Competition for the use of public open space in low-income urban areas: the economic potential of urban gardening in Khayelitsha, Cape Town

Figures & data

Figure 1: Khayelitsha in the City of Cape Town. Source: Adapted from City of Cape Town, 2002

Figure 2: Actual and predicted economic performance for Scaga Garden 1997–2006, Fermont et al. 1998 ). Source: Fermont et al. (1998) author's design

Table 1: Predicted cattle manure requirements in t/ha 1998–2006

	Year 2	Year 3	Year 4	Year 5	Year 6	Year 7	Year 8	Year 9	Year 10
	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
Fertiliser	280	280	230	160	140	120	120	100	100
Source: Fermont et al. (1998: Figure 6.3), own design.
Note: Units in tons/hectare.

Table 2: Actual and predicted performance of Scaga Garden 1997–2006, Fermont et al. ( 1998 )

	Actual	Predicted
	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3	Year 4	Year 5	Year 6	Year 7	Year 8	Year 9	Year 10
	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
Income	4 600	12 000	25 000	42 500	48 250	48 250	48 250	48 250	48 250	48 250
Water	750	3 075	3 075	3 075	3 075	3 075	3 075	3 075	3 075	3 075
Fertiliser	6 800	4 284	4 284	3 519	2 448	2 142	1 836	1 836	1 500	1 500
Seeds	6 200	4 500	2 200	2 200	2 200	2 200	2 200	2 200	2 200	2 200
Cost	13 750	11 859	9 559	8 794	7 723	7 417	7 111	7 111	6 775	6 775
Cost margin	299%	99%	38%	21%	16%	15%	15%	15%	14%	14%
Profit	−9 150	141	15 441	33 706	40 527	40 833	41 139	41 139	41 475	41 475
Source: Fermont et al. (1998: Table 4.5, Figure 4.2), author's calculations and design.
Note: All prices are in rand.

Table 3: Actual economic performance of Scaga Garden 2003, Fleming ( 2003 )

	Year 7
	2003
Income	41 998
Water	2 839
Fertiliser	2 579
Seeds	1 100
Cost	6 518
Cost margin	16%
Profit	35 480
Source: Fleming (2003), author's design.
Note: All prices are in rand.

Table 4: Differing assumptions in the Fermont et al. and Fleming studies

Assumption/condition	Fermont	Fleming
Cultivated area	1 800 m^2	2 480 m^2
Crop rotation	2 per year	3 per year on 77% of planted area*
Base year for prices	1998	2003
Source: Fermont et al. (1998), Fleming (2003), author's calculations and design.
Note: *Three crops per year on 24 of 31 vegetable beds.

Table 5: Comparison of predicted and actual performance of Scaga garden in year 7

	Predicted performance – adjusted (Fermont et al., 1998)		Actual performance (Fleming, 2003)
	Year 7 (2003)	% of cost	2003	% of cost
Income	137 579		41 998
Water	10 235	48	2 839	44
Fertiliser	5 070	24	2 579	40
Seeds	6 075	28	1 100	17
Cost	21 381		6 518
Cost margin	16%		16%
Profit	116 198		35 480
Source: Fermont et al. (1998), Fleming (2003), author's calculations and design.
Note: All prices are in rand at 2003 values.

Table 6: Comparison of expected and actual crop yields of Scaga garden

Vegetable	Yield: plants per m^2
	Fermont expected	Fleming actual	Difference (%)	Hygrotech suggested
Cabbage	4,0	2,3	−43	3–4
Lettuce	12,0	4,5	−63	5,5–10
Carrots	36,0	13,5	−63	150–250
Onions	27,0	3,1	−89	50–80
Spinach	12,6	1,7	−86	15–34
Beetroot	31,5	7,9	−75	17–35
Green peppers	6,0	3,3	−45	2–5,5
Brinjals	6,0	2,0	−67	2,2–3,5
Turnips	22,5	13,3	−41	20–40
Broccoli	4,3	1,8	−59	2–4
Cauliflower	4,3	2,7	−37	1,6–4
Potatoes	3,4	1,6	−54	Not available
Source: Fermont et al. (1998: Appendix 2), Fleming (2003: Schedule 3), Hygrotech, author's calculations and design.
Note: Units in plants/m^2.

Table 7: Comparison of total production

Vegetable	Unit	Unit weight (kg)	Fermont adjusted predicted produce (units)	Fleming produce (units)	Fermont adjusted predicted produce (kg)	Fleming produce (kg)
Cabbage	Fruit	1,50	4 204	2 360	6 307	3 540
Lettuce	Fruit	0,40	459	720	183	288
Carrots	Fruit	0,07	17 200	7 560	1 204	529
Leek/onion	Bunch	0,30	–	480	–	144
Onions	Fruit	0,17	15 996	1 960	2 639	323
Spinach	Bunch	1,00	36 602	4 339	36 602	4 339
Beetroot	Fruit	0,25	10 836	4 402	2 709	1 100
Peppers	Fruit	0,16	1 368	7 137	219	1 142
Brinjals	Fruit	0,28	1 368	2 344	376	645
Turnips	Fruit	0,25	12 040	3 180	3 010	795
Broccoli	Fruit	0,30	414	705	124	211
Cauliflower	Fruit	0,65	740	1 951	481	1 268
Potatoes	Fruit	0,20	27 940	7 484	5 588	1 497
Peas	Kg	1	344	–	344	–
Beans	Kg	1	428	–	428	–
Tomato	Fruit	0,14	17 888	535	2 504	75
Pumpkin	Fruit	2,00	206	–	413	–
Mealie	Fruit	0,25	1 445	–	361	–
Celery	Fruit		–	Some	–	Some
Total Produced			149 479	45 175	63 493	15 897
Source: Fermont et al. (1998: Appendix 2), Fleming (2003: Schedule 3), Hygrotech, author's calculations and design.

Table 8: Comparison of prices assumed by Fermont et al. and implicit in Fleming

Vegetable	Fermont et al. 2003 prices (R)	Fleming (R)	Change (%)	Vegetable unit
Cabbage	2,24	2,50	11,4	Head
Lettuce	1,50	0,15	−90,0	Head
Carrots	0,56	0,42	−25,7	Fruit
Onions	0,50	0,63	25,4	Fruit
Spinach	1,50	2,59	73,4	Bunch
Beetroot	0,50	0,43	−14,3	Fruit
Green peppers	0,60	0,59	−1,6	Fruit
Brinjals	0,50	0,90	81,5	Fruit
Turnips	1,50	0,38	−74,8	Fruit
Broccoli	5,98	5,87	−1,9	Kg
Cauliflower	1,50	2,30	54,1	Head
Potatoes	0,30	0,45	49,7	Fruit
Source: Fermont et al. (1998: Appendix 2), Fleming (2003: Schedule 3), author's calculations and design.
Note: All prices are in rand at 2003 values.

Table 9: Comparison of water used

Study	Scaga water used/assumed (kl)	Water use adjusted (kl)	Efficiency (%)	kl 100% efficiency	R/kl 2003 prices	Total cost adjusted (R)
Fermont et al.	1 566	2 993	50	1 496	3,42	10 235
Fleming	8 743 for 9 months	11 657	15–28	1 736–3 224	0,24	2 839
Source: Fermont et al. (1998), Fleming (2003 and personal communication), author's calculations and design.
Note: Fermont et al.'s adjusted kl: 1566 kl*2480/1800*1.387 = 2992.6 kl accounting for increased planting area and crop rotation. Fleming's adjusted kl for a whole year: 8743 kl*12/9 = 11 657.3 kl.

Table 10: Comparison of manure used

Study	Recommended manure (t/ha/year)	Recommended manure Scaga (t/year)	Manure use adjusted (t/year)	R/ton 2003 prices	Total cost Adjusted (R)
Fermont et al.	120 for 2 crop rotations	22	41	123	5 070
Fleming	57 for 3 rotations on 77%	14	14	182	2 579
Source: Fermont et al. (1998), Fleming (2003 and personal communication), author's calculations and design.
Note: Numbers calculated on the basis of the size of the garden: 120t/ha*0,18 ha = 21,6t (1800 m^2 = 0.18 ha) and 57t/ha*0,248 ha = 14.1t (2480 m^2 = 0,248 ha).

Table 11: Comparison of seed costs

	Cost study (R)	Cost adjusted (R)
Fermont et al.	2 200	6 075
Fleming	1 100	1 100
Source: Fermont et al. (1998), Fleming (2003 and personal communication), author's calculations and design.
Note: Prices in rands.

Table 12: Comparison of input costs for seeds and seedlings

	Fermont et al. 2003 prices (R)	Fleming (R)
Pack of seeds	3,5	5,0
Tray of 200 seedlings	57,8	10,0
Source: Fermont et al. (1998:Appendix 5), Fleming (personal communication), author's calculations and design.
Note: Prices in rands.

Table 13: Sensitivity of 2003 profits to the payment for water (rands)

Scenario	Water cost	Total profit	Profit/m^2/month
Pay electricity only (current status)	2 839	35 480	1,19
Pay city water at city prices and electricity	23 969	14 350	0,48
Pay all water at city prices	39 868	−1 549	−0,05
Pay all water (100% eff, & 100 mm) at city prices	5 937	32 382	1,09
Pay all water (100% eff, & 150 mm) at city prices	11 026	27 293	0,92
Source: Author's calculations.

Table 14: Profit scenarios and land requirements

Scenario	R/m^2/month	m^2 required to equal R500
Current operation pay all water – worst case	0	No income possible
Current operation or pay and reduce water	1	500
Fleming best case	2–2.50	200–250
Fermont et al. adjusted best case	4	125
Source: Author's calculations.
Note: All numbers are in rands.

City Of Cape Town . 2002 . City of Cape Town State of Environment Report Year 4 (2001) Cape Town

 Google Scholar

Fermont , A , van asten , P , Keet , J and Van Boom , E . 1998 . “ Urban vegetable production in Khayelitsha ” . Pretoria, , South Africa : Department of Water Affairs and Forestry .

 Google Scholar

Fleming , A . 2003 . “ The creation of livelihoods through market gardening for emerging Cape Flats micro-farmers ” . Cape Town Unpublished

 Google Scholar