Content uploaded by Angus Donald Campbell
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Angus Donald Campbell on Jan 30, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
8
Participatory Technology Design for Urban Agriculture
in South Africa
Angus Donald Campbell
University of Johannesburg, Senior Lecturer Industrial Design, Johannesburg, South Africa
acampbell@uj.ac.za
Abstract. As the population of South African cities rapidly increases, evidence
of food insecurity of urban populations is also on the increase. Urban
agriculture provides an opportunity to improve urban food security whilst
reducing poverty, inequality and unemployment. This position paper identifies
three problem areas in the current urban agricultural system in Johannesburg. It
proposes methods, whilst exploring examples, that can better encourage
participation, increasing skills and knowledge, and improve networking through
considered design intervention between stakeholders in Johannesburg’s food
system through the use of appropriate technology.
Keywords: Urban Agriculture, Community Participation, Appropriate
Technology, Participatory Technology Development, Industrial Design, South
Africa
1 1 Introduction
The mass monoculture production and distribution of food, spurred on by the green
revolution, has created a food system far removed from citizen ‘average’. Highly
processed foods blur the source of much of their content and the notion of seasonal or
local food has almost become redundant [1]. This obfuscation of the food system has
brought with it environmental degradation, introduced toxins into the food system and
due to the commodification of food, affects international food prices and hence
consumers pockets at the hint of a large drought. This highly technological, complex
and hidden food system ultimately affects the poor and the marginalised most.
The latest South African census data indicates both an increase in South African
urban population and levels of unemployment [2]. Both these indicators can have a
detrimental impact on food security; namely the availability of and the ability to
purchase healthy, culturally appropriate food [3]. There have been three national
surveys of food security in South Africa undertaken between 1999 and 2008 [4], a
comparison of these studies reveals a decrease in the level of food insecurity, however
the statistics are still harrowing: almost 25% of South Africans are food insecure and
the majority of children do not receive sufficient nutrient requirements [4].
9
There is a perception that food security is a rural problem based on the availability
of food, hence by producing a sufficient quantity of food the problem should be
eliminated [5]. This ‘grow more’ approach, as explained by The African Food
Security Urban Network (AFSUN), does not aid the plight of the urban poor and
highlights the complexity of finding solutions beyond “rural development” and “green
revolutions” [5]. Leonie Joubert’s recent publication The Hungry Season [6] together
with a multitude of articles in the press [7] [8] [9] [10] are popularising the problems
that South African cities and their citizens face with access to readily available,
nutritious, culturally appropriate food. Statistics indicated that in the deprived wards
of Johannesburg, up to 60% of households are mildly to severely food insecure [11],
add to this the prediction that by 2050 60% of Africa’s population will be urbanised
[12] and the importance of a suitable and sustainable food supply in urban areas
becomes clear.
The Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations promotes
urban agriculture as being highly relevant to alleviating food insecurity in cities [13].
At the level of both the South African government [14] and city municipalities [15]
[16] [17], policy and projects are in place to attempt to improve food security through
urban agricultural initiatives even in the face of the reduction of available land for
housing. Urban agriculture has been the focus of a few South African studies [18] [19]
and research institutions11: evidence shows a direct link between access to healthier
food and opportunities for additional income through urban agriculture. With almost
20% of South Africans using agriculture to supplement household food supplies [5],
urban agriculture provides an opportunity in cities to impact on the three core
problems in South African society: poverty, inequality and unemployment. There are
however cultural, political and organisational issues that need attention in order for
urban agriculture to improve food resilience in South African cities. This position
paper will unpack some of these problems evidenced through my involvement in
research projects in the Johannesburg region. I propose that better opportunities for
participatory engagement between all the stakeholders in city food systems needs
considered design intervention specifically with a focus on appropriate technology.
Technology designed with and for local farmers provides a viable avenue to increase
food production; and by encouraging local food production, using local skills, a much
more resilient local food system can be designed [20].
2 Issues Facing Urban Agriculture in South Africa
One of the organisational issues facing urban agriculture in South Africa is the fact
that it does not sit comfortably in any one government department: part Social
Development; part Health; part Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (AFF); it also has
11 Most notably: Siyakhana, www.siyakhana.org ; African Food Security Urban Network
(AFSUN) www.afsun.org ; Food & Trees for Africa, www.trees.co.za ; Abalimi
Bezekhaya, www.abalimi.org ; South African Food Lab,
www.southernafricafoodlab.org ; Oranjezicht City Farm, www.ozcf.co.za ;
Organic Farms Group, www.organicfarmsgroup.com
10
impact on Water Affairs; Human Settlements; Labour; Rural Development and Land
Reform; Higher Education and Training; and Economic Development. In
Johannesburg the Department of Health and Social Development manage projects
with a focus on nutrition [21] [22] [16]; the Department of Economic Development
has a project focused on organic farming [23]; and the Mayoral Committee on Food
Resilience, as part of the City of Johannesburg, sitting under the project banner A City
Where None Go Hungry [15], is now attempting to manage a range of co-operatives
that to varying degrees are located in City Parks, the Department of Health and Social
Development and AFF. This all leads to a fragmentation of focus and serious
confusion for urban farmers on the ground trying to negotiate the quagmire of
departmental authority.
In my work with grassroots urban farming organisations Rainbow Nation Farmers
[24]; Noodgesig Farmers; Balimi Food Security Company [25]; Siyazenzela Phiri
Organic and Natural Food Market [26]; and the Soweto Farmers Forum, one of the
biggest difficulties for these organisations is finding community members willing to
work on their farms. If money is not directly offered for services, and their reward is
based on the successful outcomes of a seasonal crop, compensation seems too far
removed and unpredictable for the majority of workers. Issues of ownership in terms
of land tenure and inputs are also a problem for commitment; this becomes
particularly difficult when farming takes place on government land without a lease
(Noodgesig Farmers) or on land owned by schools and hence not zoned for
agriculture (Siyanzenzela). Additionally there seems to be a social stigma attached to
farming, this stigma may stem from childhood “gardening punishment” handed out by
school teachers to try maintain discipline in classrooms; and/or the consideration of
gardening as a “desperate” means to access food as a last resort; and/or the
governments previous disregard for subsistence agriculture as relevant to economic
participation12. Add to this the theft of electricity circuit breakers by the Izinyoka-
Nyoka or illegal electricity connectors, leaving the farmers without pumps for
borehole water, and the theft of fences by opportunistic recyclers, leaving their
produce unprotected from hungry passers-by; the unpredictability of rewards for
effort becomes all the more clear.
In addition to the issues listed above, urban farming is especially difficult with
limited farming skills. Umezuruke Opara, the chair of research into post-harvest
technologies at Stellenbosch University says that, “often these [small-scale] farmers
lack access to the latest scientific knowledge about how to increase crop yield with
existing resources, when to harvest to achieve good post-harvest quality, how to
package and store their produce to extend storage life, and meeting market standards
and consumer demand.” [27]. Access to market for producers who are succeeding to
produce is also a problem. The seasonality and unpredictability of crop production
makes meeting sales agreements difficult, not to mention issues with maintaining
quality control.
12 The 2013 South African National Development Plan does however now very clearly support
smallholder agriculture, as does the Johannesburg Mayoral Project A City Where None Go
Hungry.
11
From the issues listed above, three problem areas can be clearly identified, namely
encouraging participation, increasing skills and knowledge, and improving
networking. I propose all three of these can be targeted through the use of appropriate
participatory technology.
3 Participatory Technology
Surmounting the stigma of farming in urban areas is something that can only be
addressed through a process of collaborative effort and slow change with tangible
evidence of success. The power of participation in farming in Africa is not new; Paul
Harrison’s dated but seminal book The Greening of Africa discusses how the
traditional African village facilitated participation prior to colonization [28]. In the
complex environment of contemporary city centres such as a melting pot like
Johannesburg, communities are a complex mix of migrants, ethnicities, tribes, and
political leanings, and the concept of a “traditional” African village far removed from
reality. Individuals are far more self-serving and distrusting than in familial clans, but
even in such an emulsion, the power of grassroots communal action to increase
political voice and participation in civil society should not be underestimated. Many
case studies of successful communal farming action are documented under various
participatory ground roots initiatives such as Farmer First [29], Participatory
Technology Development [30], Participatory Research and Peoples Science [31]. The
most powerful testimony to this is Roland Bunch’s exploration of People-centred
Agricultural Improvement [32]. Bunch is highly critical of paternalism created by
give-aways highlighting the basic human nature that no-one really cares for anything
they don’t have an invested interest in. He proposes that enthusiasm is the driving
force behind any developmental project and that the source of enthusiasm is through
early recognisable success. The chances of success in an agricultural endeavour can
be greatly increased through the use of suitable technologies and by increasing
productivity; the viability of such a pursuit can visibly encourage participation and
long-term sustainability.
Technology development for agricultural growth has often been seen as the transfer
of technology and knowledge from either developed countries, institutions and
practitioners to developing countries, institutions and practitioners. However, by
simply transferring technology, little empowerment takes place for the recipients, and
this creates a system of innovation that serves the current food system and the powers
that control it. It also invokes a spectre of dependency, and this could cement
developing country farmers as dependant on others who supposedly know ‘better’
what their development challenges are. For farmers and consumers in poor areas and
newly emerging farmers, such as in the urban context, such technology is often
inappropriate and does not help achieving outcomes that benefit both people and the
environment. Participatory Technology Development [33] is aimed to build the
capacity of farmers to conduct their own experiments, develop their own technology
and make informed decisions on, demands of, and interventions into, the food system
in order to realise their own interests. This does not take place in a vacuum and it is
12
important to acknowledge the social infrastructure necessary for innovation to take
place. A designed social infrastructure can contribute to technology and other
innovation by placing multiple stakeholders alongside each other in dialogue that
would be able to make effective changes to the system. A multi-stakeholder
intervention could innovate by the strategic incorporation of diverse stakeholders in
the food system, from state agencies right down to communities themselves, and
through such an intervention implement changes.
The Mayoral Committee on Food Resilience is valiantly attempting to organise
urban agriculture in Johannesburg in a designed, top-down manner. Nabeel Hamdi
describes the complexity of such an undertaking in terms of the unequal powers,
unsymmetrical balance, weak links and fragmentation of the relationships between the
state, the market and the community [34]. He goes on to expand this complexity into
the relationship on a local, national and global level. This complexity withstanding,
multi-stakeholder coalitions have also been shown to be very effective in helping to
bring about change in agricultural and food systems [35] [36]. The TransForum
project, undertaken in the Netherlands from 2004-2010, successfully used a Connected
Value Development approach aimed at transforming perceived trade-offs into
complements, by connecting the values held by the different stakeholders [35]. This
approach is currently being implemented as part of a globally linked project that will
share knowledge, innovations and expertise called the MetroAg Innoversity [37]. I am
one of the Johannesburg representatives in this project, and although at the beginning
stages of such an undertaking, we are already making significant steps to link farmers,
knowledge based institutions, civil society groups and the government in
Johannesburg.
Designers are well suited through their training in problem solving to be able to
explore the global perspective of the various networks and stakeholders involved in
food systems and providing designed opportunities for collaboration and path crossing.
Such a systems design approach to collaboration can be enhanced through
participatory approaches; many of these methods can be classified under the umbrella
of social impact design [38]. Appropriate users, in this case urban farmers, undertake
problem identification and problem solving while the role of the
scientist/researcher/designer is more of a consultant to collaborate with, rather than to
direct [31]. The design of the Seboko hail tunnel for the Rainbow Nation farmers by
Kyle Brand as part of his Industrial Design Honours mini-dissertation at the University
of Johannesburg is an example of the result of such a process [24]. Through a process
of user group interviews, hail was identified as a major issue for the farmers due to the
impact it had on their crop success. Brand was able to co-design a low-cost covering
system with the farmers that allowed for local production, assembly and resulted in a
product sufficiently flexible for their needs. The cover used invasive plant shoots
(Black Wattle) as its major structural component whilst incorporating laser-cut joining
mechanisms as the connectors. Standard hail protection covering was then attached to
the armature through a mechanism integrated in the laser cut connector plates. The
solution answered the farmers’ needs with a low-cost product whilst maintaining a
balance between high and low-tech componentry for manufacture and job creation.
From the other end of the technological scale, and notably with 650 million mobile
13
phone subscribers in Africa, Information Communication Technologies (ICT) are also
facilitating change in African agriculture through the use of mobile apps [39].
SokoniSMS64 uses sms’s to provide farmers with market prices before the farmers
travel long distances to market; Kilimo Salama (“safe agriculture” in Swahili) in
Kenya provides “pay as you plant” micro-insurance to farmers; iCow from M-Farm
helps farmers keep track of each of their cows through an online calendar; Tigo Kilimo
in Tanzania gives farmers instant weather information and provide farmers with
appropriate farming tips; and CocoaLink in Ghana provides farmers with information
on farm safety, child labour, health, crop disease prevention, crop marketing and
improvements in farming practices [39]. From another developing context, in India, a
mobile app called Nano Ganesh “seeks to transform the way farmers manage their
water systems by giving them the freedom to turn pumps on and off, from any location,
with their mobile phone” [40]. These technologies developed on the back of the
ubiquity of mobile phones in Africa and India, in some cases provide farm
management tools for farmers, but in many cases enable knowledge transfer between
‘experts’ and farmers. These knowledge transferal applications would become all the
more powerful through the integration of bottom-up knowledge transfer through wiki
type applications. Paul Richards in his book Indigenous Agricultural Revolution was
quick to note that many of the most successful innovations in crop production in Africa
had local roots, highlighting that “there should be less of an emphasis on ‘teaching’
farmers how to farm and supplying ‘improved’ inputs, and more emphasis on how to
foster and support local adaptation and inventiveness.” [31].
4 Conclusion
The University of Johannesburg’s involvement in the MetroAg Innoversity has
prompted us to undertake semester-based design lab projects in collaboration with the
Departments of Industrial Design, Anthropology and Development Studies and the
Soweto Farmers Forum in 2014. These projects will be site specific, moving annually
from one farmer to the next. They aim to document current issues faced by the
farmers on each site and then, together with the farmers, explore design solutions.
These will then be prototyped, field tested and evaluated in relation to their initial
aims. The objective is that when the team move to the next site, the farmers are left
with enough skills for them to continue experimenting and hence empowering their
own emancipation whilst still remaining connected to the broader food system though
the Soweto Farmers Forum. The impact that urban agriculture could have on reducing
poverty, inequality and unemployment is clear. The problems identified in this paper
of the complexity of encouraging participation, increasing skills and knowledge and
improving networking for urban farmers are what this future design intervention aims
to impact on through participatory technology development. Ultimately the resilience
of the Johannesburg food system will be improved through incremental changes in
current urban agricultural practice.
14
References
1.
Steel, C.: Hungry City: How Food Shapes Our Lives. Vintage, London (2009)
2.
Statistics South Africa: Census of Commercial Agriculture, 2007: Gauteng: Provincial
Statistics for Selected Products. In: Statistics South Africa. (Accessed February 08, 2011)
Available at: http://www.statssa.gov.za/Publications/Report-11-02-08/Report-11-02-
082007.pdf
3.
FAO: An Introduction to the Basic Concepts of Food Security. (Accessed 2008) Available
at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/al936e/al936e00.pdf
4.
Labadarios, D., Mchiza, Z., Steyn, N., Gericke, G., Maunder, E., Davids, Y., PArker, W.-
a.: Food Security in South Africa: A Review of National Surveys. Bulletin of the World
Health Organization 89(12), 891-899 (December 2011)
5.
Crush, J., Frayne, B.: The Invisible Crisis: Urban Food Security in Southern Africa.
Research Report, African Food Security Urban Network, Cape Town (2010)
6.
Joubert, L.: The Hungry Season: Feeding Southern Africa's Cities. Picador Africa,
Johannesburg (2012)
7.
Davids, N.: Chew on These Food Stats. The Times (2013)
8.
Biénne, H.: Salad Sprouts in the City Bowl: Farming Flourishes on Former Bowling
Green. Sunday Times (2013)
9.
Sarah, W.: Want Food Security? Stop the Rot. Mail & Guardian (2013)
10.
Mtyala, Q.: Food Security Summit on Government's To-Do List. The Times (2013)
11.
De Wet, T., Patel, L., Korth, M., Forrester, C.: Johannesburg Poverty and Livelihoods
Study. Research Report, Centre for Social Development in Africa, Johannesburg (2008)
12.
United Nations Population Fund: State of the World Population 2011. In: United Nations
Population Fund. (Accessed 2011) Available at:
http://foweb.unfpa.org/SWP2011/reports/EN-SWOP2011-FINAL.pdf
13.
Argenti, O.: Food for the Cities: Food Supply and Distributuion Policies to Reduce Urban
Food Insecurity. Food and Agricultral Oranisation of the United Nations, Rome (2000)
14.
South African Government: National Development Plan 2030 Our Future - Make it
Work., National Planning Commission (2012)
15.
City of Johannesburg: A City Where None Go Hungry: Operational Strategy Document.,
Johannesburg (July 2012b)
16.
City of Johannesburg: City Has a Plan to Boost Farming. In: City of Johannesburg.
(Accessed 2009) Available at:
http://www.joburg.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4109&Itemid=
198
17.
City of Johannesburg: 2012/16 Intergrated Development Plan: Committting to a
Promising Fututre. In: City of Johannesburg. (Accessed 2012a) Available at:
http://www.joburg-archive.co.za/2012/pdfs/idp/idp201216.pdf
18.
Richards, R., Taylor, S.: Changing Land Use on the Periphery: A Case Study of Urban
Agriculture and Food Gardening in Orange Farm. Research Report, UTRP South African
Research Chair in Development Planning and Modelling, Johannesburg (2012)
19.
Centre for Development Support (CDS): The Role of Urban Agriculture in Adressing
Household Poverty and Food Security: The Case of South Africa. Reserach Report, CDS
Research Report, LED and SMME Development, Bloemfontein (2009)
20.
Campbell, A., Brand, K.: Design of Resileint Products for Small-scale Farming in South
Africa. In : Agrindustrial Design: 2nd International Product and Service Design Congress
15
and Exhibtion on Agricultural Industries - Mediterranean / Food / Design Proceedings,
Izmir, pp.278-286 (2012)
21.
City of Johannesburg: Food Garden Planted on Roof. In: City of Johannesburg. (Accessed
March 22, 2012d) Available at:
http://www.joburg.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7861:food-
garden-planted-on-rooftop&catid=166:inner-city&Itemid=254
22.
City of Johannesburg: Veggie Patch in Hillbrow. In: City of Johannesburg. (Accessed
May 04, 2012c) Available at:
http://www.joburg.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7996:veggie-
patch-in-hillbrow&catid=166:inner-city&Itemid=254
23.
City of Johannesburg: City to Grow Organic Farming Sector. In: City of Johannesburg.
Available at:
http://www.joburg.org.za/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2376&pop=1.
24.
Brand, K.: Seboko. In: Kyle Brand. Available at:
http://www.kylebrand.com/2010/11/19/seboko/
25.
Balimi Food Security Company: Background. In: Balimi Food Security Company.
Available at: http://www.balimifoodsecuritycompany.org/
26.
Horti Shop: News: LIttle Growers. In: Horti Shop. Available at:
http://www.hortishop.co.za/news/
27.
Wild, S.: Keeping Produce Fresh can be as Simple as Better Storage. Mail & Guardian, 16
(2013)
28.
Harrison, P.: The Greening of Africa: Breaking Through in the Battle for Land and Food.
Paladin, London (1987)
29.
Scoones, I., Thompson, J.: Farmer First Revisited: Innovation for Agricultural Research
and Development. ITDG Publishing, London (2009)
30.
Haverkort, B., van der Kamp, J., Waters-Bayer, A.: Joining Farmers' Experiments:
Experiences in Participatory Technology Development. ILEIA, Leusden (1991)
31.
Richards, P.: Indigenous Agricultural Revolution. Hutchinson, London (1985)
32.
Bunch, R.: People-centred Agricultural Improvement. In Harverkort, B., Van de Kamp, J.,
Waters-Bayer, A., eds. : Joining Farmers' Experiments. Intermediate Technology
Publications, London (1991)
33.
Uphoff, N., ed.: Agroecological Innovations: Increasing Food Production with
Participatory Development. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London (2002)
34.
Hamdi, N.: Small Change: About The Art of Practice and the Limits of Planning in Cities.
Earthscan, Oxon (2004)
35.
Reeger, B., Mager, S., van Oorsouw, Y.: License to Grow: Innovating Sustainable
Development by Connecting Values. VU University Press, Amsterdam (2001)
36.
van Latesteijn, H., Andeweg, K.: THe TransForum Model: Transforming Agro Innovation
Toward Sustainable Development. Springer, Dordrecht (2011)
37.
MetroAg Innoversity: Welcome to the MetroAg Innoversity. In: MetroAg Innoversity.
Available at: http://metroaginnoversity.org/
38.
Smithsonian Institution: Design and Social Impact: A Cross-Sectoral Agenda for Design
Education, Research, and Practice. White Paper, Cooper-Hewitt, National Design
Museum, New York (2013)
39.
Schneider, S.: Five Ways Cell Phones are Changing Agriculture in Africa. In: Food Tank.
(Accessed April 12, 2013) Available at: http://foodtank.org/news/2013/04/five-ways-cell-
phones-are-changing-agriculture-in-africa
