Urban Farming Ecosystem: A NOLA Case Study

URBAN
FARMING
ECOSYSTEM
a NOLA
Case Study
SERV 753 | Prof. Xenia Viladas
Team:
Michael Buquet
Yuanhao Lu
John Gray Parker
Monica Tisminesky

CONTENTS
PROJECT BRIEF
PROBLEM FRAMING
ECOSYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
APPENDIX
3
8
21
32
45

3
PROJECT INTRO
Urban Farming Ecosystem - A NOLA Case Study
SERV 753 | Prof. Xenia Viladas | Team: M. Buquet, Y. Lu, J.G. Parker, and M. Tisminesky
PROJECT
BRIEF

4
4
INTRODUCTION
This project was taken on as a part of the MFA Service
Design program’s “Service, Innovation and Enterprise”
course at the Savannah College of Art Design. During the
beginning of the course, we read and reviewed Innovation
Design, by Elke den Ouden. The purpose behind this
was to learn the methodology and utilize it to design an
ecosystem that would successfully provide value according
to the Value Framework.
We began this project by exploring wicked problems
where an ecosystem is a necessary solution. Our team
compiled a list of wicked problems and systematically went
through the list with a decision matrix to select the best
option for an ecosystem based solution. After rounds of
research and analysis, urban farming was selected as the
best option.
Urban farming provided us with a wicked problem that
spanned across all segments within the Value Framework
and included a level of complexity that would allow us to
explore opportunities at the user, organization, ecosystem,
and society level. As a part of the research and analysis
process, other service design tools have been utilized to
complement the Value Flow Model and Value Framework
from the Innovation Design book.
The design process has included multiple iterations of our
value proposition and scenarios of using value flow model.
The end goal is to form a strategy to allow this concept to
have the scalability to be implemented in many different,
climates, economies, and cultures. As a starting point, we
have selected New Orleans, Louisiana as a case study to
base our design in a specific scenario.

5
Economy
User
Experience
Value for
Money
Profit
Core Social
Livability
of the
Environment
Stability
Shared
Drivers
Reciprocity
Sustainability
Wealth
Wellbeing
Meaningful
Life
Eco-
Effectiveness
Eco-
Footprint
Happiness Belonging
Organization
Doing Well
Ecosystem
Doing Good
Society
Transformation
Psychology
Ecology
Sociology
VALUE FRAMEWORK
This tool was utilized as a scorecard for the scenarios we designed. It provides a wholistic
combination of value perspectives from the relevant social sciences. The four levels also provides
a comprehensive and integrated view on value.

6
VALUE FLOW MODEL
Professor Elke den Ouden’s Value Flow Model examines the flow of four types of value
between actors and stakeholders in an ecosystem. This tool is useful to examine the
balance of an ecosystem in addition to check for reciprocity among members.

7
7
KEY TERMS
Aquaponics:
The marriage of aquaculture (raising fish) and hydroponics (the soil-less
growing of plants) that grows fish and plants together in one integrated
system. The fish waste provides an organic food source for the growing plants
and the plants provide a natural filter for the water the fish live in.
Aeroponics:
The process of growing plants where roots are exposed to an air or mist
environment without the use of soil or an aggregate medium.
Environmentally Controlled
Agriculture:
Controlled Environment Agriculture or CEA facilities can range from the very
low-tech such as row covers and high/low plastic covered tunnels, to fully
automated glass greenhouses with computer controls. There have even been
some CEA facilities on the international space station where astronauts have
grown leafy greens both to eat and to advance scientific knowledge.
Feedback Loop:
A feedback loop is system structure that causes output from one node to
eventually influence input to that node.
Grey Water:
Any domestic wastewater produced, excluding sewage. The main difference
between greywater and sewage (or blackwater) is the organic loading. Sewage
has a much larger organic loading compared to greywater.
Hypoxic Zones:
Hypoxic zones are areas in the ocean of such low oxygen concentration that
animal life suffocates and dies, and as a result are sometimes called “dead
zones.”
Reciprocity:
Members of an ecosystem should have relationships where they all benefit and
contribut to the health of the ecosystem. Not all relationships within the system
meet to be directly reciprocal. An efficient ecosystem will have a karmatic
system of reciprocity.
Vertical Farming:
Is a closed growing system within a skyscraper greenhouse or on vertically
stacked systems. It enables a farmer to achieve constant production of plants
all year round without the influence of seasonal, regional or climatic influences.
The modern idea of vertical farming uses techniques similar to glass houses,
where natural sunlight can be augmented with artificial lighting and all
environmental factors can be controlled by making use of CEA technology.

8SERV 753 | Prof. Xenia Viladas | Team: M. Buquet, Y. Lu, J.G. Parker, and M. Tisminesky
PROBLEM
FRAMING

9
INITIAL CONCEPTS
Concept
How might we
create a service
ecosystem... Points Concept
How might we
create a service
ecosystem... Points
Cruise ship
Tourism
around cruise ship tourism in
Savannah, that adds to the economic
prosperity of the historic city, and
already popular tourist destination,
while preserving its rich cultural
heritage and biological ecosystem?
62.8 Species
Protection
that assign species a monetary value
that can be traded with and be
used for restitution damages from
companies and individuals that harm
them?
63.2
Property
allocation
that makes exerting a verifying
someone's property over an object
easier so as to reduce the sale of
stolen goods and enable return of lost
property?
64 Rehab &
society
protection
that reframes our treatment of
criminals in order to work for their
rehabilitation using advancements
from brain and behavioral science?
53.8
Response to
epidemics
that is responsible for handling
epidemic and pandemic response
protocols?
64.9 Urban
Farming
that brings farming to urban centers
and helps combat hypoxia in South
Louisiana?
64.5
Cost effective
higher
education
that better links company's needs and
pensum and is less expensive?
56.2 Contract &
Law Parsing
that simplifies two sides going into
transparent contracts and relieves the
load from the judicial system?
56.7
Remote
people
protection
that enables private citizens to protect
people in other nations from civil war
and genocide?
59.1 Information
Legacy
that permits the easy transference of
digital information to the heirs of a
deceased owner?
50.7
Sharing
industry
that solves issues related to the
sharing of digital products.
54.6 Public
Sanitation
that transforms public sanitation into
a more cost-effective service?
64.8
Net Neutrality that solves issues related to net
neutrality?
53.8 Wearable
devices
that agluttinates data from wearable
devices
64.9
We collected and evaluated fourteen different ecosystem concepts before settling on a
final. The process helped us learn about what issues lend themselves more to the creation
of ecosystems. A large factor for us was passion about each idea. All of the ideas are shown
below with the top 5 are highlighted and the selected problem is highlighted in white.

10
THE PROBLEM WITH FARMING
Farming now
soil-depleting
missing a nutrient
feedback loop
When farmers continuously use the same
land for generations, it goes from being
fertile to being depleted in terms of
nutrients. This makes them less and less
arable and more dependent on external
nutrients.
With current methods, nutrients that
could be recycled back into the system are
instead lost and run off to the sea, where
they in turn cause devastation for the sea
fauna.

Farming now
toxic for planet and our seasfor people
The prevalent methods used
by agribusiness are toxic.
From pesticides to nutrients,
what current farming adds
is dangerous for people and
planet.
The pesticides used to kill the bugs
that affect crops today end up being
ingested by the final consumer.
Furthermore, pesticides loose their
effectiveness since pests adapt to
them, and have to be made even
stronger and more toxic in order for
them to make an impact at all.
Both the nutrient and the pesticides
sprayed on crops find their way into
our natural ecosystems and destroys
them.
Nutrients wash off crops, flow
through the rivers and into the seas.
There they impact life systems by
creating an overgrowth of algae.
When this happens the algae
consumes more oxygen, leaving
too little left for fish to live. This
phenomenon of lack of oxygen is
called Hypoxia and manifests in
coasts throughout the world in what
are called “Dead zones.”

Farming now
marred by politics
The votes that are tied to the
current farming business and the
pressure that farming lobbyist exert
on the US government creates some
unintended consequences.
favors few crops negative influence
The different lobbies have their
interests centered around a few
crops that get quite a bit of the
subsidies. This creates incentives to
prioritize their production.
The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) regulates the US food supply.
The influence of lobbies can be felt in
the changes to their regulations and
specific nutritional recommendations,
which in turn influences both
consumers the public officials .
12

13
Farming now
not local
In the first world produce travels
from very far to densely populated
cities. Very few produce is grown
locally. Research shows that the
average American meal travels
about 1500 miles to get from farm
to plate.
impacts climate lousy, non-local jobs
Transporting food over long
distance generates great quantities
of carbon dioxide emissions, which
contributes to climate change.
In the US, produce is frequently imported from
other nations, creating a more expensive food
supply. Furthermore, the regional farmers have
a difficult time making ends meet because their
lands have been rendered less fertile and thus
require a large investment of money to make
arable and fertile.

14
Farming now
expensive
Certain factors of current farming
methods contribute to make it more
expensive for the final user, which of
course impacts his consumption of
healthy produce.
if not local
As previously explained,
transporting produce is expensive.
when subsidized
In order to keep the prices low for
the final consumers, governments
subsidize farmers. However, this
costs are borne by the tax payer
and impact their economy.
when organic
Farming done with organic
methods creates smaller yields
because they do not use pesticides.

15
URBAN FARMING
Urban farming can range greatly in scope and scale from massive centers of agricultural
growth, to community groups focussed on beautifying a neighborhood. However, there are
a couple of tennants that all urban farming activities aim to achieve: a more sustainable
future, affordable produce, & the production of vhealthy, organic and non-GMO foods.
Sky GreensFARM:Distributed Urban Farming
Initiative
“The Distributed Urban Farming Initiative
is a program that unites agriculture with
community development, nutrition, and
local economic development. The end goal
of the project is not simply to build gardens
around town, but rather use local agriculture
to encourage healthy food choices, promote
good health and spur economic growth
through entrepreneurship and tourism.”
“FARM: design, build and operate sustainable
urban farms and innovative growing systems.
We believe in city grown food that is fresh,
tasty, sustainable and grown with our
customers helping hands.We cut carbon and
reduce waste by using the latest agricultural
innovations in aquaponics, hydroponics,
vermiculture and greenhouse design. “
“World’s first low carbon hydraulic water-
driven, tropical vegetable urban vertical
farm, using green urban solutions to achieve
enhanced green sustainable production of
safe, fresh and delicious vegetables, using
minimal land, water and energy resources.”
Examples

16
FARMING, REFRAMED
Urban Farming
non-toxic
hypoxia free
Urban Farming technologies make a
different use of nutrients and, done
carefully, do not cause run-off to
our seas and other environments.
Aquaponics, for example, supplies
nutrients directly to the roots of the
plants, which means less nutrients
are needed and are contained to a
small area. Urban Farming can take
care to not disperse these nutrients
in the environment.
Urban farming does not add to the
current crisis of Dead Zones around
our costs. If done carefully, urban
farmers can keep nutrients from
reaching the sea and killing the sea
fauna.

17
FARMING, REFRAMED
Urban Farming
local by definition
Urban farming generates a
much smaller Eco-footprint that
traditional farming. The jobs it
generates are also local. The
activity becomes more economic
for farmers, so the jobs are better
paying.

18
FARMING, REFRAMED
Urban Farming
cost effective
With current technological
advancements, we are seeing
these technologies are becoming
more accessible. They do not need
pesticides and make a more rational
use of nutrients and have higher
yields. The fact that it is done locally
means that there is a much lower
transporting cost. In the balance,
urban farming can be much cheaper
and make healthy produce much
more accessible to consumers.

19
FARMING, REFRAMED
Urban Farming
nutrient-wise
Urban Farming does not deplete
nutrients in the soil, but uses them
them in a more efficient way. For
example, aquaphonics uses just
65% of the nutrients that traditional
farming requires. Moreover, Urban
Farming is more apt to recycle
nutrients than traditional farms
because of the containment and
control of the agriculture.

20
20
WHY NEW ORLEANS?
Few cities in the Western world have the opportunity
to begin anew. Cultural influences, complacency
and content with the status quo stifle natural social
development and prevent innovation. New Orleans is
different. Following Hurricane Katrina in the summer
of 2005, which tore the city apart and displaced its
residents, New Orleans was given the opportunity to
be reborn in the vision of its current residents as well
as great thinkers from around the world.
For this reason, New Orleans is primed for paradigm
shifting innovation. Education reform in the city
provides a nice example of how open the city and its
inhabitants are to change. This openness to change
makes New Orleans the perfect location for the
rebirth of agricultural development. The city has also
gained national support and popularity due to its
remarkable comeback.
Additional advantages to New Orleans as the
epicenter of our project include population density
and geographic location. Contemporary urban
development studies and environmental sciences
argue for urbanization as the way of the future if
we continue to embrace the health of our planet.
However, for this to work agrarian activities
must move closer to urban centers to reduce the
environmental costs of transportation.
From a geographic perspective, New Orleans’ tropical
biological ecosystem is positioned to have the
most naturally fertile ground in the United States.
Historically, the Mississippi River would flood the
marshlands and change direction every so often,
leaving behind nutrients it carried from its path
through the center of the United States. After years
of farming sugar cane and cotton, and due to the
damming of the river to direct its path, these lands are
no longer as fertile as they once were. However, the
Mississippi River is contains more nutrients than ever
as it carries the same nutrients it always has, but now
with the addition of those from runoff for farming
activities in the American Northwest. Let’s use the
nutrients for farming activities and prevent them from
entering the Gulf of Mexico watershed, where they
cause hypoxia each summer, killing fish stocks and
hampering recreational tourism.

21
PROJECT INTRO
ECOSYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT

22
STAKEHOLDER MAP
Customer
Onstage
Backstag e
Academic
Institutions
Health and
equality NGOs
Financing
institutions
AVF Members
City Council
Green NGOs
Pro-farming
NGOs
Insurance
companies
Power companies
Governmental
Environmental
bodies
Federal nutrition
aid bodies
Water & Waste
entities
UF Consumables
Suppliers
UF Infrastructure
Suppliers
Deparment of
Commerce
Health & Equality
NGOs
General Delivery
Services
Residents Urban
Farmers
U Farming
platform
ECA farms
Non ECA
farms
Low-income
Residents
Restaurants
Farmer’s market
Grocery Stores
Hotels
Local Farmers
Mobile food
vendors
Property owners
IT/engineering
companies
A Stakeholder map divides the entities that participate in a specific experience into
visible and invisible to the user at the center. Below are all of the major stakeholders
we envisioned within the urban farming ecosystem.

23
ECOSYSTEM ANALYSIS
Offering DeliveryOfferings
During the intial stages of development, we borrowed some metrics from den Ouden’s
Design Parameters tool. This helped us begin to shape, on a high level, what the value
proposition might look like for our end users.

MOTIVATION MATRIX
We utilized a motivation matrix to perform a cross analysis of value flows to form a
better understanding of which stakeholders were providing value to as well as the
value that stakeholders were receiving and from whom.

25
STATUS QUO
Before creating new scenarios, we analyze the existing Urban Farming situation in NOLA
and generate this physical Value Flow Model, with four-color strings and actor cards. This
process gives us a chance to establish the stakeholders and to examine the value flow in
the ecosystem.

26
PROJECT INTRO
VALUE FLOW MODEL
Goods & Services
Money & Credits
Information
Intangible Value
Transactions 7 central players
Core Value
Proposition
Complementary
Offerings Supplying
and Enabling
Network
Food
Resellers +
Prep
1
Residents
2
U Farming
platform
4
Urban Farm
7
UF Suppliers
and consulting
services
8
General
Delivery
Services
9
Water & Waste
Company
10
Residents
Urban Farmers
3
Promotion
Assistance
Strategic
Partnership
Certification
Endorsement
Strategic
Partnership
Support
Meals
Deals/
Vouchers
Deals/Vouchers
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Produce
Produce
Deliveries
Deliveries
Deliveries
Produce
Produce &
Classes
Infrastructure
Deliveries
Infrastructure
Produce
Produce
Waste
Collection
Service
Produce
ProduceProduce
ProduceDeliveries
Deliveries

27
PROJECT INTRO
VALUE FLOW MODEL
Goods & Services
Money & Credits
Information
Intangible Value
Goods & Services
Core Value
Proposition
Complementary
Offerings Supplying
and Enabling
Network
Food
Resellers
1
Residents
2
U Farming
platform
4
Food
Prep
5
Property
owners
6
Urban
Farm
7
UF Suppliers
and consulting
services
8
General
Delivery
Services
9
Water & Waste
Company
10
Federal
Nutrition Aid
Bodies
11
UF-related
NGOs
12
Governmental
Environmental
Bodies
13
City
Council
14
Meals
Residents
Urban Farmers
3
Produce
Produce
Deliveries
Deliveries
Deliveries
Produce
Produce &
Classes
Infrastructure
Deliveries
Infra-
Produce
Produce
Waste
Collection
Service
Waste
Produce
ProduceProduce
ProduceDeliveries
Permits
Deliveries
Deliveries
Permits
Real
Estate
Infrastructure

PROJECT INTRO
VALUE FLOW MODEL Money & Credit
Goods & Services
Money & Credits
Information
Intangible Value
Core Value
Proposition
Complementary
Offerings Supplying
and Enabling
Network
Food
Resellers
1
Residents
2
Residents
Urban Farmers
3
U Farming
platform
4
Food Prep
Facilities
5
Property
owners
6
Urban
Farm
7
UF Suppliers
and consulting
services
8
General
Delivery
Services
9
Water &
Waste
10
Federal
Nutrition Aid
Bodies
11
UF-related
NGOs
12
Governmental
Environmental
Bodies
13
City
Council
14
Payment
Deals/
Vouchers
Deals/Vouchers
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Payment
Rent
Rent
Rent
Rent Rent
Payment
Payment
Payment

PROJECT INTRO
VALUE FLOW MODEL Information
29
Goods & Services
Money & Credits
Information
Intangible Value
Core Value
Proposition
Complementary
Offerings Supplying
and Enabling
Network
Food
Resellers
1
Residents
2
Residents
Urban Farmers
3
U Farming
platform
4
Food Prep
Facilities
5
Property
owners
6
Urban Farm
7
UF
Suppliers
8
General
Delivery
9
Water & Waste
Company
10
Federal
Nutrition Aid
Bodies
11
UF-related
NGOs
12
Governmental
Environmental
Bodies
13
City
Council
14
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Reports
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info,
Case studies
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Statistic info
Location for
farming activities
Statistic info

PROJECT INTRO
VALUE FLOW MODEL Information
3030
Goods & Services
Money & Credits
Information
Intangible Value
Core Value
Proposition
Complementary
Offerings Supplying
and Enabling
Network
Food
Resellers
1
Residents
2
Residents
Urban
3
U Farming
platform
4
Food
Prep
5
Property
owners
6
Urban
Farm
7
UF
Suppliers
8
General
Delivery
Services
9
Water &
Waste
10
Federal
Nutrition
Aid
Bodies
11
UF-related
NGOs
12
Governmental
Environmental
Bodies
13
City
Council
14
Votes
Votes
Cooperation
Opportunities
Cooperation
Opportunities
Cooperation
Opportunities
Cooperation
Opportunities
Cooperation
Opportunities
Votes
Promotion
Votes
Votes
Votes
Political
support
Endorsement
Endorsement
Endorsement
Cooperation
Opportunities
Assistance
Strategic
Partnership
Strategic
Partnership
Certification
Endorsement
Endorsement
Strategic
Partnership
Support
Certification

31
Economy
User
Experience
Value for
Money
Profit
Core Values Social
Responsibility
Livability
of the
Environment
Stability
Shared Drivers
Reciprocity
Sustainability
Wealth
Wellbeing
Meaningful
Life
Eco-
Effectiveness
Eco-
Footprint
Happiness Belonging
Organization
Doing Well
Ecosystem
Doing Good
Society
Transformation
Psychology
Ecology
Sociology
VALUE FRAMEWORK CHECK
Scenario 2
Scenario 1
Final Ecosystem
Professor den Ouden’s Value Framework was used to
check the value propositions of various ecosystem
scenarios against the value perspectives of different
social sciences and perceived value for four levels of
agents. After establishing the status quo in a value flow
model, two others were developed: Scenario 1 & 2.
Scenario 1 focuses on the establishment of massive
environmental controlled agricultural (ECA’s) centers. It
was found to be highly unstable and established non-
reciprocal relationships between ecosystem members
because of dominance established by ECA urban farms.
Scenario 2 was also low in reciprocity and stability but
the main negative factor was eco-effectiveness. Scenario
2 failed to address a main concern of the region: hypoxia
in the gulf.
The final scenario focussed on establishing a balance
between the two, establishing an ecosystem where
actors of comperable size engage to create a longterm
sustainable urban farming eco system with closed loop
systems for key resources and flows of value.

32
PROJECT INTRO
BUSINESS MODEL
CREATION

KEY ORGANIZATIONS
During the process of mapping the ecosystem we identified four key organizations that
were crucial to deliver value to our end user. These organizations were taken a step further
by developing individual business to provide more detail for the value proposition.
Core Value
Proposition
Complementary
Offerings Supplying
and Enabling
Network
Food
Resellers
1
Residents
2
Residents
Urban Farmers
3
U Farming
platform
4
Food Prep
Facilities
5
Property
owners
6
Urban
Farm
7
UF Suppliers
and consulting
services
8
General
Delivery
Services
9
Water &
Waste
10
Federal
Nutrition Aid
Bodies
11
UF-related
NGOs
12
Governmental
Environmental
Bodies
13
City
Council
14

Community Activities Technology Financical Support Applicable to all
Platform Maintenance
Food Resellers
Membership
Networking
Food Prep Facilities
Resource Allocation
Marketing
UF Residents
Residents
Platform (website & app)
General Delivery Service
Running Events
UF Community Activities
Financing Institutions
Insurance Companies
Platform Maintenance
Network
IT/Engineering Companies
UF Training Session
Academic Institutions
Agreements
Taxes
Advertising Revenue
License/Permit Fees
UF Community Activities
(farmer’s market)
UF Companies
(ECA & non-ECA)
Assistance in Building New UF
Businesses (loans, etc)
Send Coupons/Discounts
to the Residents
Promote Urban Farming
Technology
Economic Incentives
to Participate UF Activities
Website & app
Membership Fees
BUSINESS MODEL CANVAS
Urban Farming Platform
As a digital social network, the urban farming platform is crucial in the ecosystem by building relationships
between customers and service providers. In this business model canvas, the core value for the platform is
to promote urban farming technology and to increase public participation, through community activities
and economic assistance.
Key Partners
Revenue Streams
Key Activities Value Proposition Customer Relationships Customer Segments
Cost Structure

ProduceFarming Services Boxed Applicable to all
Final Customer
Resident Urban Farmers
Produce Wholesale
Customer Acquisition
Food re-sellers (Farmer’s
markets, grocery stores)
Produce Retail
Site picking and relationship
maintenance
Real Estate
Rent or Properties
Landlords
Water
Water
Technology
Technology
Technology providers
Nutrients
Nutrients
General delivery provider
Local Governments
Water/Waste company
UF and health NGOs
Seeds
Seeds
Electric
Boxing automation
M&C
Salaries
Taxes
Affordable, sustainable, local
and organic produce
Non ECA farming services
Vehicles for visits
Transportation to sites
Consultancy fees
Payment for Farming Service
Self Service Online
Dedicated farmers
UF platform
UF platform
Ordering Web site
Dedicated Corporate
Salesfoce
Retail Self-Service
Pick up @ farm
Retail @ farm
Food prep facilities (Hotels,
restaurants, etc)
Box preparation
Coordination with boxed-food
companies
Farm-keeping
Boxed to-order produce
Processed food producers
Boxed food services
Urban Farming Company
Small urban farms already exist in NOLA. However in order to imagine a full-blown reframe to Urban
Farming, we are creating an archetypical Urban Farming company. This does not mean there would be only
one such company, but that the ones created and bore by the market would be likely to resemble the one
we describe here. The Urban farming Business model we propose uses different technologies available
where they are most advantageous and operates from the locations that make sense economically. It
provides services to smaller scale farms and to food resellers.
Key Partners
Cost Structure Revenue Streams

Produce Compost Applicable to all
Deliveries
Delivery network management
Customer service
Local event participation
UF and health NGOs
UF platform
Food re-sellers (Farmer’s
markets, grocery stores)
Central distribution system
Central distribution system
Vehicle maintenance
Local brand
Delivery vehicles
Trained drivers/staff
Transportation cost
IT management/support
Salaries
Affordable, sustainable, local
and organic produce delivery
Delivery vehicles
Delivery charges
Participation in the
community
Online payment system
Food prep facilities (Hotels,
restaurants, etc)
Local compost delivery
Urban Farms
Urban Farms
Waste Company
UF Suppliers and consulting
services
Delivery Service
The role of the delivery service in this ecosystem is to provide the capability to deliver local produce and
compost to customers. In this business model canvas, the value proposition highlights sharing the core
values of the entire ecosystem by stating that the produce is local, sustainable, and affordable. A key
component will be the central distribution system to make this solution cost effective for a local market.
Key Partners
Revenue Streams
Cost Structure

Key Partners
Cost Structure Revenue Streams
Channels
Key Resources
Nutrient Rich Water Phase II ServicesCompost Applicable to all
Urban Farms
Urban Farms
Volume Dependant Pricing
Water & Mineral MGMT
Physical location; Lab;
Consumption measurement
devices; Process patents; City
official support; Financial
capitol; Labor; Cans; Trucks;
Pipeline & Pumps
Infrastructure
Nutrient rich river water
Facility & Machinery Maint.
Taxes
Waste (organic)
Employee Training
Nutrient Ready Water
(Mississippi River)
Garbage Collection/Sorting
Waste (human/non-organic)
Subscription
Gov’t Expenditure from Taxes
Highly Automated Subscript.
Delivery/Pick-up Trucks
Mobile App
Constant Consumption
Website
Water Mane (Smart)
Price/Unit
Organic Matter Pick-up
Nutrient Heavy Water
Redistribution Value from Waste
(Organic -> Compost)
Sewage Reclamation &
Processing
Composting
Compost distribution
Garbage/Recycling/Organic
Sorting
Pro-Farming NGOs
Federal Environmental Bodies
Policy Makers
Wildlife & Fisheries Dept.
Urban Farming Suppliers
Oil Companies
Fishermen
Delivery Services
Health & Equality NGOs
AVFs
Green NGOs
Academic Institutions (Lab)
Sewage & Levee Board
Street Cleaning Services
Utilities
Consultant Costs
Insurance
Bi-weekly Pick-ups
Weekly Drop-offs
Little Personal Interaction
High Vis & Contact w/
Infrastructure
Cans for Waste
Email
Face2face @ Brick & Mortar
Location
Telephone
Residents
NOLA Businesses
Property Owners
Urban Farms
Residents
NOLA Businesses
Property Owners
Waste & Water
Waste & Water is a crudial part of the New Orleans Urban Farming Ecosystem. Waste & Water is actually
more of an ecosystem within the ecosystem rather than one massive company. Businesses in this ecosystem
work to close the nutrient and hydration systems required to sustain life within the city. They also closely
monitor the city’s output in efforts to mitigate hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico.

38
PROJECT INTRO
IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN

39
39
POTENTIAL FARMING LOCATIONS
Residential Urban FarmingECA Urban Farming Orleans Parish

40
40
IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE
now 1 year 5 years 10 years
UF Platform Waste & Water
Urban Farms Delivery Services
New Orleans chapter
established
50 residential farms;
One 10 story ECA
Delivering water by tank to
urban farms
Central delivery established
serving CBD, French Quarter
& Warhouse District
Regional network established;
10 cities from Charlotte to
Miami to Houston
Supplying 90% of required
produce for New Orleans
Beginning to take over
garbage/recycling/ org. waste
collection for Orleans Parish
Supplying delivery services to
all of Orleans Parish
National network connecting
cities & advising congress on
farming policy
Expanding nationally
New Orleans plumbed for
grey water; Implementing
systems in other cities
National franchising

41
After running our NOLA Urban Farming
Ecosystem through the Value Framework
we found that it indeed creates value at
all levels and perspectives. The obvious
next question is: what are the hurdles in
creating a mirroring ecosystem in urban
centers not only in the US but the world?
Even though the proposed business
models could work in many other
locations, we have identified some factors
that might work differently in other
cultures, climates and technical aptitudes.
We will examine these factors on the next
pages.
SCALING URBAN FARMING

42
SCALING URBAN FARMING
Desirability
local culture
Local eating habits
good neighbors
In some locations, locals might be
less willing to participate directly in
Urban Farming. In others, a grass-
roots approach, where bigger scale
companies are not as central, might
be stronger because of a culture of
participation.
Do locals tend to eat out or prepare
food at home? Is there a trend for
food trucks or farmer’s markets?
Is there a big itinerant population
that might want to try uban-farmed
produce?
Every city will have different
“sensible” areas where a urban
farming development might or
might not be welcome. It is essencial
for the promoters of the ecosystem
to create goodwill.
Feasibility
technology
political support
This ecosystem is heavily dependent
on technology and know-how.
There should be consideration to
the value of the knowledge and
how actors will transact with it.
An Urban Farming ecosystem
requires a high level of acceptance
at the city government level.
The permanence of its support
is essential to the success of the
ecosystem.
Viability
climate
water
In certain climates, intense cold
or high temperatures might make
impede outdoor urban farming.
In this case ECAs might be the
solution. Resident urban farmers
might not be able to participate,
since ECA Urban Farms are more
complex technologically.
One of the benefits for Urban
Farming is its being local. If,
however, water has to be brought
from outside because it is not
readily available, it might make the
growing of plants too expensive.
Within the city itself, it makes sense
to verify that affordable real estate
that is suitable for farms is available
in proximity to water sources.

43
SCALABILITY AND HYPOXIA
Our ecosystem includes a business model
for a company that will use the nutrient-
rich water from the Mississippi river, and
thus keep some nutrients from flowing
into the Gulf of Mexico, where they would
add to the hypoxia problem.
However to further mitigate the issue,
and considering that the current yearly
average of nutrients flowing through the
Mississippi and into the gulf is 1.6 million
metric tons, a bigger plan of action is
needed.
Careful urban farming, one that recycles
its own nutrients or partners with other
players to prevent nutrient runoff, could
potentially be prevalent enough that the
tonnage of nutrients will decrease and
with it the Dead Zones.

44
CONCLUSION
The urban farming ecosystem that was designed needed a way to showcase the entire concept in a
simpler way. To achieve this, we illustrated key stakeholders and there actvities in context of New Orleans.
While the sketch does include some complexity as well, it also provides a visual interpretation that can
quickly explain the entire ecosystem.

45
PROJECT INTRO
APPENDIX

46
major customers
process management
challenges
Vertifarms
Community education systems, restaurants, schools, and
some residents.
Design install and manage the system, including on-site
check and maintenance support.
• guarantee the yields in extreme weathers.
• teaching customers maintain the system individually.
• create an intuitive environment
• control the system to grow food in the urban area.
• providing suppor to the small market of New Orleans and
growing competition pressure from other organizations.
Vertifarms is an urban farming company at New
Orleans, which specializes in vertical aeroponic,
hydroponic, and aquaponic systems. They help
business, restaurant, school, home, or organization
grow fresh food onsite using state of the art growing
systems.
INTERVIEW WITH VERTIFARMS

discussion
major insights
We contacted Elke to gain her feedback on the use of her
method as well as her professional feedback and guidance
on our urban farming ecosystem. The feedback she provided
gave us insights that helped shape the final direction of the
project.
• Municipalities could be a major stakeholder that must be
convinced to make changes to the status quo.
• Thicker arrows can be used to highlight level of value
influence of transactions in the value flow model.
• Educating the public is an extremely important activity for
the successful implementation of this ecosystem.
• Waste & water is complex enough to be considered
another ecosystem.
INTERVIEW WITH AUTHOR
Elke den Ouden
Elke den Ouden is the author of Innovation Design: Creating
Value for People, Organizations and Society published by
Springer Science+Business.

48
RESOURCES
Intro:
Glossary:
Urban Farming Problems:
Why NOLA:
Ouden, Elke den. Innovation Design: Creating Value for People, Organizations and
Society. Springer Science & Business Media, 2011.
US EPA, OW. “Northern Gulf of Mexico Hypoxic Zone.” Overviews & Factsheets.
http://water.epa.gov/type/watersheds/named/msbasin/zone.cfm.
“What Is Aquaponics.” The Aquaponic Source. http://theaquaponicsource.com/what-is-
aquaponics/.
“Hydroponics 101 - Aeroponics: What is it and How Does it Work?” Garden
Greenhouse. http://teamdubuque.org/index.php/past-issues-mainmenu-18/37-2009-
gg/march-2009/498-hydroponics-101.
“Cornell Controlled Environment Agriculture” Cornell University Biological and
Environmental Engineering. http://www.cornellcea.com/
“Feedback Loop” Thwink.Org. http://www.thwink.org/sustain/glossary/FeedbackLoop.
html
“Grey Water Treatment” Sustainable Earth Technologies. http://www.sustainable.com.
au/greywater-treatment.html
US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
“‘Dead Zone’ Is a More Common Term for Hypoxia, Which Refers to a Reduced Level of
Oxygen in the Water.” http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/deadzone.html.
“Glossary for Vertical Farming.” Association for Vertical Farming. http://vertical-farming.
net/vertical-farming/glossary-for-vertical-farming/.
Fred Magdoff topics “Global Resource Depletion: Is Population the Problem?” Monthly
Review. http://monthlyreview.org/2013/01/01/global-resource-depletion/.
“Pesticide-Fueled Toxic Slugs Are a Nightmare for Farmers.” Motherboard. http://
motherboard.vice.com/read/pesticide-fueled-toxic-slugs-are-farmers-nightmare.
“Closing the Nutrient Loop.” Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Accessed March 11, 2015. http://csanr.wsu.edu/closing-the-nutrient-loop/.
“Pollution | Threats | WWF.” https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/pollution.
“The Problem with Pesticides” Toxics Action Center. http://csanr.wsu.edu/closing-the-
nutrient-loop/.
“Dead Zone.” http://education.nationalgeographic.com/education/encyclopedia/dead-
zone/.
“Five Charts on Food Industry Influence.” Sunlight Foundation. http://
sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2014/06/16/five-charts-on-agribusiness-influence/.
Coley, David, Mark Howard, and Michael Winter. “Local Food, Food Miles and Carbon
Emissions: A Comparison of Farm Shop and Mass Distribution Approaches.” Food Policy
34, no. 2 (April 2009): 150–55. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.11.001.
“Food Miles Are a Distraction. Local Food Is Not.” TreeHugger. http://www.treehugger.
com/sustainable-agriculture/food-miles-are-distraction-local-food-not.html.
“How Farm Subsidies Harm Taxpayers, Consumers, and Farmers, Too.” The Heritage
Foundation. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/06/how-farm-subsidies-
harm-taxpayers-consumers-and-farmers-too.
“10 Reasons Organic Food Is so Expensive.” Text.Article. The Daily Meal, March 11,
2012. http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/03/11/10-reasons-organic-food-is-so-
expensive
Sharon Toscano. “Hurricane Katrina Anniversary Serves as Reminder of Need for Storm
Protection | Restore the Mississippi River Delta.” http://www.mississippiriverdelta.org/
blog/2014/08/28/hurricane-katrina-anniversary-serves-as-reminder-of-need-for-
increased-storm-protection/.
“Find a Local CSA in New Orleans” Organic Ag Info. http://www.organicaginfo.org/
louisiana/csas-new-orleans.

49
PROJECT INTRO
“Experience is what you get when
you didn’t get what you want”. I
believe this and I think it’s better
for designers to experience more
than others. A professional and
perspicacious designer should have
the capability to consider and solve
the problem in a constantly changing
environment. I enjoy collecting
stories from different people, and
then visualizing new scenarios and
designing a better solutions that
can help them live a better life.
My passion is the journey of creating
actionable human centered designs
that are born from the spirit of
collaboration. The elements that
make this possible are refreshing
individuals, perceptive inspiration,
systematic iteration, and old
fashioned hard work. I am currently
working to obtain my MFA in Service
Design at the Savannah College
of Art and Design to build a more
holistic approach to problem solving
and further my abilities as a designer.
I live for innovation. No, really, I do.
I also care about taking innovation
mainstream and centering it
around the user by making it
work for him/her. I do research,
strategy and design. I aspire to
be a sherpa for teams that bravely
embark on innovation projects.
With an undergraduate background
in economics from Rollins College,
John Gray is currently pursuing
an MA in Industrial Design and
an MFA in Service Design at the
Savannah College of Art and Design.
He is a firm believer in stakeholder
centered design and strives to
maximize value for all individuals
and entities that come into contact
with his products and services.
John Gray is putting this believe
into practice through his newly
formed design studio, ismDESIGN.
OUR TEAM
URBAN farming NOLA ecosystem
Michael Buquet Monica Tisminesky John Gray Parker Yuanhao Lu

Urban Farming Ecosystem: A NOLA Case Study

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (17)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Urban Farming Ecosystem: A NOLA Case Study