national and local regulatory frameworks that can encourage urban agriculture and biophilic urbanism. Findings are grounded on semi-structured interviews, mapping, visual observation, and policy review.
2. Conceptualising Urban Agriculture in Neighbourhoods Towards Biophilic Urbanism
2.1 Biophilic Urbanism and Biophilic Cities
The concept of biophilic urbanism has emerged from the awareness that human has an innate affiliation with nature which is expressed as biophilia (Wilson, 1984). The idea of biophilia was further developed as the biophilia hypothesis by Kellert and Wilson to perform systematic inquiry for defending the existence of the human need for exposure to nature and the influence of nature in human health and well-being (Levy, 2003). Recognising this human necessity for daily access to nature and the ecological and monetary benefits nature can provide, biophilic urbanism is concerned with promoting nature while designing, planning, and managing a city (Beatley, 2011). In this concept, environmental resources are treated as assets with a market value (el-Baghdadi & Desha, 2017), heal natural systems, and increase human well-being (Newman, Beatley & Boyer, 2017). Participation and engagement with nature in the city to bring environmental, social and economic sustainability and resilience is the vision of biophilic urbanism (Beatley & Newman, 2013). This notion leads to the purposeful use of nature in every aspect of the city so that an emotional commitment and interest grow in visible and accessible natural settings (el-Baghdadi & Desha, 2017).
Biophilic urbanism aspires to create biophilic cities that seeks to achieve regenerative sustainability by accommodating ample nature that people can regularly access (Soderlund, 2017). Besides, biophilic cities protect biodiversity, improves the environmental condition, and helps the residents to lead healthier and happier life (Ziari et al., 2018). Non-motorised transportation, access to parks and wilderness, acknowledgement of existing nature, and incorporation of nature through daylight and air are appreciated at different biophilic cities’ scales (Littke, 2016).
Beatley (2011), the pioneer researcher of biophilic urbanism, declared qualities of biophilic cities and pointed to 20 indicators at different scale under the four interrelated dimensions (see Table 1). According to Ziari et al. (2018), the influencing dimensions include biophilic conditions and infrastructure (Beatley, 2011, p.47) and biophilic institution and governance (Beatley, 2011, p.49) are that foster the creation of the influenced dimensions, namely biophilic activities and biophilic attitude and knowledge. The indicators (see Table 1) provide the qualities a biophilic city (Beatley, 2011, p.45) should have to achieve the intended goal of biophilic urbanism (Littke, 2016; Ziari et al., 2018; Mustafa & Yaseen, 2019). Ziari et al. (2018) declared some variables (see Table 1) to describe these indicators. All the dimensions, variables, and indicators address wellbeing, peoples’ contact with nature, and strategic significance for green space (Littke, 2016).
Biophilic urbanism is possible to implement at three urban scales (Beatley, 2011) (Table 2). Where the installation of city-scale elements requires a large public area, preferably in city peripheral areas (Reeve et al., 2015), neighbourhood scale elements are easier to incorporate in the built environment and ease peoples’ daily access to nature (el-Baghdadi & Desha, 2017; Ziari et al., 2018). Every element appears with different forms of nature like plot plants, rain garden, community garden, and so on that can be integrated into various scales of the built environment. Among different forms of biophilic urbanism on different scales, only forms of urban agriculture provide short-term economic return like a pot plant on a building scale, a community farm on a neighbourhood scale and green corridors on the city scale.
2.2 Urban Agriculture
Researchers perceived urban agriculture from the perspectives of health, social, economic, and environmental protection. Urban agriculture can provide urban residents with nutrition, social justice, environmental protection, health benefits and economic growth and reduce poverty (Wertheim-Heck, Raneri & Oosterveer, 2019). FAO described urban agriculture as a process of growing food in the urban area to provide food security that ensures access to healthy, adequate, and culturally appropriated food. Locally produced and consumed foods add economic wealth to that area (Toth, Rendall & Reitsma, 2016). During crises like war, hazard, or disaster, these food sources help promote the resilience of the city (Farr-Wharton, 2019). Levidow (2018) defines urban agriculture from a social perspective as the food growing process in cities that involve a diverse group of people through voluntary action, training, employment, and utilising leisure. Agricultural practice in an urban area could include five capitals to a community, including human, physical, financial, social, and natural (Tibesigwa et al., 2016). Agricultural initiatives like community garden increase social capital and knowledge sharing behaviour among community people and grow an attachment to the place. It helps build community resilience by increasing social network and reducing crime and violence (Toth, Rendall & Reitsma, 2016). It helps to reduce carbon footprint, urban heat-island effects, captures stormwater runoff, improves air quality, and provides an environmental buffer against natural disasters (Toth, Rendall & Reitsma, 2016; Farr-Wharton, 2019) and promotes biodiversity within cities (Toth, Rendall & Reitsma, 2016).
Diverse forms of urban agriculture can be applied from intensive and extensive rooftop gardening and homestead gardening at building scale to community gardening, roadside plantation, institutional livestock and aquatic farming and small-scale commercial horticulture on a neighbourhood scale. Additionally, agriculture and forestry, large-scale agro-enterprises and multifunctional farms can be implemented on a city-scale (Lwasa et al., 2014; Miedema, 2019).
2.3 The Nexus Between Biophilic Urbanism and Urban Agriculture
Closeness to nature has a positive influence on human. By engaging people in outdoor activities, biophilic urbanism strengthens human-nature interdependency. Along with ecological protection and social stability, access to nature in this process also appreciates economic growth by using environmental resources as assets to meet human need. Different forms of biophilic cities related to urban agriculture manifest the elements of biophilic urbanism. Incorporating these elements into the built environment as small doses of nature at the neighbourhood and building level can help achieve the neighbourhood level indicators. Variables, the significant concepts of those indicators, lead towards the dimensions of biophilic cities that provide the measure to judge a city with the lens of biophilic urbanism. The sequential achievements starting from the forms of urban agriculture to the dimensions of biophilic urbanism (Figure 1) can attain ecological protection, social stability and economic prosperity, which is the central notion of biophilic urbanism.
Figure 1. Urban agriculture in neighbourhoods towards Biophilic urbanism(Authors, 2021)
3. Materials and Methods
Influenced dimensions of biophilic urbanism which are ‘biophilic attitude and knowledge’ and ‘biophilic activities’ (Beatley, 2011, p.48) unwrap the aspect of biophilic urbanism regarding citizens. Whereas biophilic institution and governance and biophilic infrastructure and condition these influencing dimensions of biophilic urbanism unpin the aspect of biophilic urbanism that requires administrative support. As neighbourhood scale initiatives should involve local people and requires government and institutional intervention, neighbourhood scale indicators of these four dimensions are used for this research.
The dimension biophilic activities, that include two variables, examine the participation of community people in nature and their engagement in nature restoration. On the other hand, the dimension biophilic attitude and knowledge seeks to understand the consciousness of residents toward biophilic benefits. Associated to these two influenced dimensions, this research explores residents’ perspectives and existing practices of urban agriculture through the indicators, elements, and forms of biophilic urbanism in an urban neighbourhood. Investigation of both the dimensions require mapping, visual observation, semi structured interviews (20 sample residents), and key informant interviews (KII) (five local and national level policy makers and practitioners).
The dimension ‘biophilic institution and governance’ are state provided scope of incorporating forms of urban agriculture in neighbourhoods which can be analysed through the five variables (Figure 1). For this dimension, data from policy review as well as KII are used. The dimension ‘biophilic conditions and infrastructure’ observe the scope of integrating urban agriculture in the study neighbourhood. Mapping is the prime tool used to collect data for this dimension. Data from policy review also addresses some aspects of this dimension. These two influencing dimensions investigate the scope of accommodating urban agriculture in the study neighbourhood and supportive national and local regulatory framework (total reviewed 22) that can encourage biophilic urbanism.
Most of the residential areas of Khulna city are developed organically. As these areas are dense, neighbourhood scale possibilities of accommodation would be a challenge. Also, these areas are lived with mixed-income citizens, who have various level of education; capturing the diversity of perspectives and understanding their consciousness and willingness to accommodate urban agriculture need in-depth and large-scale research. In contrast to these challenges of considering organically developed neighbourhoods as a case study area, planned residential neighbourhoods with a homogeneous income band would offer more room for accommodation of urban agriculture both in building and neighbourhood scale. Also, it would be possible to know how a planned neighbourhood is performing in terms of biophilic urbanism and the scope towards accommodating this concept on the ground. Nirala residential area lived by mostly middle-income people is the preferred study area for this study considering the merit of taking a planned residential neighbourhood as a case study city.
4. Citizen’s Perspective Regarding Urban Agriculture and Biophilic Cities
4.1 Biophilic Attitude and Knowledge
Residents’ knowledge about and benefits of biophilic elements portray their consciousness. All the respondents are aware about at least some forms of nature and 90% of them directly or indirectly referred about the human nature interdependency. Although most of the remaining respondents who were reluctant to express the benefits of greenery, either spent time outside in nature or grow vegetables. To them (10%), the direct benefits of plants in the form of food like fruits and vegetables is the priority for planting trees. Apparently, even if some people denied recognising their interdependency on greenery, they unconsciously urge to come close to nature.
However, residents’ knowledge about the elements of biophilic cities appeared extremely limited as they could only refer some basic elements like plantation in and around homesteads, rooftop gardening and roadsides plantation. They are either unfamiliar with or limitedly aware about the elements helpful for curing contemporary urban issues including rain garden, community garden and green wall. According to key informants, residents’ knowledge about the forms of biophilic cities contributing to urban agriculture can be enhanced through introducing different elements at neighbourhood scale where residents can easily access. The need of systematic institutional interventions is paramount here.
While describing the benefits of greenery, respondents stated that greenery reduces their anxiety, provides relaxation and comfort eyes. Reflection of awareness about the health benefit that people get from nature is evident. Fruits, vegetables, breeze, and shades from trees provide direct benefit and reduce energy demand was prioritised. Statements explaining these necessities manifested human nature interdependency. Few respondents pointed on the environmental benefits of plants and depicted greenery as a remedy of hazardous situation. Even the aesthetic value of natural elements is not unknown to the residents. Therefore, it is explicit that participants are aware about health benefits of greenery as well as perceived plantation as a potential source of oxygen and aesthetics, energy demand reducer, environmental protector, and disaster mitigator.
One of the respondents tried to explain the benefits of nature-based urbanism with his experience from other country where the focus was on the aesthetic value, influence on transport system and the supply of food that can be earned from nature focused urbanism. Some others replied with the decrease in the amount of plant indicates the deterioration of environment and suggested nature focused city planning to mitigate disaster, ensure environmental sustainability, and provide shade and health benefits. All these considerations direct towards the consciousness about the benefits that nature provide us and thus the acceptance of residents about the concept of biophilic cities.
4.2 Biophilic Activities
The percentage of people in a neighbourhood that actively participate in outdoor and outdoor playtime of children tend to lead green lifestyle. Likewise, the time residents spend outside, the proportion of people involved in gardening, renewal of nature and volunteer endeavours reflect their environmental behaviour. In the Nirala Residential Area 60% of adults actively participate in outdoor nature and 75% of children play outside their house. However, in an average, they spend only 12 minutes outside per day, which should be at least 30 minutes per day according to the standards (Ridgers et al., 2006). Also, 33% children who play outside their house, had to go far away from their home for playing and lower percentage of children are playing within the residential area. About 65% adult respondents and 33% children are disappointed with the facilities provided at the outdoor spaces. Dissatisfaction with the existing facilities in the neighbourhood, lack of park and playgrounds and their poor quality and lack of investment in public spaces are the reasons limiting residents’ participation in outdoor.
Though residents of the study area do not participate in outdoor spaces, plantation within homestead is evident in this area. 95% of the respondents are engaged in gardening within homestead. In urge of going close to nature and because of lack of scope provided in outdoor space, people are making efforts to accommodate greens in their own property. One of the respondents said “I cannot manage to spend time outside my house. So, I have arranged my roof with the facilities of a park. Parks nowadays are not in a condition to make a visit.” (2018). This message conveys peoples’ desire to come close to natural elements but unwillingness to expose their children outside their home. Residents expressed their concern that they do not have to buy preservative added foods from market as they grow food at their garden. According to a respondent “We get different seasonal fruits like mango, olive, sugar apple, star fruit, golden apple, sapodilla and so on from our garden during the whole year.” (2018). This outlines the intensity of gardening. The food value that residents get from plants, encourage them to plant trees within their residents, lack of space could not restrict them to grow plants within homestead.
Other than gardening in private lands, 60% of the respondents are engaged in voluntary efforts for nature restoration in public space. The residents surely intended to have some personal benefit but at the same time they took some voluntary actions to plant trees along roadsides which provide benefits to other people as well. A statement from a respondent was “I share the fruits from the roadside garden I maintain with the people around my house and my relatives.” (2018). This statement reflects the opportunity for building social capital through gardening in community property. Figure 3 shows that the agricultural forestry created through personal initiative is also attracting people indicating the potential of agricultural forestry performing as a social forestry.
People are willing to take part in nature restoration by taking personal initiative, but they are unable to make this a community effort due to the association of cost, labour, and time. Additionally, some cannot even participate in green lifestyle because of the absence of necessary assistance and legal basis for using land for productive purpose. Key informants acknowledged the dearth of facilities in public spaces and highlighted on the lack of security their restricting residents’ access and effective use of outdoor nature. They emphasised on promotion of voluntary activities with public security and institutional support. Public private partnership to provide support for maintenance and security of land ownership for agricultural practice are also suggested by the key informants to inspire more people to get involved. To sum up, public private partnership can bring the community together along with the administrative support.
5. Administrative Support Towards Urban Agriculture and Biophilic Urbanism
5.1 Biophilic Condition and Infrastructure
To have a healthy life and sustainable neighbourhood, access to walking trial, community garden and ecological connectivity within neighbourhood are necessary. Though the study area is a planned residential area designed in 80s, absence of walking trial is explicit here. Despite the prestige of community garden worldwide, there is no existing community garden in this area. Also, the presence of integrated ecological network is absent. Only about 14% of the area is covered with greenery. It is fascinating that there is a scope to integrate 68% green area in the study area through incorporating neighbourhood elements of biophilic cities which are green verges, green islands, and green roofs. Addition of green walls and green initiatives around waterbody will increase the percentage.
To have a healthy city, a 10% reservation of land for natural element is a minimum requirement (Beatley, 2011), while in the study area, park and playground cover only 2.56% of the total neighbourhood area. The amount is even lower than the requirement of Khulna master plan where 3.51% area of total land has been proposed to preserve for major open space. The condition of the existing park is also substandard. Broken fences, lack of facilities for recreation or exercise, and lack of maintenance of the very few facilities provided are making the existing park underused by the residents (Figure 2). In this concern, one of the key informants mentioned that “There is no strict law that bounds the development authority to follow the standards.” (2018).
Figure 2. The existing park in the study neighbourhood offering little opportunity (Photo credit: Authors)
Green urban features in public space provide numerous benefits to the neighbourhood and residents that also contribute to the sustainability of the city. Though home gardening is the most prominent element among the green urban features in the neighbourhood, insignificant portion of people are also voluntarily engaged in gardening in public space (Figure 3). Very few people do roadside gardening around their house utilising the Right of Way. People are investing money and time to create social and agricultural forestry in the public space with an intention to add aesthetic value to their house, and to get food and shade from those plants. Regardless of the motives, these small scale social and agricultural forests attract local people to gather and enjoy the aesthetics, summer breeze and foods. Key informants of this research mentioned that the conservation of land for green features mainly depends on the priority projects of government and allocated budget. In study neighbourhood some activities like gardening in public spaces are visible by the help of private initiative. But these initiatives require active support from administration to have land security to sustain and have their maximum potential.
Figure 3. Attracting green urban features in the study neighbourhood (Photo credit: Authors)
5.2 Biophilic Institutions and Governance
Accommodation of biophilic urbanism through urban agriculture in neighbourhoods require supportive regulatory frameworks that would provide permission of such practices in public space. Many national and local level policy documents of Bangladesh have policies those indirectly refer the need for biophilic interventions. The Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh prioritises the protection and progress of the environment and biodiversity. The Climate Change Trust Act, 2010 sets aim and objectives to promote sustainable use of natural resources that also protects the environment. Many other documents repeatedly pointed on the need for environmental pollution control, prevention and mitigation of pollution, and conservation of environment. Policy emphases convey the importance of addressing environmental concern. The regulation stated as “Space for playground, park, open space and green space should be conserved for healthy environment and recreation in residential areas and promoter will invest on its maintenance and then handover it to municipality authority or NGO” in the Private House Land Development Rule, 2004 encourages the preservation, protection and restoration of the natural environment for healthy living.
A government national climate change fund has recently been introduced to tackle the impacts of climate change in Bangladesh. But this policy has not mentioned any specific action where funding will be used. Some recently developed strategies are encouraging green development and agricultural practice to improve the environmental condition by providing fund. one of the key informants stated that “Development authority do not get enough fund for this kind of activity. Priority is provided in other sectors of development.” (2018). Lack of specification of laws which strictly enforces the implementation of these policies is the main barrier to the implementation of conservation initiatives.
Unfortunately, there is no pronouncement among the statutes of state government of Bangladesh that recommend the existence of walking trials, community garden or ecological network within neighbourhood. The absence of formal regulation has resulted in the absence of these kind of facilities in the study neighbourhood which is a planned residential area. In this regard, some key informants suggested that the regulatory frameworks can offer flexibility by reducing barriers to promote application of community gardens. While others highlighted the necessity of the institutional support for maintenance that can sustain the concept of community gardening or ecological network.
Statements from some statutes also directly restrict activities in open space and denies productive use of abundant residential lands. According to a key informant of this study “We cannot even practice awareness program in open space. Authority do not provide us the permission and restricts to perform any kind of social activity there.” (2018). Local level planning document of Khulna city declares the natural green space as informal and defined their accommodation on city fringe areas. Formal intervention in those places is restricted by considering them informal places and the locational specification restricts this kind of activity in the core urban area where the need is acute. Key informants of this study suggested to remove these restrictions for better living environment which directs towards the modification of regulations to increase accessibility of public spaces.
Despite all these barriers, some policies recognise the necessity for increasing the scope for urban agriculture for both food productivity and environmental protection. Policy documents from 1999 and onwards support local agricultural production to have food security down to the household level. Codes on green building and planning, grant programs and greenspace initiatives are examples of green design within neighbourhoods. But lack of specification on building construction act restricts the application of this strategy. Bangladesh Climate Change Strategy and Action Plan 2009 recommends policy to appreciate planning interventions for protecting urban area from climate change effects. Green urban features have also been appreciated as a solution to different issues. Preservation of waterfront green and restrictions on development there have been recommended as a solution in Khulna structure plan to protect river from possible encroachment, to maintain ecological balance and to provide waterfront recreation. All these considerations demand better management of cities through improvement of green infrastructures.
As a response to provide access to food, nutrition and increased economic opportunity, national policies have encouraged agricultural forestry. Social forestry is inspired as an action for mitigation and low carbon development in the Climate Change Action Plan 2010. Homestead gardening is emphasized in the draft National Agricultural Extension Policy 2015 through considerations of the social environment, local need, and traditional practices where service providers will be involved to support the community in such an activity. The aim is to create a viable means of increasing food security and intake of micro-nutrient among the vulnerable groups. The policy document also proposes a collaborative model for nationwide successful and cost-effective home gardening initiatives that is adaptable to local conditions. Likewise, the Khulna city structure plan considered public parks as basic urban amenities and specified prospective location at city centre and at neighbourhood level. This indicates the emphasise on the restoration of public parks that assures the access of citizens. Additionally, it encourages recreational activities there. These contemporary documents represent those policies are starting to define scope for biophilic urbanism through urban agriculture.
Along with national level policies, local level plans also encourage green designs as a means of bring relief to the overcrowded and monotonous urban environment, and ecological balance. Though none of the policies comes with proper implementation guidelines. Although a fair number of statutes of recent years have encouraged the application of green urban design, the effort is not visible. The Local Government (municipality) (amendment) Ordinance 2010 motivates arboriculture and gardening. In this case, municipality is responsible for maintenance and improvement activities, and citizen will participate in the planning process assuring access of local people in open spaces. But according to a key informant, the municipality do not provide any support for maintenance purpose. This reflects the negligence of duties of authority.
Apart from regulations, organisational support to the residents to perform agricultural activities in public space and extent of different institutions are needed to initiate biophilic urbanism and urban agriculture. The Climate Change Trust Act, 2010 aimed to initiate project or program for tackling climate change through bringing local people close to nature. To accelerate this policy in National Sustainable Development Strategy 2010-21 (NSDS), a strategy was set to ensure people’s ownership of social forestry and suggested to increase people’s participation in plantation and crop cultivation. Along with the formal support this strategy ensures attachment of local people with space. But according to the key informants, in practice, people do not get the organizational support. The barrier is the lack of integrated system of management and lack of collaboration among authorities in policy implementation.
6. Conclusions
Human evolved in a world that was filled with nature. Now people are living in a world where the economy has the upper hand over nature. However, nature has its limit and taking its revenge in the name of environmental degradation, ecological deterioration, natural hazards and disaster. It is high time to recognise the need of incorporating nature into the built environment intentionally and purposefully for making sustainable and resilient cities. As the building block of cities, Neighbourhoods has the potentials to embrace the forms of biophilic urbanism through diverse forms of urban agriculture in three urban scales. Incorporating urban greens, their maintenance and giving them life for long in neighbourhoods of the cities in Bangladesh require people’s active participation. Encouraging findings suggest, residents are conscious of the importance of nature, and they are active in nature restoration to some extent and willing to contribute to creating a biophilic city through urban agriculture on the building and neighbourhood scale. However, there is still limited community involvement in urban agriculture as this involves time, labour, and resources. Public sectors’ proactive effort to secure the use of available public lands for urban green, which is currently absent, is essential to be effective. Findings also reveal residents’ dissatisfaction with the provided facilities in the neighbourhood, including lack of park and playgrounds and limited security, poor maintenance, and quality of the existing small park. Public-Private Partnership (PPP) can be a helpful tool to engage residents heavily in nature restoration. It can provide the security of land to the community for urban agricultural practice. This approach will encourage more people to invest in public space and secure the effectiveness of the voluntary efforts in nature restoration. Inspection of the study neighbourhood and supportive regulatory frameworks show that though the existing amount of green cover and the open space of the study area is not satisfactory enough, there is a huge opportunity to add more greens into space.
Additionally, regulatory frameworks are promoting the concept that demonstrates political will towards biophilic urbanism. Still, there are no detailed guidelines on it. Political acceptance of the idea of biophilic urbanism and commitments are fundamental to create biophilic cities. Institutional support in the maintenance and implementation of the goals of biophilic cities will be helpful in the real world. Incentives and assistance for accommodating urban green in building scale and using vacant public lands supported by detailed guidelines in planning documents can increase the amount of green cover within the built environment. The national-level regulations are too broad to apply at the local level, and local policies are less explicit about achieving these goals at the city and neighbourhood level. Effective implementation needs institutional support.
Acknowledgements
This study received no financing from public, private, or non-profit organizations.
Conflict of Interests
The authors disclose that they have no competing interests.
References
Anakwenze, U., & Zuberi, D. (2013). Mental health and poverty in the inner city. Health & social work, 38(3), 147-157. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hlt013
Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic cities Integrating Nature into Urban Design and Planning. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-59726-986-5
Beatley, T., & Newman, P. (2013). Biophilic cities are sustainable, resilient cities. Sustainability, 5(8), 3328-3345. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5083328
Byomkesh, T., Nakagoshi, N., & Dewan, A. M. (2012). Urbanization and green space dynamics in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 8(1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-010-0147-7
Chawla, L., & Derr, V. (2012). The development of conservation behaviors in childhood and youth. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199733026.013.0028
Dickinson, E. (2013). The misdiagnosis: Rethinking “nature-deficit disorder”. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture, 7(3), 315-335. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2013.802704
Du Plessis, C. (2012). Towards a regenerative paradigm for the built environment. Building Research & Information, 40(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2012.628548
el-Baghdadi, O., & Desha, C. (2017). Conceptualising a biophilic services model for urban areas. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 27, 399-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.10.016
Farr-Wharton, G. (2019, December). Seed to Feed: Leveraging HCl and Capitalising on Office Environments to Grow Food. In Proceedings of the 31st Australian Conference on Human-Computer-Interaction (pp. 53-63). https://doi.org/10.1145/3369457.3369462
Levidow, L. (2018). London’s urban agriculture: Building community through social innovation. The International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food, 24(3). https://doi.org/10.48416/ijsaf.v24i3.10
Levy, S. S. (2003). The biophilia hypothesis and anthropocentric environmentalism. Environmental Ethics, 25(3), 227-246. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics200325316
Littke, H. (2016). Becoming biophilic: challenges and opportunities for biophilic urbanism in urban planning policy. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-10-2015-0036
Lwasa, S., Mugagga, F., Wahab, B., Simon, D., Connors, J., & Griffith, C. (2014). Urban and peri-urban agriculture and forestry: Transcending poverty alleviation to climate change mitigation and adaptation. Urban Climate, 7, 92-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2013.10.007
Mabon, L., & Shih, W. Y. (2021). Urban greenspace as a climate change adaptation strategy for subtropical Asian cities: A comparative study across cities in three countries. Global Environmental Change, 68, 102248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102248
Miedema, K. (2019). Grow small, think big: designing a local food system for London, Ontario. URBAN DESIGN International, 24(2), 142-155. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-019-00095-5
Mustafa, F. A., & Yaseen, F. R. (2019). Towards the Application of Biophilic Parameters in Local Buildings: a Case Study of Bilkent School, Erbil City-Iraq. Architecture, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v10i2.2416
Newman, P., Beatley, T., & Boyer, H. (2017). Resilient cities: Overcoming fossil fuel dependence. Island Press. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-686-8
Reeve, A. C., Desha, C., Hargreaves, D., & Hargroves, K. (2015). Biophilic urbanism: contributions to holistic urban greening for urban renewal. Smart and sustainable built environment. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-11-2014-0057
Reeve, A., Desha, C., Hargroves, C., Newman, P., & Hargreaves, D. (2013). A basis for inquiry into policy considerations for increasing the application of biophilic urbanism. In Urban Environment (pp. 143-151). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7756-9_12
Ridgers, N. D., Stratton, G., & Fairclough, S. J. (2006). Physical activity levels of children during school playtime. Sports medicine, 36(4), 359-371. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200636040-00005
Ridgers, N. D., Stratton, G., & Fairclough, S. J. (2006). Physical activity levels of children during school playtime. Sports medicine, 36(4), 359-371. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200636040-00005
Roy, S., Sowgat, T., & Mondal, J. (2019). City profile: Dhaka, Bangladesh. Environment and Urbanization ASIA, 10(2), 216-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0975425319859126
Roy, S., Sowgat, T., Islam, S. T., & Anjum, N. (2021). Sustainability Challenges for Sprawling Dhaka. Environment and Urbanization ASIA, 0975425321997995. https://doi.org/10.1177/0975425321997995
Soderlund, J. (2017). New Opportunities for the Horticultural Industry. Ornamental Horticulture, 23(3), 221-233. https://doi.org/10.14295/oh.v23i3.1115
Srinivasan, S., O’fallon, L. R., & Dearry, A. (2003). Creating healthy communities, healthy homes, healthy people: initiating a research agenda on the built environment and public health. American journal of public health, 93(9), 1446-1450. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.9.1446
Tibesigwa, B., Visser, M., Collinson, M., & Twine, W. (2016). Investigating the sensitivity of household food security to agriculture-related shocks and the implication of social and natural capital. Sustainability Science, 11(2), 193-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0332-6
Toth, A., Rendall, S., & Reitsma, F. (2016). Resilient food systems: a qualitative tool for measuring food resilience. Urban ecosystems, 19(1), 19-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-015-0489-x
Wan, G., & Wang, C. (2014). Unprecedented urbanisation in Asia and its impacts on the environment. Australian Economic Review, 47(3), 378-385. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8462.12076
Wertheim-Heck, S., Raneri, J. E., & Oosterveer, P. (2019). Food safety and nutrition for low-income urbanites: exploring a social justice dilemma in consumption policy. Environment and Urbanization, 31(2), 397-420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247819858019
Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Harvard university press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674045231
Yigitcanlar, T., & Teriman, S. (2015). Rethinking sustainable urban development: towards an integrated planning and development process. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 12(1), 341-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-013-0491-x
Youzhen, C., & Longlong, D. (2012, August). From Garden City to Smart Growth: The Evolution and Management of New Urbanism. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Public Management (ICPM-2012) (pp. 266-271). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/icpm.2012.32
Ziari, K., Pourahmad, A., Fotouhi Mehrabani, B., & Hosseini, A. (2018). Environmental sustainability in cities by biophilic city approach: a case study of Tehran. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 22(4), 486-516. https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934.2018.1425153
Sign in to continue
Not a member yet? Sign up now
Administrative Assistant
Deniz Bol is the Administrative Assistant at SPACE Studies, where she supports the day-to-day operations and contributes to the smooth functioning of the organization. Alongside her administrative role, Deniz is an artist with a passion for creative expression. She is currently pursuing her studies at the University of the Arts London (UAL), where she continues to develop her artistic practice. Her organizational skills, paired with her artistic background, make her a valuable asset to the SPACE Studies team, helping bridge the worlds of administration and creativity.
E-mail: denizbol@spacestudies.co.uk
Digital Marketing Consultant
Murat Oktay is the Digital Marketing Consultant at SPACE Studies, where he provides strategic guidance to enhance our digital presence and community engagement. With a keen eye for digital marketing trends and best practices, Murat plays a key role in refining our content strategy, expanding our online reach, and connecting with a wider audience. His expertise in digital tools and innovative marketing techniques aligns with SPACE Studies’ mission as a social enterprise, ensuring that our campaigns are impactful and resonate with our commitment to social responsibility in architecture and design. Outside his work with SPACE Studies, Murat stays at the forefront of digital marketing advancements, continually exploring new tools and sharing his insights with peers.
E-mail: muratoktay@spacestudies.co.uk
Marketing Manager
Santa Noella Matabaro is the Marketing Manager of SPACE Studies, bringing her expertise in strategic planning, community engagement, and relationship-building to the organization’s mission as a social enterprise. With a background in Politics & Law from the University of Kent, Santa combines analytical insights with a creative approach to advancing SPACE Studies’ vision of fostering interdisciplinary dialogue in architecture, design, and urban planning. In her role, she develops targeted campaigns and strategic partnerships, building brand presence and fostering meaningful connections with the community. Santa’s collaborative and people-centered approach enhances SPACE Studies’ impact, aligning with its commitment to social responsibility and innovation in the built environment.
Academic Content Coordinator
Betul Uckan is an architect and dedicated academic with a background in both architectural practice and research. She holds a Master of Science in Architectural Design and a Bachelor’s degree in Architecture from Istanbul Technical University, where she cultivated her interests in architectural theory and design. Betul has gained experience as a research assistant in various universities, contributing to design studios and foundational courses. She has also worked in the field as an architect with projects focused on design, modeling, and construction, and has been involved in notable projects, including Maltepe Piazza and Emaar Square in Istanbul. With her expertise spanning both digital and material architecture, Betul brings a dynamic, interdisciplinary approach to her role as the Academic Programme Coordinator.
E-mail: betuluckan@spacestudies.co.uk
Senior Researcher & Managing Editor
Arghavan Pournaderi is a senior researcher in the field of architectural conservation and restoration, with an academic foundation in architecture and specialized expertise in historic sites and buildings. Completing her PhD at the Art University of Isfahan, Iran, in 2019, her research has contributed to the understanding of Iran’s architectural heritage, with a focus on Isfahan’s urban and architectural evolution during the Safavid period. In addition to her extensive research, Dr. Pournaderi has held academic positions at various institutions in Isfahan, teaching at both undergraduate and graduate levels. Her work extends beyond academia as she contributes to SPACE Studies as Senior Researcher & Managing Editor, where she oversees scholarly initiatives that foster deeper interdisciplinary dialogue in architecture and heritage conservation.
Senior Researcher & Educational Consultant
Gregory Cowan is a Senior Researcher and Educational Consultant at SPACE Studies, where he leads initiatives that bridge academic research and practical application in architecture and urban design. He contributes his extensive experience to mentoring postgraduate students, designing educational workshops, and guiding community-focused projects. Gregory is also a freelance academic at the University of Wales Trinity St David and the University of Westminster, and founder of The Architects Coach. His expertise spans architectural workspace analysis, professional development, and positive intelligence coaching.
E-mail: gregorycowan@spacestudies.co.uk
Senior Researcher
Alison Hand is a Senior Researcher at SPACE Studies. She is a painter and writer with an MA in Painting from the Royal College of Art. Alison’s work focuses on creating absurd, unstable heterotopic spaces and dialogues with painting history. She is currently the Artist in Residence for King’s College London Philosophy Department on the Dreams and Wakeful Consciousness Research Project, exploring themes of time and simultaneity in new work. Alison has received numerous awards for her painting and is currently working with Bloomsbury Publishers on a major essay on Drawing in Contemporary Art. She is also the BA Fine Art Programme Leader at Art Academy London and co-director of Cement Arts. Her role at SPACE Studies involves leading research projects, mentoring junior researchers, and contributing to our artistic and academic initiatives.
E-mail: alisonhand@spacestudies.co.uk
Senior Researcher
Julian Wild is a Senior Researcher at SPACE Studies and the Sculpture Program Leader at The Art Academy London. With over 30 years of experience in creating and exhibiting sculptures, Julian has worked with high-profile clients such as Cate Blanchett and the University of Oxford. A fellow and former vice president (2015-2019) of the Royal Society of Sculptors, his work has been featured at venues like Modern Art Oxford and Chatsworth House. At SPACE Studies, Julian leads research projects, mentors junior team members, and conducts workshops that blend art and urban studies. In his free time, he enjoys attending academic conferences and crafting new sculptures.
E-mail: julianwild@spacestudies.co.uk
Director of Publications & Senior Researcher
Elif Suyuk Makakli (Associative Professor) earned her PhD in Architecture from the Vienna University of Technology, where she studied the impact of technology on architecture under Prof. William Alsop. With extensive experience in architectural practice in Istanbul and Vienna, she is now an Associate Professor at FMV Isik University, focusing on design education and technology. At SPACE Studies, Elif serves as both the Head of Publications and Senior Researcher, guiding scholarly content and contributing to research initiatives. She is dedicated to mentoring and fostering design innovation.
E-mail: elifsmakakli@spacestudies.co.uk
Director of Research
Sanaz Shobeiri is an architect, urban designer, and landscape urbanist, currently a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Planning at Queen’s University Belfast. Her research focuses on age-gender inclusiveness and the interplay of architectural, historical, political, and sociocultural dimensions in urban spaces, exemplified by her project on city centres in Belfast and Tehran. Sanaz holds a PhD in Urban Planning from the University of Tehran and has a robust portfolio in sustainability and urban theory. As Head of Research at SPACE Studies, she leads innovative research initiatives, fostering collaboration and academic excellence. In her free time, Sanaz enjoys exploring urban landscapes and supporting community development.
E-mail: sanazshobeiri@spacestudies.co.uk
Creative Director
Selin Gulce Sozmen is the Creative Director at SPACE Studies, where she leads the artistic vision and design strategy for the organisation. With a background in graphic design and visual arts, Selin has been instrumental in creating visually captivating books, journals, and event posters. Her role extends to developing and coordinating workshops and creative projects, ensuring that all visual materials meet the highest standards of quality and innovation. Selin’s dedication to creativity and excellence drives the visual and creative direction of SPACE Studies, making her an essential part of the team.
E-mail: selinsozmen@spacestudies.co.uk
Founder & Executive Director
Pinar Engincan is the Founder and Executive Director of SPACE Studies, an innovative social enterprise focused on fostering interdisciplinary dialogue and education in architecture and urban design. With extensive experience as a lecturer and researcher, Pınar holds a PhD in Architecture and has led numerous academic initiatives. Her career includes curriculum development, international collaborations, and research on housing and urban policies. Passionate about bridging academia and community, she champions accessible education and consultancy services, empowering individuals to shape the built environment.
E-mail: pengincan@spacestudies.co.uk
