Strengthening the Future of Communal Food Production in Switzerland

Community gardens, allotments and community-supported agriculture are key for sustainable, resilient food systems. Their future depends on political recognition and inter-institutional network support.

In Switzerland, communal food production encompasses collaborative models such as allotment gardens (AGs), community gardens (CGs) and community-supported agriculture (CSA). These initiatives produce food for one’s own consumption and foster social ties and eco-friendly lifestyles in addition to promoting food security. However, these alternative food networks face an uncertain future, with challenges such as urban densification, structural institutional limitations and lack of political support threatening their continued operation.

In a qualitative study conducted by Agroscope and the University of Bern, the institutional structures and challenges faced by AGs, CGs and CSA are compared. The results identify important structural differences which could affect the continuity potential of each of these forms of communal food production. Below, some specific findings of the study:

Distinct institutional structures affect continuity

AGs (allotment gardens) are highly regulated, traditional structures with strict membership requirements in terms of time and work investment as well as prerequisite knowledge. AGs promote self-expression but lack political engagement and struggle to adapt to outside challenges and to recruit individuals for leadership roles.

CGs (community gardens) are normative institutions that stress community-building. They are low-cost to run and accessible, but are dependent on neighbourhood support and external organisational backing (e.g., NGOs, churches).

CSA (community-supported agriculture) schemes are flexible, democratic and professionally organised, with strong political and ecological agendas but high financial barriers that exclude low-income groups despite efforts to appeal to the latter.

Many policy challenges affect the continuity of communal food production 

Urban development pressures reduce land availability, thereby threatening AG and CG spaces. Integrating communal food production models into urban green planning can help secure long-term access and foster collaboration with public institutions. In CSAs, financial barriers limit access for vulnerable groups, highlighting the need for subsidies, tax incentives and municipal support to promote equity. AGs face challenges due to rigid governance structures that hinder adaptability and inclusiveness. The adoption of more-flexible models from CSAs and CGs together with the creation of inter-institutional networks could enhance collaboration, knowledge-sharing and advocacy.