Urban and peri-urban agriculture under climate change: A review on carbon emissions and sequestration

Abstract

• Most studies were in the global north; research in the global south is lacking. • More studies on UPA's GHG emissions; fewer on carbon sequestration (CS). • Water and carbon cycles intertwine closely, but few studies assessed both jointly. • Spatiotemporal analysis and modelling are needed to assess GHG emissions and CS. • Remote sensing is not used for GHG emissions; few used it for CS. Urban and peri‑urban agriculture (UPA) has been proposed as a solution to address urban food security and sustainability. It is important to investigate the sustainability claims of UPA by estimating its carbon emissions and sequestration. This article reviewed 96 studies focusing on methods used for estimating carbon sequestration (CS) and emissions to identify research gaps. The review provides an overview of the distribution of UPA case studies based on location, forms and scales and an understanding of the relationships between carbon emissions and sequestration with other ecosystem services (ES). There is a lack of case studies in the global south. The most studied UPA forms are open-field agriculture and green roofs. Existing research primarily focused on estimating carbon emissions, with fewer studies on CS. CS was analysed with a more diverse ES, while emissions were studied mostly with ecosystem disservices. The most used method for estimating emissions was life cycle assessment. For CS, the most used method was coefficients. More research is needed using field measurements, modelling approaches, and broader spatial analysis to provide a spatiotemporal understanding of UPA's climate change impacts. CS and emissions should be investigated jointly to have a comprehensive understanding of UPA's contribution to climate change.

Topics & Concepts