Agroekonomika i ruralna sociologija
PRELIMINARY COMMUNICATION
Exploring linkages between urban agriculture and social capital in Sarajevo
region
Sinisa Berjan1, Vesna Milić1, Hamid El Bilali2, Noureddin Driouech2, Slavica Samardzić3
1
Faculty of Agriculture, University of East Sarajevo, Vuka Karadzica 30, East Sarajevo 71123,
Bosnia and Herzegovina ([email protected])
2
International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies (CIHEAM), Mediterranean
Agronomic Institute of Bari (MAIB), via Ceglie 9, Valenzano 70010, Bari, Italy
3
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management of the Republic of Srpska, Trg
Republike Srpske 1, Banja Luka 78000, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Abstract
Social capital refers to the networks, norms and values that enable people to act
collectively. Urban and peri-urban agriculture is about food production and processing
within and around cities. This preliminary study aims at exploring linkages between urban
agriculture and social capital in Sarajevo region. The paper is mainly based on semistructured interviews, carried out in autumn 2011, with 30 urban gardeners. It focuses on
urban agriculture social impacts in the community gardens of Mala Baŝta (Stup – Sarajevo)
and Suncokret (Kula – Istocna Ilidza). Taking into consideration the research results it can
be assumed that urban agriculture contributes to social capital strengthening, gender
empowerment, social cohesion, and inter-ethnic reconciliation and cooperation between
the constituent peoples in the post-war Sarajevo.
Key words: urban agriculture, social capital, Sarajevo.
Introduction
Urbanization and cities growth will increase the importance of urban and peri-urban
farming (FAO, 2005). Urban and peri-urban Agriculture (UPA) is perceived as agriculture
practices within and around cities. Important sectors of UPA include horticulture,
livestock, aquaculture, and forestry. Urban agriculture, refers to small areas (e.g. vacant
plots, gardens, verges, balconies, containers) within the city for growing crops and raising
small livestock for own-consumption or sale in neighbourhood markets. Peri-urban
agriculture refers to farm units close to town which operate intensive semi- or fully
commercial farms to grow vegetables and raise livestock (FAO, 1999).
Urban agriculture is frequently undertaken through community organizations. When
successful, such community efforts are an effective means of empowerment. Urban
agriculture also contributes to a community’s well-being by improving its solidarity as
neighbourhoods that include urban agriculture generally have higher levels of social
interaction. Urban farming improves as well social equity (Smit et al., 2001).
The development of UPA requires active institutions and organizations. There are currently
over 8,000 registered NGOs and non-profit organizations in BiH, but the number of active
organizations is generally estimated to lie between 500 and 1,500 (Barnes et al., 2004).
Moreover, there is a growing but uncertain number of informal community-based groups
and organizations (CBOs) (Sterland, 2006).
Currently, there are six registered associations that deal with urban agriculture in Bosnia
and Herzegovina (BiH): “Our Parcels” association (municipality of Jajce); “Family
Garden” association (municipality of Zenica); “Small Garden” association (municipality of
Sarajevo); “Linden Tree” association (municipality of Tuzla); Association for the
Promotion of Small-Scale Gardens “Sunflower” (municipality of Istocna Ilidza); and
Association of Community Garden “Sweet Basil” (Doboj municipality).
48. hrvatski i 8. međunarodni simpozij agronoma | Dubrovnik | Hrvatska
123
Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology
Community gardening helps building different forms of capital (social, human, financial,
economic, physical, natural, etc.), contributes to longer-term resilience and can reduce the
impact of future shocks (Adam-Bradford et al., 2009).
Putnam (1993, 1995) defined social capital as “the features of social organisation, such as
networks, norms and trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit”.
According to Black and Hughes (2001), social capital refers to the patterns and qualities of
relationships in a community. Winter (2000) defined social capital as “social relations of
mutual benefit characterised by norms of trust and reciprocity”. Different types of social
capital have been identified: bonding, bridging and linking. Putnam (1993) made a
distinction between bonding social capital and bridging social capital. Bonding social
capital refers to kinship and other intra-group networks or formal associations. Bridging
social capital refers to those networks or formal associations linking individuals and groups
beyond major social categories and cleavages. Woolcock (2000, 2001) introduced a third
type of social capital, linking social capital, which unlike the two others has a vertical
dimension. Linking social capital refers to the links people have with higher levels of
decision-making and resource allocation.
In the “Local Level Institutions and Social Capital in Bosnia and Herzegovina” study,
social capital was broadly defined as the “networks, norms, and values that enable people
to act collectively to produce social benefits”. The study – conducted using both qualitative
and quantitative methods and in accordance with the Social Capital Assessment Tool
(SCAT) (cf. Bamberger, 2000; Krishna and Shrader, 1999) - extended the concept of social
capital to include civic engagement as reflected by membership in formal voluntary
associations (World Bank, 2002).
This preliminary study aims at exploring linkages between urban agriculture and social
capital building and strengthening in Sarajevo region.
Material and methods
The paper is based on an extended literature review and on primary information collected
by semi-structured interviews, carried out in autumn 2011, with 30 urban gardeners from
two urban community gardens in Sarajevo region: Mala Baŝta (Small Garden) garden at
Stup - Sarajevo and Suncokret (Sunflower) garden at Kula – Istocna Ilidza (East Sarajevo);
managed by the Community Gardens Association (CGA).
Results and discussion
Sarajevo region was devastated by the civil war with thousands of internally displaced
people and refugees. Experiences show that refugee agriculture is not only a survival
strategy for displaced people but also a valuable livelihood strategy. Urban agriculture can
play an important role in all aspects of the disaster management cycle and is a
multifunctional policy instrument and tool. However, when relief agencies depart outside
support and resources for UPA decline (Adam-Bradford et al., 2009).
Urban agriculture initiatives in Sarajevo region depend on a few ambitious NGOs (e.g.
Community Garden Association of BiH - CGA) supported by international donors (e.g.
American Friends Service Committee).
The reasons to support agriculture-related activities in the post-disaster phase are
numerous. Urban agriculture can contribute to food security; provides livelihood and
income-generating opportunities and contributes to wider social and economic
rehabilitation. Home or community gardening activities can improve skills and knowledge,
while potentially contributing to restoring the social fabric of disaster-affected
communities (Adam-Bradford et al., 2009).
Community Garden Association of BiH (CGA) guides urban gardeners through working
124 48th Croatian & 8th International Symposium on Agriculture | Dubrovnik | Croatia
Agroekonomika i ruralna sociologija
process, monitors their activities and provides them with funds. The main aims of CGA are
to promote multiethnic urban gardening, to train urban gardeners, and to insure healing
therapy for people especially those with post-war syndrome. CGA mainly chooses poor
participant urban gardeners upon recommendations from some organizations, mainly
religious ones, such as the Red Cross, Merhamet, Caritas, Dobrotvor and Centres for
Social Work in municipalities where they got land for use. It should be highlighted that
most of the urban gardeners have low education level which makes communication with
and providing support to them more difficult (Davorin Brdjanin, president of the CGA,
personal communication).
The Association for the Promotion of Small-Scale Gardens “Sunflower” has 83 members
(24 families). The ethnic structure of gardeners is: 24.1% Bosnian Muslims, 3.6% Croats,
and 71.1% Serbs. Urban gardeners belonging to the different Bosnian constituent peoples
celebrate together national and religious holidays. Since 2005, the association uses a land
area of approximately 9000 m2 provided by the municipality of Istocna Ilidza (RS). The
majority of gardeners are displaced persons (54%); some of them have been living in
collective accommodation facilities for more than 10 years.
The Small Garden association in Stup (Sarajevo) has 59 members (17 families): 69.1%
Bosnian Muslims, 20% Croats and 9.1% Serbs. During the civil war in BiH, 1992-1995,
this location was the frontline. Nowadays, gardeners use this site for the production of
vegetables and flowers. The garden surface is about 5000 m2. War trenches were buried
and planted with vegetables. The Association donates 25% of the production to children’s
homes (i.e. orphanage) and the home for the elderly and disabled people in Sarajevo.
Additional activities in the garden include also a small school on basic concepts and rules
of playing chess for children and grandchildren of association’s members and also for
other children who live in the surrounding area.
The average age of respondents was 60.7 showing that mainly elders are dealing with
urban agriculture in Sarajevo region. As for respondents’ gender, 71% were women. The
average surface per respondent is 250 m2. Each household has 2-6 members. No
respondent has university degree and most of them have only primary education. The main
sources of income of respondents are urban gardening, pensions, and wages.
According to the respondents, the main reasons for dealing with urban agriculture are
profit (57%), personal satisfaction (71%) and healthy food (100%). Respondents also
mentioned friendship and as a coping strategy as they have no and/or a low income
especially for internally displaced persons and pensioners with meagre pensions.
According to the interviewees, the main social impacts of UPA are psychological and
physical healing (86%); better relationship with neighbours (57%); trust (29%); friendship
and social inclusion (29%); increased solidarity (14.2%); cross-ethnical and cross-cultural
cooperation and inter-ethnic conciliation (14.2%); gender empowerment (14.2%); and
social capital strengthening (14.2%).
Most of the respondents (71%) are members of urban gardeners’ associations. Urban
gardeners’ associations represent a form of bonding social capital, and contribute to linking
urban gardeners to other groups as well as to public institutions and decision-making
arenas.
The majority of urban gardeners (60%) are satisfied with the services provided by the
urban gardeners’ associations. Some urban gardeners (29%) are also pensioner
associations’ members.
The main reasons of such a high share of urban gardeners that are members of
participatory organisations can be explained by their awareness of the benefits that can be
gained from a membership (e.g. access to urban gardening plots and some support from
municipalities and other international donors and NGOs).
48. hrvatski i 8. međunarodni simpozij agronoma | Dubrovnik | Hrvatska
125
Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology
One of the benefits of community gardens is that they help build the character of a
neighbourhood through sustainable community development. Community gardens are sites
for a combination of activities: food production, sharing of basic resources such as land
and water, and recreation. As a result, community gardens provide many opportunities for
social and cultural exchange (Raja, 2000).
Urban agriculture brings about many multifaceted benefits to urban dwellers in Sarajevo
region especially the poor and food insecure ones. According to respondents, impacts of
UPA include as well health benefits; local economies development; local communities
revival; food security; environmental education especially for children; refugees’,
displaced persons’ and pensioners’ living conditions improvement; improving landscape in
cities, etc.
Urban agriculture can perform different functions of common interest for urban
communities. Urban agriculture activities are often associated with new forms of social
relationship between farmers, citizens and economic operators fostering the inclusion and
integration of marginalized community social strata (Antonelli and Lamberti, 2011).
Conclusions
Urban agriculture can help improving living conditions of urban residents’. It can also
bring about social benefits to urban areas and dwellers in Sarajevo region. According to the
perception of the interviewed urban gardeners, urban agriculture can contribute to social
capital strengthening, gender empowerment, social cohesion, psychological healing, crossethnical cooperation, and inter-ethnic reconciliation between the constituent peoples in the
post-war Sarajevo region.
Awareness about benefits of civic engagement led urban gardeners to act collectively in
groups and organizations to produce common social benefits and public goods. In fact, a
large share of urban gardeners is involved in participatory and voluntary organisations.
Acknowledgement
Authors would like to express their gratitude to the Community Gardens Association and
the urban gardeners in Mala Baŝta and Suncokret gardens for providing them with the
required information.
References
Adam-Bradford A., Hoekstra F., van Veenhuizen R. (2009). Linking relief, rehabilitation and
development: a role for urban agriculture? Urban Agriculture, 21:3-10.
Antonelli A., Lamberti L. (2011). Multifunctionality of periurban agriculture in Italy. In Watch
Letter of the International Centre for Advanced Agronomic Studies (CIHEAM) N° 18:
“Urban Agriculture in the Mediterranean”, September 2011; pp: 7-10.
Bamberger M. (2000). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research in development projects.
Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Barnes C., Mrdja M., Sijerćič S., Popovič M. (2004). Civil society assessment in Bosnia and
Herzegovina. Sarajevo: The Mission of the United States Agency for International
Development
in
Bosnia-Herzegovina
(USAID/BiH).
Available
online
at:
<www.usaid.ba/CivilSocietyAssessmentReportEnglishVersion.pdf>; retrieved on November
25, 2012.
Black, A., Hughes, P. (2001). The identification and analysis of indicators of community
strength and outcomes. Sydney: Commonwealth Department of Family and Community
Services.
126 48th Croatian & 8th International Symposium on Agriculture | Dubrovnik | Croatia
Agroekonomika i ruralna sociologija
FAO (1999). Urban and peri-urban agriculture. Report of the 15th Session of the Committee on
Agriculture; Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO). Available
online at: <http://www.fao.org/unfao/bodies/COAG/COAG15/X0076e.htm>; December 20,
2012.
FAO. (2005). Farming in urban areas can boost food security. Green the cities through
agriculture
World
Environment
Day.
Available
online
at:
<http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2005/102877/index.html>; July 15, 2012.
Krishna A., Shrader E. (1999). Social capital assessment tool. Conference on Social Capital and
Poverty Reduction. Washington D.C.: The World Bank.
Putnam, R. (1993). The prosperous community: social capital and public life. The American
Prospect, vol. 4, no. 13. Available online at: <http://www.prospect.org/print/V4/13/putnamr.html>; December 20, 2012.
Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy,
6/1: 65-78.
Raja, S. (2000). Preserving community gardens in a growing community: a report on the
community gardens planning process in Madison, Wisconsin. Madison Food System Project
Working Paper MFSP–WPS–04. University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Smit J., Nasr J., Ratta A. (2001). Benefits of urban agriculture. In “Urban agriculture: Food,
jobs, and sustainable cities”; New York: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
Sterland B. (2006). Civil society capacity building in post-conflict societies: the experience of
Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. Praxis Paper No. 9. Oxford: INTRAC (International
NGO Training and Research Centre).
Winter, I. (2000). Towards a theorised understanding of social capital. Working Paper 21.
Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Woolcock, M. (2000). Why should we care about social capital? Canberra Bulletin of Public
Administration, pp. 17-19.
Woolcock, M. (2001). The place of social capital in understanding social and economic
outcomes. Isuma, 2/1: 11-17.
World Bank. (2002). Bosnia and Herzegovina: local level institutions and social capital study.
Washington D.C.: World Bank.
48. hrvatski i 8. međunarodni simpozij agronoma | Dubrovnik | Hrvatska
127