A tale of tree cities

What single measure has a positive impact on soil erosion, biodiversity loss, health and community spirit? The Urban Orchard Project (UOP) claims that all this and more can be achieved through their community-centred model of promoting sustainable green infrastructure, often in the midst of the hubbub of metropolitan life.

Whether it’s establishing new orchards, restoring heritage orchards, maintaining orchards, running workshops and food markets on orchards, or sponsoring orchards through CSR; whether it’s apples, pears, plums – you name it, since 2009 UOP has been planting it. It’s an intuitively appealing idea, and it’s hard to argue with an organisation whose mission is to create “inspiring cities swathed in trees, providing beautiful blossom and tasty fruit, everywhere.”

But it’s also just one of many green community initiatives competing for our attention – so does UOP have us USP? Is it possible to quantify just how much orchards give back?

Traditional variety

The UK Habitat Action Plan estimates a 63% decline in the overall area of orchards since 1950 (when the words ‘apple’ and ‘blackberry’ referred only to fruit). That’s partly a response to pressure for land to develop, but also reflects the fact that orchards are labour intensive to establish and maintain, while the yield of fruit per hectare is relatively low compared with alternative crops. Wouldn’t we be better off supporting urban potato planting instead?

However, many of the orchards that UOP restores, plants and harvests are traditional ones, usually comprising fewer than 200 fruit trees, pruned into ‘standard’ form so they are tall enough for animals to graze under them. They’re well-spaced over grassland and grown using vigorous rootstock. Although fruit yield per hectare is lower than a modern commercial orchard, the land is effectively ‘dual use’ and they require little labour input, and no chemical fertilisers.

Traditional orchards function as biodiversity islands in an increasingly monocultural agricultural landscape, and were designated as a Priority Habitat under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) in 2007. A subsequent study by Natural England and Just Ecology Environmental Consultancy revealed just what significant islands they are. A limited survey of six traditional orchards across England recorded over 200 species per site. Nationally scarce and rare species, including priority BAP species across all groups (with the exception of bryophytes) were found to be supported in all the orchards studied.

Painting the town green

As well as traditional orchards, the UOP has set up numerous ‘urban micro-orchards’, using dwarfing rootstock to enable them to thrive in even the most unpromising urban settings – infill plots, backland plots, hospitals, schools and residential areas in the heart of London’s sprawl, as well as corners of larger parks and gardens. In the process, they check off many of the local Green Infrastructure (GI) boxes, which are summarised by the Landscape Institute’s report on Local Green Infrastructure:

“Providing space to restore locally sourced and distinctive food production and to connect urban populations with the rural economy. Opportunities to learn about…gardening, vegetable and fruit growing, bee-keeping and horticulture, as well as providing for outdoor places and activities that help bring communities together and provide an active lifestyle.”

They also tend to cost less than many other GI projects, and their small scale and limited need for expenditure (remember, no chemical fertilisers) makes them perfect for local volunteer management. In fact, a lot of UOP’s projects originate within communities themselves. After an orchard has been established it can be managed by locals of all shapes and ages, who (with a little support from UOP) quite literally reap the fruits of their labour.

The combination of project validity (in addressing a wide range of sustainability issues), robustness (in its applicability to almost any site) and scalability (either through orchard expansion, ecosystem expansion, or the connection of micro-orchards via orchard corridors) is what makes the UOP’s activities so interesting.

GI tracts

In 2012, a study for Natural England considered six orchards in Herefordshire, including two intensive orchards, and used triple bottom line accounting to monetise economic, social and environmental values. Their findings showed a similar diversity among orchards to the previous study. They estimated the total value per hectare ranged from £1,629 to £4,776 for traditional, and £4,179 to £7,129 for intensive orchards. Using 2012 Defra farming statistics figures for crop areas, the total value of the UK’s 24,000 hectares of orchards is anywhere between £39.1 and £171.1 million.

Although the total value of intensive orchards was higher, I take three key points from the study:

• For both types of orchard, the environmental values far outstripped the direct economic ones.
• The estimation of social values must be treated with caution, as they were loosely based on qualitative ranking by affected communities and derived from economic values assigned to each orchard.
• Valuing UOP’s urban micro-orchards requires a rather different set of parameters from those considered by Natural England. They sit within radically different environments from commercial orchards, and have radically different impacts on a radically different pool of stakeholders.

How much do you like them apples?

UOP orchard communities consistently rate social and cultural benefits as their primary motivation for, and the benefit of their work, while environmental benefits are secondary, and economic ones are comparatively marginal. This leaves urban micro orchards highly susceptible to any shortcomings in the valuation of social, cultural and environmental benefits.

Do urban orchards lead to communities blossoming? Photo © Peter Jones.

Approaches to valuing some of the most interesting benefits of UOP orchards therefore need study. How do you assess the therapeutic effect of an orchard in a hospital’s grounds, or the health benefits arising from free access to locally grown fruit for people who might otherwise find fresh fruit an expensive luxury? What is the value of access to green space within an urban sprawl, and the opportunity for outdoor activity and engagement with nature? Can we quantify the educational and cultural benefit to schools and universities if students engage in running on-site orchards, or the benefit of access to tranquil spaces in otherwise highly built, fast-paced environments? These are challenges for econometricians, and ones worth exploring if the balance between direct and indirect benefits is anything like recent findings regarding litter.

Then there are the effects that orchard projects – like community litter picks – can have on communities, help marginalised groups find a stake in society and promoting pro-social behaviours, which can lead to reductions in littering and vandalism. The orchards build social ties, with communities even reporting heightened feelings of patriotism and cultural identity.

Counsel of dis-pear?

Expressing these benefits in monetary terms is far from easy, but they do have a value. Of course, benefits vary from project to project, and there may be a degree of respondent bias. Research into the benefits has to be mindful of the following challenges:

• The communities managing the orchards are typically small, while the orchards themselves are a non-excludable source of certain benefits. As a result, the costs of creating and maintaining them are usually borne by a few, while the benefits are reaped by a wider community (in most cases, all the residents of the council estate on which the orchard is planted) and environment.
• Aside from the cost of setting up, maintaining and operating the orchards, there is an opportunity cost of the land and effort used for urban orchards. Land used for trees isn’t available for football; time volunteered for pruning isn’t available for visiting the housebound.
• In some cases, orchards may not enjoy community-wide support. Some orchard groups have become embroiled in disputes over land use and aesthetics with neighbours and local councils – rather detracting from the orchard’s role as haven of peace and tranquillity. Some orchards have suffered vandalism, while volunteers occasionally report physical or mental fatigue, or feelings of resentment towards non-participative community members.
• While a micro-orchard is largely self-sustaining after 3-5 years, the benefits it delivers depend on the availability and motivation of volunteers. Most community orchards are still in their infancy, and managed by the enthusiastic groups that established them. However, the urban population is particularly mobile, and it remains to be seen how groups will manage to secure the succession of management responsibility to the next generation of volunteers. One community leader reported volunteers returning to participate in the orchard work even after moving away from the area; another was left shouldering the entire burden of orchard management after colleagues moved to other estates.

Nevertheless, despite austerity the charity has secured additional funding streams and is expanding its geographical reach, with plans to expand operations in London, Manchester, Birmingham, Herefordshire, Leeds and Scotland. It’s also taking on more commercial activities, while trying to enhance the value of their existing community projects.

There is an intuitive appeal to what UOP is doing, and the communities in which it is active clearly feel urban orchards are worthwhile – but we lack the econometric tools to properly evaluate their benefits. This is an area of research that could be of huge benefit to grant administrators and other funders, as they struggle to decide between the competing calls on their limited resources.