Projektowanie i budowa pierwszej polskiej farmy akwaponicznej – studium przypadku

Maria Jankowska, Paweł Pedrycz

doi:10.37190/arc260107

Streszczenie

Artykuł stanowi studium przypadku dotyczące procesu projektowania miejskiej farmy akwaponicznej, realizowanej jako element infrastruktury miejskiej o funkcjach produkcyjnych, edukacyjnych i społecznych. Farma taka powstała we Wrocławiu w ramach projektu badawczo-wdrożeniowego Urban Stormwater Aquaponic Garden Environment (USAGE), finansowanego ze środków publicznych w ramach programu Badania stosowane oraz z Funduszy Norweskich. Celem autorów opracowania było zarówno przybliżenie technologii akwaponiki w kontekście urbanistycznym, jak i identyfikacja kluczowych wyzwań projektowych, organizacyjnych oraz decyzyjnych związanych z wdrażaniem tego typu systemów w warunkach miejskich. W tekście zaprezentowano kolejne etapy działań podejmowanych przez interdyscyplinarny zespół projektowy, ukazując potencjał rozwiązań akwaponicznych, a także ograniczenia procesu. Autorzy artykułu uporządkowali kluczowe zagadnienia oraz zidentyfikowali podstawowe punkty decyzyjne, które determinują ostateczny kształt przedsięwzięcia.

2026

1(85)

Maria Jankowska*, Paweł Pedrycz**

Design and construction of the first Polish urban aquaponic farm

– case study

DOI: 10.37190/arc260107

Published in open access. CC BY-NC license.

Abstract

The article presents a case study on the design of an urban aquaponic farm in Poland. Such a farm was established in Wrocław as part of the

research and implementation project Urban Stormwater Aquaponic Garden Environment (USAGE), nanced by the state budget under the Applied

Research Programme and by Norwegian Funds (Norway Grants). The planning and design of the farm was a multi-stage process that can be catego-

rized into three main groups: (1) technological requirements of aquaponics, (2) public engagement, and (3) creativity and design expertise (urban and

architectural). The described process resulted in the design and creation of the farm as a public space in the city, consisting of a composition of three

modied shipping containers and additional elements, which – beyond its primary technological function – also serves as a meeting place and an

educational venue.

Key words: aquaponics, sustainable food production, urban agriculture, water circulation, New European Bauhaus

Introduction

In recent years, the growing interest in urban food pro-

duction systems has been embedded within broader en

vi ron -

mental, climatic, and economic transformations. On going

ur banisation, climate change, the degradation of na tural

resources, the instability of global supply chains, and the

increasing vulnerability of logistical systems to geopolitical

crises have led to a situation in which local models of food

production are gaining importance not only in ecological

terms, but also as a matter of strategic relevance. In the aca-

demic literature, these phenomena are examined within the

frameworks of concepts such as urban agriculture, vertical

farming, glocalism, and the idea of so-called edible cities

(or edible settlements) (Mougeot 2005; Despommier 2010;

Viljoen, Bohn 2014; Barthel, Parker and Ernstson 2015).

Glocalisation, understood as the coexistence of global

and local processes, emphasises the growing role of local

pro duction systems in enhancing the resilience of urban

structures (Eigenbrod, Gruda 2015). Within this perspective,

the food system ceases to be viewed solely as an economic

sector and instead begins to be interpreted as a component

of the city’s critical infrastructure. Concepts of urban resil

ience and crisis resilience indicate that the capacity for lo-

cal, stable, and scalable food production is becoming a key

element in cities’ adaptation to environmental, economic,

and social uncertainties (Latawiec et al. 2014).

An important context for the development of urban farms

is also provided by the concept of the circular econo my,

which redenes the ways in which resources, waste, and

material ows are understood (Geissdoerfer et al. 2017).

Aquaponic systems constitute a model example of the in-

tegration of biological and technological processes within

closed cycles of matter and water, minimising resource

losses while reducing the demand for synthetic fertilisers

(Goddek et al. 2019). At the same time, they align with the

concept of sitopia, which emphasises the systemic role of

food in shaping the spatial and social structures of the city

(Steel 2008).

* ORCID:

0000-0002-4658-9055. Faculty of Architecture, War-

saw University of Technology, Poland, e-mail: maria.jankowska.dokt@

pw.edu.pl

** ORCID:

0000-0001-9892-1964. Faculty of Architecture, War-

saw University of Technology, Poland.

78 Maria Jankowska, Paweł Pedrycz

The development of urban food systems is also analysed

within the frameworks of concepts such as food safety, food

security, and food sovereignty, which emphasise the impor-

tance of local control over food production, availability, and

quality (Lansdown 2011). In response to these challenges,

contemporary cities are increasingly formulating their own

food strategies (including Milan, Ghent, and Wrocław), in-

tegrating issues of production, logistics, environmental sus-

tainability, and public education (Morgan, Sonnino 2010).

The signicance of local food systems extends beyond

technological considerations, encompassing cultural and so -

cial processes as well (Specht et al. 2014). Concepts such as

slow food, which promote regionality, transparency, and the

shortening of supply chains, as well as notions of neomedi-

evalism – interpreted as a return to local, decentralised pro-

duction structures – indicate a growing interest in models

of self-suciency and independence. In this context, urban

food production becomes part of a broader socio-spatial

transformation (Viljoen, Bohn 2014).

The issue of food self-suciency extends beyond culti-

vation itself, encompassing the availability of water, energy,

and raw materials required for fertiliser production. Under

conditions of increasing pressure on natural resources and

the instability of commodity markets, particular importance

is attributed to technologies that enable the integration of

cycles of matter, water, and nutrients within local produc-

tion systems.

Against this background, aquaponics emerges as a solu-

tion that combines high resource eciency, the ability to

control the production environment, and the potential for

implementation in urban conditions. Aquaponics is a food

production system that integrates the cultivation of aquatic

organisms with plant production in a controlled environ-

ment (Somerville et al. 2014). Fish provide nutrients that

are transformed by microorganisms and utilised by plants as

fertiliser, while plants and biolters improve water quality,

enabling its recirculation. This integration allows for e-

cient resource use, a signicant reduction in water consump-

tion, and a limitation in the use of synthetic fertilisers.

The urban aquaponic farm described in this article consti-

tutes a case study demonstrating the potential of such

solu-

tions in the context of contemporary environmental and

urban challenges. The project may be interpreted as an

ex perimental attempt to implement the principles of the

cir cular economy, urban resilience, and local food produc-

tion within real urban conditions. Its signicance extends

beyond

the technological dimension, encompassing spatial,

social, infrastructural, and environmental aspects, and there-

by providing an empirical contribution to the discourse on

the role of urban food systems.

Container-based aquaponic farms

– selected examples

One of the earliest projects of this type was Micro-Farms

by Damien Chivialle, developed as part of the Mediama tic

initiative in Amsterdam (Triboli, Chivialle 2025; Farhan-

gi et al. 2020). The project is based on a standard ship-

ping container equipped with an aquaponic system, while

a greenhouse structure is installed on its roof. The entire

installation functions as an autonomous food production

module, operating within the urban environment as both

a productive and educational unit.

A similar concept is developed in the British project

GrowUp Box, which involves the adaptation of a ship

ping container into an urban farm combining sh cultiva-

tion with plant production in a hydroponic system (Garcia

Menocal 2013; Crepeau 2014). The project is characterised

by a compact layout, full water recirculation, and the use of

renewable energy sources. Its aim was to create a scalable

prototype that could be replicated within urban environ-

ments.

In turn, the Berlin-based example described in the article

“Ecient City Farming” presents the adaptation of ship-

ping containers as elements of infrastructure supporting ur-

ban agriculture and environmental education (Slow Travel

Berlin 2013). In this approach, the container becomes a tool

for experimentation, technological demonstration, and the

development of ecological awareness within conditions of

limited urban space.

All of the aforementioned projects conrm the potential

of container-based architecture as a tool for integrating pro-

ductive, educational, and social functions. The urban aqua-

ponic farm in Wrocław described in this article develops

these premises further by adapting container-based solu-

tions to the local urban, climatic, and social context, and

by employing them as part of a broader urban food strategy

and a tool for enhancing urban resilience.

The Urban Stormwater Aquaponics Garden Environment

(USAGE) project constitutes an interdisciplinary and in-

ternational initiative implemented between 2021 and 2024,

aimed at developing two aquaponic installations – located in

Wrocław and Oslo. In both locations, multifunctional spaces

were created, designed to support ecological food produc-

tion, education, and integration with stormwater collection

and treatment systems. A key premise of the project was the

planning of an urban farm based on the expectations of local

communities as well as specic urban conditions. In addi-

tion to production facilities, environmental education centres

were established, along with new spaces for social interac-

tion and activity within the city’s green areas. As part of the

project, a scalable model for urban farming was also devel-

oped, enabling its future implementation by municipalities

as well as small and medium-sized enterprises. The project

was funded by the state budget under the Applied Research

Programme and by Norwegian Funds (Norway Grants).

Methods

The article is based on a qualitative research approach,

with the case study serving as its primary methodological

framework. This method is widely applied in urban, ar-

chitectural, and environmental research, particularly in the

analysis of complex, context-dependent spatial phenomena

and innovative design solutions. The case study approach

enables an in-depth examination of a phenomenon within

its real functional, technological, and social context, inte-

grating diverse sources of data.

The application of the case study method is justied by

the nature of the project under consideration, which is ex-

 DesignandconstructionoftherstPolishurbanaquaponicfarm–casestudy 79

perimental and prototypical, and strongly embedded in local

conditions. The analysed object does not represent a typical

solution, which limits the applicability of quantitative and

comparative methods. Instead, this approach enables the re-

construction of the design process, the identication of key

decisions, and the analysis of relationships between tech-

nology, space, and users. The study was exploratory and

qualitative in nature.

The basis of the analysis is an urban aquaponic farm lo -

cated in Wrocław, developed as part of a research and im -

ple mentation project. The subject of the study includes both

the physical structure itself and the processes of its planning,

design, and realisation. The analysis encompasses spatial,

technological, organisational, and social conditions. The

case study includes an examination of the site at two scales:

urban and local. At the broader scale, the analysis considers

the farm’s position within the functional and spatial struc-

ture of the city, its relationships with urban in fra structure,

and its accessibility. At the local scale, atten tion is given to

the immediate surroundings, solar exposure conditions, vi-

sual connections, and the character of the space in which

the facility is situated. To illustrate the spatial context, carto-

graphic methods were employed, in particular location maps

presenting the position of the site within the urban structure.

These maps serve both analytical and interpretative func-

tions, enabling the assessment of relationships between the

investigated development and the broader urban layout.

The design and implementation process was monitored at

all stages by the authors involved in the project. The observa-

tion focused on spatial, functional, and technological aspects,

as well as on interactions between participants in the invest-

ment process. Due to the direct involvement of the research

team in the design and implementation of the farm, the study

also exhibited characteristics of participant observation.

At the conceptual stage, individual interviews were con-

ducted with representatives of the project’s stakeholders.

The aim was to identify their expectations, needs, and per-

ceptions of the planned investment within the urban con-

text. This method enabled the identication of qualitative

factors such as spatial perception, social acceptance, and

the expected functions of the facility.

An important component of the research process was sys-

tematic photographic documentation covering successive

stages of the farm’s construction and operation. The visual

material served as a source of research data, enabling the

analysis of the relationship between the object and its sur-

roundings, its architectural form, and patterns of spatial use.

The applied approach is interdisciplinary in nature, inte-

grating design, spatial, and social perspectives. Qualitative

methods are particularly justied in this case, as the subject

of analysis is the design process itself, as well as the com-

plex relationships between technology, the urban environ-

ment, and users.

Planning of a modular aquaponic farm in Wrocław

Location

The project was planned within an urban environment, as

determined by its functional and conceptual premises. Due

to the need to integrate food production with urban infra-

structure and ensure access for end users, a location within

a large city represented the most justied solution. Wrocław

was selected – a city characterised by unique hydrograph-

ic and cultural conditions. The presence of the Oder River,

along with its numerous branches and canals, shapes not

only the urban landscape but also the city’s historical devel-

opment and its relationship with water management. The

long-standing tradition of aquaculture in Lower Silesia, ex-

emplied by the Milicz Ponds, also proved to be an import-

ant criterion in the decision-making process.

This heritage constitutes a signicant cultural and tech-

nological context for the development of modern food pro-

duction systems such as aquaponics. Locating the farm in

Wrocław made it possible to combine contemporary solu-

tions with the city’s local identity, its water resources, and

its historical traditions.

The rst stage of the planning process involved the selec-

tion of a specic site, aligned with the project’s objectives.

Key criteria included accessibility, distance from the city

centre, legal feasibility, and the potential for recreational

and educational synergy. Additional considerations encom-

passed the surrounding context, transport connectivity, the

needs of the local community, the possibility of agreements

with landowners, access to water and urban utilities, as well

as soil conditions. Potential locations for the farm can be

categorised according to accessibility and degree of privacy

into three groups: (1) private spaces; (2) semi-public spac-

es (such as inner courtyards, residential estates, university

campuses, and research complexes); and (3) public spaces

(including squares, streets, and parks). This classication

provides a framework for assessing both spatial integration

and social accessibility of the proposed intervention. A sep-

arate but closely related issue concerns the relationship be-

tween the proposed structure and the surrounding existing

(or planned) built environment, as well as regulatory con-

straints, including local zoning plans, permissions for tem-

porary structures, minimum requirements for biologically

active surfaces, and heritage and environmental protection.

Within this context, at least three spatial congurations can

be distinguished: (a) a freestanding structure, physically in-

dependent from other buildings; (b) an “attached” structure,

directly adjoining existing buildings; and (c) an “integrated”

structure, fully incorporated into other buildings or located

within them. These congurations correspond to increasing

levels of technological and organisational complexity.

The above classication can be structured in the form

of a matrix, in which each eld represents a distinct set of

challenges and leads to a dierent spatial and functional

character. From the perspective of the project objectives, the

most relevant congurations were: 2a (semi-public spaces

– freestanding structure), 2b (semi-public spaces – attached

structure), 3a (public spaces – freestanding structure), and

3b (public spaces – attached structure). For the purposes of

the pilot farm, variant 2a was selected as the most feasible

option in terms of formal simplicity and technological re-

quirements. Within the scope of further research, it would

be justied to test additional congurations, particularly

those involving interventions in representative public spac-

es – such as a signicant urban square.

80 Maria Jankowska, Paweł Pedrycz

particular attention given to minimising shading from exist-

ing structures, maximising sunlight for plant cultivation, and

introducing partial shading in the meeting area during mid-

day hours. The potential for creating an intimate gathering

space was also considered. As a result of these analyses, the

farm was located in the area of a paved intersection in the

central-eastern part of the site. A curved widening of a tech-

nical road, surfaced with large-format concrete slabs, forms

a natural preguration of a public square, further dened by

greenery on the western side. In order to fully exploit the de-

sign potential of this location, the farm was positioned along

its eastern edge, partially extending onto a grassy area. At

the same time, a sense of spatial enclosure was suggested

through a recessed corner of the architectural form. Subse-

quent design decisions followed from the development of

the enclosure for the research installation itself.

Diagnosisoflocalcommunity

Due to the innovative nature of the programme, the de-

sign process did not follow a conventional trajectory, but in-

stead evolved through the integration of expert knowledge

and the expectations of the local community. Decisions

made by experts were informed by ideas proposed by res-

idents of Wrocław, while community-generated concepts

were subject to expert evaluation. During the planning of

the individual functions of the AquaFarm, key stakeholder

groups were identied. From these, 20 representatives were

selected, with whom individual, semi-structured interviews

were conducted in order to better understand the expecta-

tions of the local community.

Preliminarytechnologicalandfunctionalanalysis

Following the detailed site analysis, the design of the in-

stallation infrastructure was initiated. Decision-making fo-

cused on the number and types of tanks, ltration systems,

pumps, ventilation, lighting, monitoring systems, and oth-

er components required to maintain the health of both sh

and plants. The selection of these solutions was determined

by the operational characteristics of aquaponic systems, in

which sh cultivation and plant production remain closely

interdependent.

During the cultivation of sh or crustaceans in aquapo -

nic farms operating within a closed-loop recirculating system

(RAS – Recirculating Aquaculture System), compounds such

as ammonia – originating from animal waste – are gene-

rated. Within certain concentration ranges, these substances

are toxic to aquatic organisms; however, they simultane-

ously constitute valuable nutrients for plant growth (United

States Environmental Protection Agency 2013; Camargo,

Alon so 2006). Taking this relationship into account, the

aqua ponic system of the Wrocław farm was enclosed with-

in food-grade adapted shipping containers and equipped

with three aquaculture tanks for animal cultivation. Water

con taining waste products is pumped from these tanks into

a unit equipped with both mechanical and biological ltra-

tion systems. Within the biological lter, appropriately se-

lected bacteria convert ammonia into nitrates, which are less

toxic to animals and more readily absorbed

by plants. At the

Within the semi-public, freestanding conguration (vari

ant 2a), a site belonging to the Wrocław municipal water-

works was selected. This choice was driven by thematic

alignment – particularly issues related to water treatment

and conservation – as well as the resulting openness to insti-

tutional collaboration. The historic and industrial character

of the site had a positive impact on both the social reception

of the project and the functioning of the farm itself. The fa-

cility was established approximately 4 km east of the Mar-

ket Square, between the Oder and the Oława rivers, within

the revitalised “Na Grobli” complex. This location is sur-

rounded by buildings with academic, educational (includ-

ing Hydropolis), industrial, and infrastructural functions,

complemented by a residential component.

Urbananalysis

Due to the considerable size of the site and the multi-

ple possible locations for the farm within it, a general urban

analysis of the plot was conducted. This included, among

other aspects, the identication of visual axes, viewpoints,

and access routes (the facility was positioned so as to re-

main visible from multiple vantage points and perspectives).

Solar exposure conditions were also analysed (Fig. 2), with

Fig. 1. Location of the aquaponic farm in Wrocław

(source: National Geoportal, elaborated by M. Jankowska)

Il. 1. Lokalizacja farmy akwaponicznej we Wrocławiu

(źródło mapy: Geoportal Krajowy, oprac. M. Jankowska)

Fig. 2. Location of the aquaponic farm in Wrocław

(source: Google Earth, elaborated by P. Pedrycz)

Il. 2. Lokalizacja farmy akwaponicznej we Wrocławiu

(fot. Google Earth, oprac. P. Pedrycz)

 DesignandconstructionoftherstPolishurbanaquaponicfarm–casestudy 81

next stage, following biological ltration, the nutrient-rich

water is directed to the plant cultivation area, located on

a dedicated rack system, where two hydroponic methods

are employed. In the NFT method (nutrient lm technique),

plant roots are continuously washed by a thin lm of ow-

ing water, whereas in the DWC method (deep water cul-

ture), roots are submerged in a deeper body of intensively

aerated and continuously refreshed water (Chowdhury, Sa-

marakoon and Altland 2024). Subsequently, water puried

of substances harmful to aquatic organisms returns from

the hydroponic system to the cultivation tanks, thereby

completing the closed-loop cycle. In functional terms, the

complex was designed to accommodate not only the aqua-

ponic installation and the rainwater collection system, but

also auxiliary and complementary spaces, including storage

facilities and a dedicated meeting area.

Costplanningandmanagement

Following the preliminary technological and functional

analyses, an organisational and nancial framework was

developed for the initial phase of the farm’s operation. De-

tailed analyses of technological performance and economic

eciency are being conducted within the USAGE project

and will be comprehensively examined and reported upon

after the completion of the full research period. At the initial

stage, it was necessary to establish a set of assumptions and

outline temporal and nancial parameters that would enable

the implementation of the farm within the allocated bud-

get. Consequently, it was decided to realise the core of the

farm in the form of the aquaponic installation itself, without

the rainwater collection and treatment module or accom-

panying functions such as the meeting space and storage

facilities.

As a result of market analysis, the decision was made to

construct a modular facility using shipping containers. This

solution is commonly employed in temporary projects or

in contexts where the potential need for relocation must be

considered (Giriunas, Sezen and Dupaix 2012). The mod-

ular structure of containers allows for exible adaptation

and future expansion of the facility. Containers can be com-

bined in various congurations, forming larger structures

or functional modules, and can be adapted to accommodate

electrical, sanitary, and HVAC systems (heating, ventila-

tion, and air conditioning). In the context of the selected

site, the aforementioned advantages of modular construc-

tion played a signicant role, particularly by enabling the

phased implementation of the project. An additional ben-

et was the possibility of applying an analogous structural

solution to the twin installation developed in Oslo. The use

of container technology made it possible to achieve compa-

rable systems in both locations, which is important for the

comparative analysis of future results. Despite the historic

character of the surroundings, the technical associations of

container architecture did not pose a conict, as the imme-

diate context is dened by an industrial and infrastructural

character. A key aspect of the design process was therefore

the integration of the infrastructure into the urban context,

with particular attention to aesthetics and accessibility for

the local community.

Architecturalconcept

A clearly dened architectural concept was necessary in

order to obtain formal approvals and to establish a frame-

work for the further development of the design. In pursuit

of maximum modularity and compactness of the complex,

as well as for educational purposes, a clear separation of

functional zones into distinct containers was adopted. The

red container houses the “animal” module, the blue con-

tainer the plant module, and the green container auxiliary

facilities and a meeting room. The roof surface is ultimate-

ly intended to exceed the footprint of the containers. This

results not only from the increased demand for water col-

lection, but also from broader design intentions. The roof

was conceived as an installation for water capture and

redistribution, a protective layer for the container units,

and at the same time as an element shaping a welcoming

space and reinforcing the identity of the place. This led to

the introduction of a pergola structure, designed to provide

pleasant shading from the southern side while also acting

Fig. 3. Conceptual sketch of the architectural form

of the aquaponic farm in Wrocław (drawning by P. Pedrycz)

Il. 3. Szkic formy architektonicznej farmy akwaponicznej

we Wrocławiu (rys. P. Pedrycz)

Fig. 4. Structural diagram of the terrace and green roof support system

(elaborated by M. Jankowska)

Il. 4. Schemat konstrukcji wspierającej taras i zielony dach

(oprac. M. Jankowska)

82 Maria Jankowska, Paweł Pedrycz

as an attractor for visitors. The modularity of the container

system and its orthogonal arrangement formed the basis for

a square

modular structural grid applied to both the pergola

and the green roof. The span of the grid corresponds to the

width of a container. As the length of a container is not

a multiple of its width, modular coherence was achieved

by partially overlapping two containers in plan at ground

level. The resulting architectural form, composed of adapt-

ed shipping containers, is bordered on one side by clusters

of greenery and on the other by a historic building. The

individually se lected colour scheme of the containers is

consistent with the façades of neighbouring structures and

the surrounding natural context. A distinct local accent is

provided by the blue container, positioned at the highest

level as a deliberate “counterpoint” to the dominant water

tower in the vicinity.

Planningpermission

The aquaponic farm described in this study is located in

an area not covered by a local spatial development (zon-

ing) plan. This constituted an important condition for the

design process, although planning status was not a primary

criterion in the initial site selection. From the perspective

of representativeness, the absence of a local plan may be

regarded as an ambivalent condition. On the one hand, the

lack of formal planning for a fragment of the city can be

seen as a shortcoming, and ideally, future research should

aim to test scenarios in which the farm is located within

an area governed by a local spatial development plan. On

the other hand, the absence of such a plan is a relatively

common situation in urban contexts, particularly in central

areas, where it is often assumed that the spatial structure is

already consolidated.

The submission of an application for development con

ditions (planning permission) required the design team to

dene a range of parameters within the relevant formal

documentation. The proposed development did not repre-

sent a typical application of this procedure, which is gen-

erally intended for the inll of homogeneous urban fabric

with buildings of similar type and scale. In the case of the

Wrocław farm, the situation involved the insertion of a rel-

atively small structure within a complex of monumental in-

dustrial buildings of signicant scale and historic character.

During the procedure, and in accordance with its require-

ments, the proposal was consulted with relevant authorities

– most notably the oce of the regional heritage conserva-

tor. The project was approved, and the administrative deci-

sion granting development conditions was issued.

Technicaldesign

The specic technical design of the Wrocław installation

was based on positive experiences gained from an earlier

Norwegian prototype. Both systems were manufactured

by a specialised Norwegian–Turkish company, which pro-

duced the installations according to the provided speci-

cations – primarily concerning the dimensions of the ex-

ternal enclosure and the required performance parameters.

The technological design was conceived as preliminary and

open to modication in response to ongoing operational ex-

perience.

The idea of self-suciency inherently implies a reduc-

tion in dependence on urban infrastructure networks. At the

same time, however, the assumption of the farm’s “urban-

ity” allows for – if not encourages – the utilisation of re-

sources available within the urban environment. In the case

described, the technological process is primarily associated

with a demand for electrical energy, and to a lesser extent,

water.

Construction of the aquaponic farm

Prior to the construction of the container-based structure,

appropriate site preparation was required. This included

clearing and levelling the terrain, as well as carrying out

necessary earthworks. Structural stability and load-bearing

capacity had to be ensured – for example, through the use

of concrete foundation slabs (Giriunas, Sezen and Dupaix

2012). The main construction phase involved assembling

the delivered containers in the designated spatial congu-

ration. Depending on the design, containers can be stacked

Fig. 5. Conceptual sketch of the aquaponic farm in Wrocław

(elaborated by P. Pedrycz)

Il. 5. Szkic farmy akwaponicznej we Wrocławiu

(oprac. P. Pedrycz)

Fig. 6. Architectural visualization of the aquaponic farm in Wrocław

(elaborated by M. Jankowska)

Il. 6. Wizualizacja farmy akwaponicznej we Wrocławiu

(oprac. M. Jankowska)

 DesignandconstructionoftherstPolishurbanaquaponicfarm–casestudy 83

vertically, arranged side by side, or combined in other con-

gurations. The farm was designed to allow for scalability

and future expansion of the facility. Ensuring proper con-

nections between containers was essential to create a sta-

ble and safe structure. Following installation, all necessary

modications and nishing works were carried out. These

included cutting openings for windows, installing electrical,

plumbing, and ventilation systems, applying thermal insu-

lation, nishing walls, oors, and ceilings, and completing

the external painting. Within the prepared containers, the

installation of essential internal components was then un-

dertaken, including sh tanks, ltration systems, and plant

cultivation systems.

Green roof

A modular structure with a slight slope in one direction

(towards the gutter) was installed on the roof of the contain-

ers. On this lightweight structural framework, a system of

waterproong and green roof layers was designed. These

include mineral wool (serving as a retention and drainage

layer), a substrate layer (for plant rooting), and a vegetation

mat (in the form of a pre-grown mat with a sedum mix-

ture). An alternative solution – based on the use of modular

ltering planters – was also considered; however, it was

ultimately rejected due to the higher estimated cost of im-

plementation (Pérez et al. 2025).

Fig. 7. Architectural elevation

drawings of the aquaponic farm

in Wrocław

(elaborated by M. Jankowska)

Il. 7. Rysunki elewacji farmy

akwaponicznej we Wrocławiu

(oprac. M. Jankowska)

Selectionandcultivation

ofaquaticspeciesandplants

Following a preliminary legal analysis, redclaw craysh

were selected for cultivation on the farm. Cherax quadricar-

inatus is an Australian freshwater craysh species naturally

occurring in northern Australia and New Guinea. The species

tolerates water temperatures in the range of

approximately

16–32°C, with optimal growth at 26–29°C; temperatures

below 10°C or above 34–36°C may be lethal (Queensland

Government 2025; García-Guerrero et al. 2014). Once an

appropriate body mass is reached in cultivation

(e.g. around

Fig. 8. First day of construction of the aquaponic farm in Wrocław

(photo by P. Pedrycz)

Il. 8. Zdjęcie z pierwszego dnia budowy farmy akwaponicznej

we Wrocławiu (fot. P. Pedrycz)

84 Maria Jankowska, Paweł Pedrycz

300 g), the craysh may be harvested for consumption.

One of the main limitations in closed-system aquaculture

is strong territorial behaviour and competition between in-

dividuals, which may inhibit growth, particularly among

younger and smaller specimens (Karplus, Barki 2004). To

increase stocking density, it is necessary to provide adequate

shelters, thereby reducing aggressive and cannibalistic be-

haviour. In the plant section, cultivation initially focused

on leafy vegetables that germinate well at lower tempera-

tures (including pak choi and Swiss chard). At a later stage,

herbs and aromatic plants (such as coriander, lemongrass,

and chervil) were introduced, along with vegetables such

as watercress and watermelon radish. Currently, the devel-

opment of strawberry cultivation technology is underway.

Once appropriate methods are established, near year-round

production of this crop will be possible, allowing for more

eective utilization of the potential oered by aquaponic

systems.

Legalanalysispriortotheestablishment

oftheurbanfarm

The establishment of an urban farm requires compliance

with numerous regulatory and administrative obligations.

Assuming that the local land-use plan does not exclude

agri-related activities, regulations extend beyond spatial

planning issues to include, among others, food safety, the

quality of water used within the system, and the labelling

and packaging of nal products. In the case of the Wrocław

farm, approvals and required registrations with the State

Sanitary Inspection (the District Sanitary-Epidemiologi-

cal Station in Wrocław) and the Veterinary Inspection (the

District Veterinary Inspectorate in Wrocław) were typically

submitted on the basis of the intended cultivated species

no less than 30 days prior to the commencement of pro-

duction. Furthermore, the project team is obliged to verify

at least once a year that the water meets the standards for

water intended for human consumption when sourced from

a private intake and used in production or direct sales. In

addition, all personnel handling shery products must pos-

sess a valid medical certicate conrming their tness to

perform work that may involve the transmission of infec-

tious diseases, issued in accordance with regulations on the

prevention and control of infectious diseases in humans.

Fig. 9. Mizuna and Swiss chard cultivation within the aquaponic farm in Wrocław (photo by M. Jankowska)

Il. 9. Uprawa mizuny i buraka liściowego we wnętrzu farmy akwaponicznej we Wrocławiu (fot. M. Jankowska)

Fig. 10. Crayfish cultivation within the aquaponic farm in Wrocław

– aquaponic farming system (photo by M. Jankowska)

Il. 10. Uprawa raków we wnętrzu farmy akwaponicznej we Wrocławiu

– instalacja akwaponiczna (fot. Maria Jankowska)

 DesignandconstructionoftherstPolishurbanaquaponicfarm–casestudy 85

References

Barthel, Stephan, John Parker, and Henrik Ernstson. “Food and Green

Space in Cities: A Resilience Lens on Gardens and Urban Environ-

mental Movements.” Urban Studies 52, no. 7 (2015): 1321–38.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012472744.

Camargo, Julio A., and Álvaro Alonso. “Ecological and Toxicological Ef-

fects of Inorganic Nitrogen Pollution in Aquatic Ecosystems: A Glob-

al Assessment.” EnvironmentalInternational 32, no. 6 (2006): 831–

49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2006.05.002.

Chowdhury, Milon, Uttara Samarakoon, and James Altland. “Evaluation

of Hydroponic Systems for Organic Lettuce in Controlled Environ-

ment.” Frontiersin Plant Science 15 (2024): 1401089. https://doi.

org/10.3389/fpls.2024.1401089.

Crepeau, Katie. “GrowUp Urban Farms: Aquaponics Takes on Lon-

don.” Published December 15, 2014. Accessed October 12, 2025,

at https://medium.com/design-affects/grow-up-urban-farming-

5011d63f6ce9.

Despommier, Dickson. TheVerticalFarm:FeedingtheWorldinthe21

Century. Thomas Dunne Books, 2010.

Eigenbrod, Christine, and Nazim Gruda. “Urban Vegetable Production

for Food Security in Cities: A Review.” Agronomy forSustainable

Development 35 (2015): 483–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-

014-0273-y.

Farhangi, Mosen, Arnold Valk, Gerrit Casjens, and Margerita Turvani.

“High-Tech Urban Agriculture in Amsterdam: An Actor-Network

Ana lysis.” Sustainability 12 (2020): 3955. https://doi.org/10.3390/

su12103955.

García-Guerrero, Marcelo, Pedro Hernández Sandoval, Javier Orduña-

Rojas, and Edilmar Cortes-Jacinto. “Eect of Temperature on Weight

Increase, Survival, and Thermal Preference of Juvenile Redclaw

CrayshCheraxquadricarinatus.”Hidrobiológica 23 (2014): 73–81.

Garcia Menocal, Cat. “GrowUp Box – An Aquaponic Shipping Container

Farm.” Designboom, June 26, 2013. Accessed October 5, 2025, at

https://www.designboom.com/architecture/growup-box-an-aqua-

ponic-shipping-container-farm/.

Geissdoerfer, Martin, Paulo Savaget, Nancy M. Bocken, and Erik Jan Hult-

ink. “The Circular Economy – A New Sustainability Paradigm?” Journal

of Cleaner Production 143 (2017): 757–68. https://doi.org/

10.1016/j.

jclepro.2016.12.048.

Giriunas, Kevin, Halil Sezen, and Rebecca Dupaix. “Evaluation, Model -

ling, and Analysis of Shipping Container Building Structures.” Engi -

neering Structures 43 (2012): 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng-

struct.2012.05.001.

Goddek, Simon, Alyssa Joyce, Boris Kotzen, and Gavin M. Burnell, eds.

Aquaponics Food Production Systems: Combined Aquaculture and

HydroponicProductionTechnologiesfortheFuture. Springer In terna-

tional Publishing, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15943-6.

Karplus, Ilan, and Assaf Barki. “Social Control of Growth in the Redclaw

Craysh, Cherax quadricarinatus: Testing the Sensory Modalities

Involved.” Aquaculture 242, no. 1–4 (2004): 321–33. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2004.08.041.

Lansdown, Gerison. EveryChild’sRighttoBeHeard:AResourceGuide

ontheUNCommitteeontheRightsoftheChildGeneralComment

No.12. Save the Children UK on behalf of Save the Children and

UNICEF, 2011. Accessed October 5, 2025, at https://resourcecentre.

savethechildren.net/document/every-childs-right-be-heard-resource-

guide-un-committee-rights-child-general-comment-no-12.

Latawiec, Agnieszka Ewa, Bernardo B.N. Strassburg, Anna Maria Rod ri-

guez, Elah Matt, Ravic Nijbroek, and Maureen Silos. “Suriname: Rec-

onciling Agricultural Development and Conservation of Unique Natu-

ral Wealth.” LandUsePolicy 38 (2014): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

landusepol.2014.01.007.

Morgan, Kevin, and Roberta Sonnino. “The Urban Foodscape: World Cities

and the New Food Equation.” CambridgeJournalofRegions,Economy

andSociety 3, no. 2 (2010): 209–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsq007.

Mougeot, Luc J. A., ed. Agropolis:TheSocial,PoliticalandEnvironmen-

talDimensionsofUrbanAgriculture.Routledge, 2005.

Pérez, Gabriel, Julia Coma, Cristina Chocarro, et al. “Rock Mineral

Wool – Based Green Roofs to Improve the Quality of Urban Water

Runo.” EnvironmentalScienceandPollutionResearch 32 (2025):

8986–9003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-025-36232-7.

Queensland Government. “Redclaw Craysh Aquaculture.” Last updat-

August

2025.

Accessed

Oc tober

2025,

https://www.

business.qld.gov.au/industries/farms-shing-forestry/sheries/aqua-

culture/species/redclaw-craysh.

Slow Travel Berlin. “Ecient City Farming.” Published July 18, 2013.

Updated October 29, 2020. Accessed October 5, 2025, at https://

www.slowtravelberlin.com/ecient-city-farming/.

Somerville, Christopher, Moti Cohen, Edoardo Pantanella, Austin Stan-

kus, and Alessandro Lovatelli. Small-Scale Aquaponic Food Pro-

duction: Integrated Fish and Plant Farming. FAO Fisheries and

Conclusions

The design of an urban aquaponic farm is a complex

process, equally creative and analytical in nature. Paradox-

ically, this interdisciplinarity also constitutes a signicant

challenge. This results from the sectoral functioning of

public authorities, as well as expert and academic commu-

nities. Although the topic of urban food production is gen-

erally met with positive reception and broad acceptance, it

does not always receive active support. Many disciplines

and sectors tend to perceive it as belonging to “others” and

they do not fully identify with it. While it appears attractive

to each of them, it is not considered a priority within any

single eld.

From this perspective, an important advantage of the im-

plemented farm lies in its material and operational reality.

The very fact of its successful realisation makes it possible

to convince and engage stakeholders, while also allowing

the concept to be tested in practice and potential barriers to

be identied. The stages of the research project described

in this article can be grouped into three main categories:

(1) the determination of the technological requirements of

aquaponics; (2) the outcomes of stakeholder engagement;

and (3) the results of design creativity and expertise (ur

ban and architectural). The sequence of these steps enables

the formulation of a concrete set of issues that must be ad-

dressed in the planning of urban aquaponic systems. Each

of these aspects warrants further, in-depth investigation in

future research.

The USAGE team implemented a series of actions that

led to the creation of the rst urban AquaFarm in Wrocław

accessible to residents. This project aligns with the Euro-

pean Commission’s Farm to Fork strategy – one of the key

initiatives within the European Green Deal – as well as with

the concept of the agrihood, one of the most recent trends

in spatial planning. This approach involves designing com-

munities around farms that provide fresh and healthy food

to local residents while simultaneously fostering social inte-

gration through shared green spaces. The project thus forms

part of a broader trend related to the design of self-su-

cient and sustainable urban environments, often referred to

as sustainable urban neighbourhoods.

86 Maria Jankowska, Paweł Pedrycz

Streszczenie

Projektowanie i budowa pierwszej polskiej farmy akwaponicznej

– studium przypadku

Artykuł stanowi studium przypadku dotyczące procesu projektowania miejskiej farmy akwaponicznej, realizowanej jako element infrastruktury miej-

skiej o funkcjach produkcyjnych, edukacyjnych i społecznych. Farma taka powstała we Wrocławiu w ramach projektu badawczo-wdrożeniowego Urban

Stormwater Aquaponic Garden Environment (USAGE), nansowanego ze środków publicznych ramach programu Badania stosowane oraz z Funduszy

Norweskich. Celem autorów opracowania było zarówno przybliżenie technologii akwaponiki w kontekście urbanistycznym, jak i identykacja kluczo-

wych wyzwań projektowych, organizacyjnych oraz decyzyjnych związanych z wdrażaniem tego typu systemów w warunkach miejskich. W tekście

zaprezentowano kolejne etapy działań podejmowanych przez interdyscyplinarny zespół projektowy, ukazując potencjał rozwiązań akwaponicznych,

a także ograniczenia procesu. Autorzy artykułu uporządkowali kluczowe zagadnienia oraz zidentykowali podstawowe punkty decyzyjne, które deter-

minują ostateczny kształt przedsięwzięcia.

Słowa kluczowe: akwaponika, zrównoważona produkcja żywności, rolnictwo miejskie, cyrkulacja wody, Nowy Europejski Bauhaus

Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 589. Food and Agriculture Organi-

zation of the United Nations, 2014.

Specht, Kathrin, Rosemarie Siebert, Ulf B. Freisinger, and Ina Opitz. “Ur-

ban Agriculture of the Future: An Overview of Sustainability Aspects

of Food Production in and on Buildings.” Agriculture and Human

Values 31 (2014): 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-013-9448-4.

Steel, Carolyn. HungryCity:HowFood ShapesOurLives. Chatto and

Windus, 2008.

Triboli, Anna, and Damien Chivialle. “Micro-Farms: An Aquaponics

System inside a Container.” Accessed October 5, 2025, at https://

www.mediamatic.net/en/page/23894/micro-farms-an-aquapon-

ics-system-inside-a-container.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Aquatic Life Ambient

Water Quality CriteriaforAmmonia–Freshwater. EPA 822-R-18-

002. April 2013. Accessed October 5, 2025, at https://www.epa.

gov/sites/default/les/2015-08/documents/aquatic-life-ambient-wa-

ter-quality-criteria-for-ammonia-freshwater-2013.pdf.

Viljoen, André, and Katrin Bohn. SecondNatureUrbanAgriculture:De-

signing Productive Cities. Routledge, 2014. https://doi.org/

10.4324/9781315771144.