Urban agriculture is considered a grassroots solution to food security in Africa. Research consistently supports this belief, and in South Africa urban agriculture is promoted by national and local government. One city supporting urban agriculture is Cape Town, the only South African city with an urban agriculture policy. Although many questions remain regarding the sustainability of non-governmental organisation (NGO)-supported urban agriculture projects in Cape Town and their contribution to food security, this study argues that one must look beyond economics and the physical benefits of urban agriculture to the personal and social benefits. By capturing the lived experiences of cultivators on the Cape Flats in Cape Town, the study shows that urban agriculture not only contributes to food security but builds social capital, which improves livelihood strategies and interpersonal relations. This is especially the case where urban agriculture projects are facilitated by NGOs that fund, train and oversee cultivators in these impoverished communities.

Urban agriculture has long been endorsed as a means to promote food security and economic wellbeing in African cities. However, the South African context presents mixed results. In order to establish the contributions of urban agriculture to sustainable livelihoods, the sustainable livelihoods framework is applied to a case study on cultivators from Cape Town’s Cape Flats. This study contributes to the empirical literature on urban agriculture by providing a deeper understanding of the benefits cultivators themselves attribute to urban agriculture. The key finding is that cultivators use urban agriculture in highly complex ways to build sustainable livelihoods. NGOs are central to this process. Distrust, crime and a lack of resources are, however, limiting factors. The paper concludes with policy recommendations to support pro-poor urban agriculture in African urban centres.

Land-based income streams, which include the consumption and selling of crops, livestock and environmental products, are inherent in rural households’ livelihoods. However, the off-farm cash income stream – primarily composed of migrant labour remittances, social grants, and savings and loans – is increasing in importance in many regions. This case study of 590 households from Bushbuckridge, South Africa, analyses the economic value of each of these income streams at three points: what enters the household, what is used and what is sold. Two important findings emerge. First, dependence on offfarm cash incomes is far higher than previously suggested by case studies in the area and the benefits of employment accrue to those already better educated and wealthier. This suggests that shifts in offfarm opportunities will exacerbate already deep inequalities. Second, while environmental products and crops are important for direct use, they generate insignificant cash incomes from sales. This suggests a weakening of the direct links between the local ecosystem and this society, challenging traditional notions of African rurality being intrinsically land based. Significance: Off-farm incomes such as wage labour, remittances and social grants are almost the sole source of cash for households in the study area. Even when including non-monetary incomes such as harvested produce, foraged goods and livestock products, off-farm incomes still represent the overwhelmingly largest proportion of overall household income value. This highlights the fact that South African rural economies are not consistently or primarily land based, and indicates the necessity of rural development strategies that facilitate participation in local cash economies. Otherwise, such efforts will be unable to yield broad benefits and will, instead, simply enrich those who are already better off.

In Africa, many urban farmers apply cropping systems from rural backgrounds into their urban setting. This paper explores the possibility that “upgrading” cropping systems in African cities could boost economic empowerment for impoverished urban farmers. To these ends, the author conducted a case study of cropping systems in Cape Town, identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the predominant cropping system. Data collection consisted of in-depth interviews and focus-group discussions with a selection of 59 urban farmers as well as interviews with key informants from non-governmental organizations, and local government. The findings are interpreted using an asset-based community development lens, which suggests that local networks and locally sourced inputs, utensils, and infrastructure are fundamental to resilient urban agriculture in this context. A limitation of the case study method is in the generalisability of the findings to other contexts. This study may, however, be used as a guideline for conducting similar case studies in other contexts.