Challenges of Urban Garden Initiatives for Food Security in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

The World Food Summit in 1996 agreed that food security materialises when all people can access sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs for active and healthy life (Pinstrup-Andersen 2009). However, many factors contribute to food insecurity. A study by Ihab et al. (2013) revealed that 83.9% of households in Bachok, Kelantan, faced food insecurity because of large household size, food expenditure and low monthly income. Food will become unaffordable, particularly for urban residents with lower income, and their daily diet will be affected and lead to hunger and malnutrition (Othman et al. 2018). Besides, the increased population and a decline in food products can have an impact on food security in cities (Muhamad et al. 2015). According to the Department of Statistics Malaysia (2016 a, 2016b), the Malaysian population is projected to rise from 28.6 million in 2010 to 41.5 million by 2040. This obviously will decline the availability of domestic food, which will increase the amount of imported food. For instance, the government needed to import food from China and Thailand in 2014 (Ministry of Finance Malaysia 2011), and the cost of imported food increased from RM 8.97 billion in 2012 to RM 17 billion in 2014 (Ministry of International Trade and Industry Malaysia, 2015).

Hence, according to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industries, Malaysia, in the ‘Program Sentuhan Kasih Tani-Pertanian Bandar 2.0’, urban farming is an initiative by the government to enhance food security and ensure a complete food supply chain (New Straits Times, 2018). Urban farming is a strategy for Malaysia's economic and food security (Othman et al. 2018). The urban garden is defined as the growing of food within cities (Ackerman 2012), and is one of the initiatives to ensure that all people in the world are fed (Mok et al. 2014). The engagement of people in urban garden practice ensures that the food sources can be accessed easily and are safe to consume (Alaimo et al. 2008). A previous study by Rezai et al. (2016) shows that availability and accessibility of fresh food among households in Putrajaya improved when they grew vegetables daily. Besides, the other highlighted benefits about this urban garden practice are that it helps in improving mental health and reducing stress and it allows people to plant something that can be consumed safely (Teig et al. 2009). A study in 15 countries by Zezza and Tasciotti (2010) shows that there is a positive change in the dietary diversity and calorie intake among urban people after being involved in urban farming. Furthermore, fluctuating food prices can contribute to food insecurity in cities. According to Mkhawani et al. (2016), the impact of the increase in food price caused 50.0% of households in South Africa to need to spend almost half of their money on food, and it affected their ability to access other important commodities required in the household. This study also states that 15.0% of households needed to borrow money from microlenders. Thus, an urban garden is important to overcome this issue.

Although the urban garden has the potential to support food security and provides many benefits to urban farmers, they should face many challenges, such as fluctuating weather that will have a negative impact on food sources. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (2015), the most natural hazard affecting the agricultural crop sector is flood, and a study by Jega et al. (2018) shows that floods in Kelantan had an impact on almost all the crops, livestock and agricultural assets. Next is dryness of soil, which reduces soil fertility and stops root growth and causes decomposition of organic material (Ogwuche et al. 2018). Insufficient rainfall and temperature lead to food insecurity all over the world (Milan, Ruano 2014; Generoso 2015). It is in line with the findings of Solaymani (2018), showing that there is a direct correlation between changes in rainfall–temperature and the productivity of agricultural products. Thus, farmers adapt to rainfall variability through the choice of crop and planting dates, adjusting the levels of fertiliser, as well as resorting to cropping in areas with a high water table (Makuvaro et al. 2017).

According to a study by Pourjavid et al. (2013), the top constraint of urban farming in Tehran was high start-up cost and lack of knowledge among urban managers and authorities. Mostly, urban farmers need loans or subsidies to develop urban gardens because these require a large investment in terms of operational cost, infrastructure, energy and management (Valk 2012). Farmers also need to arrange the cost for purchasing fertilisers, pesticides and tools (Dimitri et al. 2016). A finding by Makuvaro et al. (2017) reveals that the shortage of pesticides among farmers is caused by a lack of capital. Besides, less access to loan facilities will increase the impact on farming activities, e.g. for small urban farmers in Africa, Asia and Latin America, in the context of scaling up their production (Cabannes 2012). The high cost of irrigation is one of the issues in urban farming (Kutiwa et al. 2010; Adedayo, Tunde 2013). Rainwater is another source of water in cities. A study by Moglia (2014) shows that farmers use water from the Kalkallo Stormwater Harvesting and Reuse facility. However, there are possibilities that it may be contaminated with pathogens, heavy metals, excessive nutrients and salinity (Norton-Brandao et al. 2013). Furthermore, the shortage of land in an urban area will affect the urban farmers involved in this practice (Beniston 2016). According to Low (2019), lack of space is one of the challenges for urban farming in Singapore because of the complex and restrictive regulatory legislative framework related to land use.

Other than that, the challenge faced by urban farmers is hard-to-access available land. The agricultural sector needs to compete for the available soil with the residential, industrial and commercial sectors (Duchemin et al. 2009) and most of the available land is owned by private owners (Barthel et al. 2013a). Land, particularly in urban areas, is valuable and highly competitive (Man et al. 2017). Half of the farmers in Accra cultivate their crops not on their land, and private owners only sell to those residential and commercial developers who are the highest bidders (Asomani-Boateng 2002). In addition, illegal urban gardens and recreational urban farming have created conflicts among the farmers, residents and local government (Razak, Roff 2007; Man et al. 2017). Meanwhile, the main challenges faced by urban farmers of nutrition gardens in Mucheke town, Masvingo, are difficulty in securing fertilisers/manure, pests and diseases, and theft (Chimbwanda 2016). Pests and diseases can be influenced by climate change because the rise in temperature and change in rainfall patterns increase the number of fungi and diseases that affect yield production in Malaysia (Rahim 2014). Furthermore, lack of information about market demands and pricing, sudden shortages of products and price instability can be seen as other challenges faced by urban farmers (Man et al. 2017). For instance, intensive training can improve the knowledge among farmers in Nepal, where less-literate farmers cannot use all the information without guidance from extension services (Karki et al. 2011).

In addition, several economic, environmental and social factors can be identified and categorised as the challenging constraints of the urban garden. The constraints are classified based on related factors. In terms of the economic factor, the location of the urban garden far from supermarkets and lack of marketing skills are the challenges faced by urban farmers. A previous study by Aarthi Dhakshana and Rajandran (2017) shows that 27.0% of farmers in Thanjavur faced problems due to lack of marketing techniques. Othman et al. (2017) reveal that the fewest participants are among people younger than 20 years of age because they have the perception that this activity is not profitable to them (Ramaloo et al. 2018). Thus, the aim of this study was to identify the demographic background of target respondents in urban gardens around Kuala Lumpur, to investigate the challenges of urban garden development and to identify the relationship between demographic background and the factors challenging the development of this urban garden practice in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Urban gardens play an important role in producing food sources, which makes it crucial in most developing countries. It is generally believed that the urban garden has the potential to enhance food availability, access and utilisation, especially among the urban poor. Besides, it also has the potential for improving the urban environment. As a result, from the socio-demographic profiles of respondents, this study has revealed that among urban farmers, females are predominant because there is a perception in societies that women have the responsibility to ensure safe food supply to their family members (Kutiwa et al. 2010), and also this activity meshes well with women's other household activities such as cooking and childcare (Islam, Siwar 2012). Besides, 48.1% of the urban farmers involved in this survey are within the age group of 41–60, and the majority have received tertiary education. This is in line with a study by Rezai et al. (2016), wherein young urban dwellers with higher education are more involved in urban farming activities. Furthermore, 50.0% of the urban farming practitioners have between four to six people per house, and 47.2% have a household income of ≤RM 3,000, which falls under the bottom 40% (B40) income group (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2017). It is also in line with a previous study (Islam, Siwar 2012), where the urban garden is important for the urban poor to produce their own food.

Many benefits of gardening activities for urban farming practitioners towards food security are listed in this study. According to Table 2, the majority (98.1%) of the respondents are aware that the urban garden is the government's green initiative to enhance a sustainable urban environment because a high-density urban environment has an impact on the quality of city residents’ lives, and increases the awareness of people living in cities to take action in creating a better environment to improve the current quality of life (Lau et al. 2017). According to Lovell (2010), an increasing amount of vegetation through the urban garden project in an urban area helps regulate humidity levels. Besides, the creation of green space in cities can reduce the number of urban wastes and urban heat island effects, in addition to improving the air quality of the surrounding area (Berhanu, Akola 2014). The second-highest benefit mentioned by 97.2% of the respondents is building a social relationship. It is in line with the study by Sanye-Mengual et al. (2016), where the purpose of involvement among urban farmers in Barcelona is more for leisure and social activity than for food production activity. This practice allows urban farming practitioners to meet their friends for four to five hours per day at the garden plot (Sauyah, personal interview, 14 March 2020).

Meanwhile, the perspective of urban farmers on the benefit of the urban garden for food security (the third highest: 95.3% of the respondents) is that safe and more nutritious food can be produced through the urban garden, and it can also help people in cities gain easier access to vegetables and fruits (Taylor, Lovell 2014). These three are related to the components of food security. According to Brüssow et al. (2017), the four components in achieving food security are availability, access and utilisation, underlined by stability. A study by Park et al. (2011) shows that the urban garden can make food accessible to residents and can also increase the consumption of fresh produce (Corrigan 2011). For instance, growing the vegetables daily helps improve the availability and accessibility of fresh food among households in Putrajaya (Rezai et al. 2016). Besides, the urban garden also helps produce food sources closer to consumers (Lovell 2010). Furthermore, most of the urban women farmers become involved in crop farming to cater to the family's demand for fresh, nutritious and agrochemical-free food (Gamhewage et al. 2015).

Table 3 reveals the prioritising challenges related to the urban garden faced by urban farmers in Kuala Lumpur. The results show that the main barrier to the urban garden in Kuala Lumpur is highly fluctuating weather. Highly fluctuating weather will affect the crop's yield. According to Alam et al. (2011), a low level of rainfall can be overcome by farmers with irrigation, but high rainfall will lead to damage to output and serious damage to crops at the end of the crop cycle. Besides, an increase in rainfall and temperature also causes agricultural production losses of between RM 37 and RM 48 per hectare in Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak (Zainal et al. 2012). The second major barrier in this study is the problem of access to available land. Findings by Hussain et al. (2019) show that planting in the pot is a popular method because of limited open spaces in some residential areas and it is also portable and easy to handle within a small compound. On the other hand, the lack of space for farming activities in Edible Garden City, Singapore, is due to the restriction of the legal framework on land use (Low 2019). Besides, contaminated land also contributes to limited land availability in cities. According to Nabulo et al. (2012), land contamination in Kampala, Uganda, is caused by the waste disposal practice, which has led to health concerns due to the presence of toxic elements in the vegetables grown in an urban area. The third major barrier is a financial constraint. It is similar to the finding by Ramaloo et al. (2018): farmers in Taman Desa Damai Community Garden at Bukit Mertajam face financial constraints to pay the rental fees on land use and domestic water supply. Besides, lack of capital causes difficulties among farmers in purchasing adequate amounts of fertilisers and pesticides (Makuvaro et al. 2017).

Table 4 shows the challenges faced by urban farmers related to technical factors. Most (35.8%) of the respondents in this study do not have any problem with urban garden knowledge because there have been enough awareness and promotion programmes related to urban gardens, such as an exhibition by Malayan Agri-Horticulture Association (MAHA) (Ali, personal interview, 14 March 2020). Besides, 45.3% and 50.0% of urban farming practitioners can access technical support and training and consultation services from the government and NGOs. It is in contrast with the findings by Adeoti et al. (2011), where 50.0% of farmers in Accra, Ghana, never receive advice facility from the authorities. According to Singh et al. (2015), training can provide more information related to agriculture activities. Thus, a study by Gamhewage et al. (2015) shows a lack of knowledge among women involved in urban farming in Sri Lanka, causing difficulty in identifying diseases, pest attacks and nutrient deficiencies. The role of knowledge is also important to increase the number of participants in this practice (Azman et al. 2013; Shamsudin et al. 2014) whereby knowledge builds a favourable attitude of the public towards the urban garden. In addition, 54.7% of urban farmers disagree that it is difficult to access online urban farming information because a lot of information about not only urban farming but also everything on agriculture has been provided by the government and NGOs online.

The data on resource-related constraints in Table 5 show access to available land is a challenge among 53.8% of the urban farmers involved in this study. It is similar to the study by Pearson et al. (2010), where the primary constraint in Australia is to protect and preserve land because of intense competition with other land uses. Besides, limited land is available in Singapore for farming activities because of the restricted legislative regulatory framework on land use, whereby no land is allowed for farming for social purposes, and the land that is set aside for community purposes cannot be used for farming (Low 2019). The high price of land in cities is also one of the reasons, as shown in a study by Moglia (2014), wherein the cost of available land for agriculture around Kalkallo is reported to be as high as AUS$ 100 000 per hectare. Furthermore, 33.0% of urban farmers in this study face problems with contaminated land. This phenomenon has been proved in a study by Säumel et al. (2012), where the vegetables produced in the city contain a high amount of trace metals. The contaminant can come from waste disposal practices similar to the occurrence in Kampala, Uganda, where the waste disposal practice contaminates the land and it affects human health because of toxic elements, such as cadmium, chromium and lead contained in the vegetable (Nabulo et al. 2012).

Table 6 also reveals that 35.8% of the respondents have agreed that the available land belongs to a private owner. According to Asomani-Boateng (2002), there are issues related to private owners, whereby they tend to sell their plots to residential and commercial developers, who are usually the highest bidders. The high price of pesticides is one of the issues reported by 33.1% of urban farmers. It is similar to the study by Makuvaro et al. (2017), where a shortage of pesticides used to control pests and diseases is faced by farmers in Lower Gweru due to lack of capital. However, the majority of urban farming practitioners in this study do not have difficulties in accessing seed, fertiliser and complete equipment. It contrasts with the finding by Gamhewage et al. (2015), where the third major constraint of urban farming in Sri Lanka is the poor quality of input, such as the unsatisfactory quality of planting material and poor soil fertility. The urban farming practitioner received the inputs such as seeds, fertilisers and some equipment from the Department of Agriculture during the early stages of involvement in this practice (Norizai, personal interview, 14 March 2020).

The data regarding economic factors reported in Table 7 revealed that the majority (39.6%) of urban farmers had to face financial problems similar to farmers in Kenya, who were affected by the financial constraint to adopt urban agriculture (Muriithi 2013). This is because urban gardens require a large investment in terms of operational cost, infrastructure, energy and management (Valk 2012). The difficulty in getting access to financial institution is agreed by 40.6% of the respondents in this study. This might be happening because of a lack of information among farmers about available sources of lenders and the type of credits offered in their area. Besides, commercial banks do not lend money to agricultural enterprises because it is risky (Adeleke et al. 2010). However, 35.8% of the respondents do not need to sell their products through a middleman because most of them (33.0%) have regular customers. All the vegetables are sold to the regular customer directly at the garden or at Farmer's Markets (Hamidah, personal interview, 14 March 2020). Next, according to Antwi and Seahlodi (2011), marketing constraints include limited knowledge, lack of access to high-value reliable markets, distance from markets, poor quality of products, lack of storage facilities, poor agricultural extension services and lack of financial support. It is in line with this study, where 38.7% of the respondents have a problem storing their produce in the absence of cold storage. The study by Aarthi Dhakshana and Rajandran (2017) shows that farmers in Thanjavur cannot afford to purchase cold storage due to lack of capital, which has an impact on farmers’ marketing. According to Cong and Baldeo (2006), lack of storage facilities will lead to reducing the quality of the produce, increasing the humidity of the produce and increasing the produce loss.

According to Noriah Mat, Senior Deputy Director of Putrajaya Corporation Landscape and Parks Development, the challenge of Community Garden Programmes is attracting volunteers (The Star 2014). This is similar to this study based on the data for social constraints in Table 7, where 33.0% of urban farming practitioners face a shortage of volunteers, which is derived from a lack of commitment from the public, mentioned by 35.8% of the respondents. A finding by Gamhewage et al. (2015) shows that the constraint faced by women participants in this practice is insufficient time because they need to spend more time on household care and management. This study also shows that most women not participating in this practice were job holders. In a study by Othman et al. (2017), urban farming practitioners spent from four to five days per week in the garden after finishing work and during weekends. Furthermore, a study by Ramaloo et al. (2018) shows a lack of participation among young people in this practice because they considered community gardens as non-profit activities. It causes difficulty in managing such garden activities as weeding, watering, harvesting and replanting (Au Yong, personal interview, 1 May 2020). Moreover, finding a leader and farm theft are not major problems in this study, but are similar to the findings of Ober Allen et al. (2008) and Bradley and Galt (2014), where the implementation of community gardens in cities is less likely to support crime or vandalism. However, 23.6% of the respondents experienced this issue. The high-quality fences that were installed in the garden area (Yusof, personal interview, 12 March 2020) as well as the plants and machines that were used for farming activities were stolen in the night (Jamil, personal interview, 14 March 2020).

Environmental issues constitute one of the factors that can have a negative impact on farming activities and food supply. The data in Table 8 show that highly fluctuating weather is a challenge faced by 36.8% of the respondents in this study. A study by Alam et al. (2013) shows a decline in crop production in Malaysia because of the fluctuation of rainfall between −30.0% and +30.0%, which also leads to drought in many areas. Table 8 reveals that 48.1% of the respondents agree that lack of rain will reduce the water availability. According to Gornall et al. (2010), 80.0% of agriculture depends on rainwater. Thus, the poor rainfall pattern and the amount received in Lower Gweru and Lupane communal areas lead to poor production of crops, hunger, shortage of grazing and, finally, low animal productivity (Makuvaro et al. 2017). Moreover, warmer temperatures increase the plant stress, which require greater water input (Wortman, Lovell 2013). On the other hand, 37.7% of urban farmers agreed that flood disasters can damage the yield. It is shown in a study by Jega et al. (2018) that floods in Kelantan affected almost all the crops, livestock and some agricultural assets. Climate change also contributes to the increase of pests and diseases in the garden area, faced by 49.1% of the urban farming practitioners in this study. A previous study by Rahim (2014) shows that changes in rainfall pattern and increase in temperature will cause the quick spread of fungus and diseases, which affects the yield in the agriculture sector in Malaysia. Besides, another impact of the increasing number of pests is also the overuse of pesticides and reduction in biodiversity (Al-Amin and Siwar 2008).

Based on the correlation analysis results in Table 9, the value of the technical factor and race is 0.210, with a significance level of 0.05. It indicates there is a weak positive correlation between the variables. According to Carstens (2005), the Chinese have a better education than other races, which makes them more aware of the environment. This is because they have a long history of living in cities and are the first- or second-generation urban dwellers. Next, the value of the technical factor and education is 0.225, with a significance level of 0.05, which shows that there is a weak positive correlation. According to Singh et al. (2015), training can provide more information, knowledge and exposure of urban farmers to innovations related to agricultural activities.

The results in Table 9 also show that the value of the social factor and race is 0.201 at the significance level of 0.05, which shows that there is a weak positive relationship. The finding by Othman et al. (2019) shows that the Chinese have higher social motivations than the Malays and Indians in the context of urban farming. This is because the Chinese have higher physical and mental health motivation than Malays and Indians because they are predominantly employed as entrepreneurs and employees (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2016). Table 9 also shows that there is a strong negative correlation between the environmental factor and age, with a value of −0.410 at the significance level of 0.01. According to Barthel and Isendahl (2013b), experience in farming is very important and it can be gained through years of practice. It means that young farmers have higher possibility of being vulnerable to the impact of climate change than older farmers because of a lack of experience in farming activities. This study also shows that monthly household income has a weak negative correlation between the economic factor (−0.223) and the environmental factor (−0.197) at the significance level of 0.05. This is because urban gardens require a large investment for operational cost, infrastructure, energy and management (Valk 2012). Besides, farmers also need a sufficient amount of money to overcome climate change. According to Makuvaro et al. (2017), farmers tend to apply fertiliser at higher rates than usual under high rainfall conditions and the number of pests will increase due to climate change. However, this study shows that most of the smallholder farmers are unable to purchase an adequate amount of commercial fertiliser because it is very expensive, and lack of capital causes a shortage of pesticides.

This study documented the challenges that urban farmers in Kuala Lumpur faced in managing their gardens in cities. In terms of the socio-demographic profile of the respondents, urban farmers are predominant among females. Most of the people involved in this urban garden practice are in the age group of 41–60 and have received tertiary education. Furthermore, most of the urban farmers in this study have from four to six people per house and have a household income of ≤RM 3,000. Prioritising challenges faced by urban farmers regarding urban gardens reveals that highly fluctuating weather, problems with access to available land and financial problems are at the top of the list. The main resource-related constraint faced by urban farmers was access to available land, while difficult access to financial institutions was the main economic constraint. Besides, in terms of social factors, the main challenge faced by urban farmers was a lack of commitment from the public due to many factors such as lack of time and lack of interest among young people. The increased number of pests due to highly fluctuating weather, which reduces the productivity and quality of crops was the main issue when it came to environmental factors. Meanwhile, the difficulty in getting training or technical support from the local authorities and NGOs and access to information online under technical factors were among the lowest priorities facing urban garden development. The technical factor has a weak positive correlation with race and the educational level. Besides, the social factor has a weak positive correlation with race, and there is a moderate negative correlation between the age and the environmental factor. There was also a weak negative correlation between household income-related economic factors and environmental factors.

Thus, the community should move towards urban farming—although it seems to be difficult to achieve with its limitations—which is crucial for urban farming to be sustainable. The government needs to publicise more about other alternative gardening practices, such as vertical farming and hydroponics. These alternatives can solve the problems related to contamination and lack of available land. On the other hand, the government and agencies should provide more financial resources to those who need economic help, which can allow them to buy inputs and cold storage to store their produce. The education and training about the choice of planting dates and other suitable crops, soil and water conservation, and regulating the amount of fertilisers should be enhanced to allow farmers to overcome the climate change problem. Besides, the government should plan and make policies specifically to overcome the challenges faced by urban farmers and also for the transformation of urban garden development, where the government should view this urban farming as a catalyst for supporting food security, achieving a better lifestyle for urban residents and the well-being of the natural environment. There is also a need to conduct further research more comprehensively to capture the actions that can be taken to create a policy-making space for urban farmers.