ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2025
Urban vertical farming: innovation for food security and social impact?
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Key action areas for transforming the UK food system: insights from the Transforming UK Food Systems (TUKFS) Programme project portfolio.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- Food systems transformation: rationale and methodologies.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Urban vertical farming (VF) has emerged as a potential solution to improve food security and safety for urban populations, as well as to transform wider food systems (FS) to ensure greater sustainability. Existing literature has highlighted both direct and indirect benefits from VF to individuals and communities through novel technology alongside social entrepreneurial innovation. These include the creation of green jobs, and greater access to fresh, healthy food produced locally, as well as community development programmes and avenues for civic participation. We explore relevant literature to critically examine the socio-economic impact of VF, drawing out key issues of debate, while identifying areas of future research and recommendations for practice. We draw attention to critical accounts that have highlighted a need to consider the role of technology within social and political processes. Studies have noted key challenges to VF in achieving social and economic benefits to urban populations, as well as in contributing to food security. Examining VF as an intervention within a wider political economy enables a more rigorous exploration of social impact. A research, policy and practice focus beyond production and business model design is needed to situate VF within broader efforts to transform FS.This article is part of the theme issue 'Transforming terrestrial food systems for human and planetary health'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.