With the rapid progress of urbanization and rising material affluence fostering spiritual needs, balcony agriculture has gradually become a focus of urban residents in China. Based on the Stimulus-Organism-Response theory, this study explores the impact and underlying mechanisms of integrated services on urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony agriculture.
Methods
Theoretical model construction combined with empirical analysis was employed. Data were collected via a structured survey of urban residents to examine the relationships between integrated services, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and participation willingness, and analyze the moderating effects of spatial conditions on these links.
Results
Integrated services have a significant positive impact on residents’ willingness to engage in balcony agriculture. Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use mediate the relationship between integrated services and participation willingness. Spatial conditions exert a moderating effect on the links between perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and participation willingness.
Discussion
Integrated services play a pivotal role in fostering residents’ participation in balcony agriculture; strengthening perceived usefulness and ease of use enhances their participation willingness, and optimizing spatial conditions amplifies this effect. Policy implications include encouraging enterprises to focus on customer education and training, optimize supply chain logistics, and provide one-stop shopping and other integrated solutions to support the sustainable development of balcony agriculture.
balcony agricultureindividual cognitionintegrated servicesparticipation willingnessquestionnaire surveyurban residentsThe author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This work was financially supported by the National Key Vegetable Industry Technology System Industrial Economics Research Project of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (China) (Grant No. CARS-23-F01) by ZX.section-at-acceptanceUrban AgricultureIntroduction
Balcony agriculture refers to agricultural production activities utilizing urban balcony spaces, aimed at meeting the demands of modern urban living and promoting low-carbon development (Aggarwal et al., 2024). As an emerging industry integrating the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors, balcony agriculture not only enhances residents’ quality of life and alleviates stress, but also improves living environments and satisfies urban residents’ multifunctional needs for high-quality agricultural products and leisure agriculture (Zhao et al., 2024). This development model aligns with the emphasis on “facilitating the flow of urban and rural resources” and “promoting urban–rural integration” in the Report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (Song et al., 2022), and its path of unleashing ecological value and rational promotion scale are the core to adapting to urban low-carbon development. Specifically, balcony agriculture can collaboratively optimize urban ecological characteristics and unleash diverse ecological values across multiple dimensions. From a spatial perspective, green plants in residential units conduct photosynthesis and transpiration. They not only purify air and absorb harmful particulates, but also regulate the micro-temperature and humidity of balconies and indoor spaces. This creates a comfortable and livable micro-environment for residents, while contributing to mitigating the urban heat island effect. From a systemic perspective, balcony agriculture is anchored in the overall structure of urban ecology. The distributed “sky green space” formed by a large number of balconies can effectively supplement urban green coverage, optimize the spatial layout of green space, reduce waterlogging risks and improve the service efficiency of urban ecosystems. From a developmental perspective, balcony agriculture is highly consistent with the core concepts of urban low-carbon development and urban–rural integration. It practices a circular economy through a distributed production model. Combined with soilless culture, three-dimensional planting and organic farming techniques (Taylor, 2020), it achieves efficient resource recycling and reduces agricultural non-point source pollution, thus providing important support for urban sustainable development. To convert ecological value into tangible benefits, it is necessary to rationally plan and promote balcony agriculture based on urban development realities and residents’ demands. Scientific guidance should be adopted to raise the coverage rate of balcony agriculture, thereby forming a large-scale ecological effect. Ultimately, this will realize the coordinated improvement of ecological, livelihood and climate benefits. The potential of such benefits is highly aligned with residents’ current demand for a green lifestyle.
With the acceleration of urbanization, urban residents’ growing concerns about food safety, environmental beautification, and mental well-being have further boosted their interest and cognition of balcony agriculture (Langemeyer et al., 2021). According to the 2022 Balcony Gardening Report released by the Taobao platform, the annual sales volume of vegetable seeds on Taobao and Tmall platforms has maintained a year-on-year growth rate of over 100% for three consecutive years. Approximately 70% of buyers are from first-, second-, and third-tier cities, which underscores the substantial market potential and broad development prospects of urban balcony agriculture. This demonstrates the substantial market potential and growth opportunities of balcony agriculture. However, the development of balcony agriculture still faces numerous practical challenges. On the one hand, urban residents often lack the technical guidance and information channels needed for planting, making it difficult for them to acquire essential planting knowledge and effectively manage plant growth. On the other hand, the incomplete supply chain for materials increases the difficulty and cost of participation in balcony agriculture. To address these challenges, relevant enterprises have begun providing integrated services such as planting technical guidance, information consultation, and material delivery. These efforts aim to lower the barriers and costs for urban residents to participate in balcony agriculture and promote the sustainable development of this industry.
Current research on balcony agriculture primarily focuses on its functional positioning, technological applications, and social benefits. In terms of functional positioning, studies explore the roles of balcony agriculture in food production, ecological conservation, and science education, aiming to improve residents’ quality of life, leverage the agglomeration effect of specialized agricultural production factors, and foster industrial clusters characterized by modern agriculture (Preeti et al., 2024). Regarding technological applications, research highlights balcony agriculture as an integrated model that integrates modern technology with traditional agricultural practices, with key areas of focus including the use of smart agricultural equipment, innovations in planting techniques, and improvements in resource utilization efficiency, representing a high-tech agricultural integration model (Douziech et al., 2024). For instance, the adoption of IoT technology and intelligent monitoring systems enables precise control of environmental conditions, thereby enhancing crop yield and quality (Halgamuge et al., 2021). Meanwhile, advanced planting techniques, such as hydroponics and vertical farming, improve spatial utilization, increase production capacity, conserve water resources, and align with sustainable development goals (Payen et al., 2022). In terms of social benefits, balcony agriculture facilitates low-cost, high-efficiency green production through innovative practices (Wang X. F. et al., 2023). It also enhances residents’ mental well-being, raises community cognition of environmental protection, promotes neighborhood interactions, expands urban green spaces, reduces the urban heat island effect, and contributes to the optimization of urban ecosystems (Pueyo-Ros et al., 2024; Weidner and Yang, 2020).
The literature primarily focuses on the macro-level aspects of balcony agriculture, while micro-level studies remain underdeveloped. To further address this gap, this study constructs a rigorous theoretical model to explain residents’ willingness to participate. It explores how integrated services influence participation and clarifies the mechanisms involved. By refining this underexplored area, the study enhances academic understanding and offers targeted recommendations for enterprises to optimize service strategies. These efforts support the sustainable and healthy development of balcony agriculture.
Theoretical analysis and hypothesesIntegrated services and urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony agriculture
Integrated balcony agriculture services offer support to urban residents, effectively addressing challenges such as technical difficulties, material shortages, and information gaps encountered in balcony farming. In academic community, these services are generally categorized into three dimensions: technical support, material support, and informational support (Specht et al., 2014), providing systematic assurance for residents’ balcony agriculture practices.
Firstly, technical support includes expertise in cultivation techniques, pest management, and soil care, which reduces operational complexity and mitigates technical barriers (Sanyé-Mengual et al., 2015). In response to climate change issues such as the urban heat island effect and extreme precipitation, cultivation techniques for heat-tolerant and stress-resistant crops can be provided, combined with three-dimensional planting schemes to improve space utilization efficiency. Meanwhile, ecological prevention and control technologies are adopted to reduce chemical intervention, balancing planting diversity and environmental friendliness. In addition, attention should be paid to user feedback, with systematic collection and collation of users’ opinions and suggestions to continuously optimize service quality based on this (Baiyin and Yang, 2024). This process enhances residents’ sense of achievement, which in turn fosters participation enthusiasm, creating a virtuous cycle (Yuan et al., 2022). By boosting technical capabilities and confidence, technical support emerges as a critical driver for increasing residents’ willingness to engage in balcony agriculture.
Secondly, informational support refers to public education and knowledge dissemination. It enables residents to recognize the multifaceted value of balcony agriculture, including social, ecological, and health benefits, helping them comprehend the role of planting diversity in mitigating the urban heat island effect and retaining rainwater. It also to a certain extent conveys its value in providing basic habitats for small beneficial urban organisms and promoting local biodiversity. This bridges residents’ cognitive gap regarding the ecological functions of balcony agriculture and effectively reduces information asymmetry (Wu and Zhou, 2021). Furthermore, higher information transparency significantly enhances public participation enthusiasm (Unay-Gailhard et al., 2025). As information asymmetry diminishes, residents develop a deeper understanding of balcony agriculture, which in turn strengthens their willingness to participate.
Finally, material support provides essential resources such as seeds, soil, and fertilizers, reducing the economic and time costs of balcony farming (Hume et al., 2021). This ensures residents have a solid foundation for successful cultivation. When resources are sufficient and easily accessible, the financial and time burdens decrease, enhancing willingness to participate (Xie et al., 2024). Research also confirms a strong positive correlation between resource availability and residents’ enthusiasm for balcony farming (Veen et al., 2016). Thus, material support lowers costs and improves resource accessibility, acting as a key driver of participation. Based on the above analysis, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H1: Integrated balcony agriculture services significantly enhance urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony farming.
H1a: Technical support significantly enhances urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony farming.
H1b: Informational support significantly enhances urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony farming.
H1c: Material support significantly enhances urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony farming.
The mediating role of resident perception
In the adoption of new technologies or practices, resident perception is a key antecedent of behavioral intention. Both theoretical and empirical studies consistently indicate that adoption decisions are primarily based on two core dimensions: whether the new technology meets personal needs (perceived usefulness) and its ease of use (perceived ease of use) (Cerjak et al., 2025). In the context of balcony agriculture, perceived usefulness refers to the extent to which residents believe balcony farming can meet their needs or improve their quality of life, while perceived ease of use reflects their subjective judgment of the difficulty involved in balcony farming operations (Gerster-Bentaya, 2013).
On one hand, the integrated services of balcony agriculture, including technical support, planting guidance, and popular science education, effectively enhance residents’ cognition of balcony agriculture. As residents gradually recognize that balcony agriculture not only provides individual benefits such as healthy, safe food and environmental beautification but also contributes to broader social and environmental benefits such as ecological protection and community mutual support (Dona et al., 2024), with diverse planting alleviating urban climatic pressures through vegetation transpiration for cooling and water retention and acting as a fundamental survival carrier for small organisms, their sense of value recognition towards balcony agriculture increases (perceived usefulness strengthens). As the cognition of the multiple benefits of balcony agriculture deepens, residents’ self-efficacy is also significantly enhanced, making them more likely to actively consider engaging in balcony agriculture practices (Chen et al., 2024). Research indicates that the improvement of perceived usefulness not only strengthens residents’ value recognition of balcony agriculture but also facilitates the translation of this recognition into concrete actions. Furthermore, related studies highlight that a stronger perceived usefulness significantly increases the likelihood of residents’ actual participation (Oh and Kim, 2017). Therefore, perceived usefulness plays a key role in mediating the relationship between integrated services and participation intention.
On the other hand, the integrated services in balcony agriculture simplify complex technical operations and reduce the barriers that residents may encounter in the practical process, thereby enhancing perceived ease of use. Specifically, these services include providing clear planting tutorials, one-on-one technical consultations, and ongoing support, helping farmers alleviate the anxiety associated with learning new technologies, and boosting their confidence in mastering new techniques (Huang et al., 2017). Furthermore, studies indicate that when residents perceive balcony agriculture as simple and convenient to operate, their psychological barriers to participation significantly decrease, leading to an increased willingness to engage in the activity (Grebitus et al., 2017). Therefore, the integrated services, by reducing operational complexity and enhancing perceived ease of use, indirectly influence participation willingness. Based on the above analysis, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2: Resident perception mediates the relationship between integrated balcony agriculture services and participation intention in balcony farming.
H2b: Integrated balcony agriculture services indirectly influence participation intention by enhancing perceived ease of use.
Moderating effect of spatial conditions
The available planting area on the balcony, i.e., spatial conditions, serves as a constraint for urban residents’ participation in balcony agriculture. The available space on the balcony not only determines the size of the area available for planting but also indirectly influences the perceived benefits and operational convenience that residents experience during the planting process (Newell et al., 2022).
First, from the perspective of perceived usefulness, variations in spatial scale affect the richness threshold of planting configurations. A larger balcony space provides residents with broader planting conditions, enabling them to engage in larger-scale agricultural activities and reap more tangible benefits, such as improved air quality, resource conservation, and health benefits. The increase in these practical benefits strengthens residents’ positive perceptions of balcony agriculture (Kanosvamhira, 2024), enhancing their recognition of its value, which in turn promotes a higher willingness to participate (Akkara and Mohan, 2023). Conversely, smaller balcony spaces limit the scale and variety of planting, suffering from inadequate ventilation and lighting, which not only amplifies the negative impacts of climate change such as extreme high temperatures and sudden rainfall, but also exacerbates the breeding of diseases and pests and other uncertain factors, further compounding planting risks. This may lead to a reduced perception of the usefulness of balcony agriculture, thereby decreasing residents’ enthusiasm for participation.
Second, spatial conditions play an important role by influencing the perceived ease of use. A larger balcony space allows residents to arrange planting layouts more flexibly (Wang and Zhang, 2023), reducing physical obstacles during the operational process. This increased spatial flexibility enhances the ease of operation of balcony agriculture, making it easier for residents to start planting and reducing the difficulties they may encounter during participation, thus boosting their confidence in agricultural practices (Contesse et al., 2018). In contrast, smaller balcony spaces increase operational difficulty to some extent. Residents face more complex planting maintenance within the limited space, leading to higher operational complexity, which weakens their perception of the ease of use of balcony agriculture and suppresses their willingness to participate. Based on the above analysis, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H3a: Spatial conditions play a positive moderating role in the relationship between perceived usefulness and urban residents’ willingness to participate.
H3b: Spatial conditions play a positive moderating role in the relationship between perceived ease of use and urban residents’ willingness to participate.
Based on the previous hypotheses and incorporating the Stimulus-Organism-Response (SOR) theory, this study explains the impact of external environmental factors on individual behavior and the underlying mechanisms (Polman et al., 2022). The study views the integrated services of balcony agriculture as an external stimulus (S), which enhances residents’ cognition (O)—specifically, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. This cognitive enhancement ultimately promotes a behavioral response (R), reflected in their willingness to participate in balcony agriculture. Meanwhile, spatial conditions of the balcony moderate the specific effect of residents’ cognition on participation willingness. Based on this, the theoretical framework is constructed, as shown in Figure 1.
Theoretical models.
Graphic depicts a flowchart showing the relationship between integrated balcony agriculture services—including technical, material, and informational support—how they affect perceived usefulness and ease of use, which, moderated by spatial conditions, influence willingness to participate.Research designVariable measurement
The dependent variable in this study is urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony agriculture. The measurement tool is adapted from established scales in previous research (Butterfield and Ramírez, 2020; Godey et al., 2016; Kim and Hyun, 2011). The specific measurement includes items such as “considering participation,” “strong intention,” “willingness to recommend,” and “likelihood of participation,” covering different levels of willingness. This design ensures the measurement is more aligned with urban residents’ actual participation motivations, accurately reflecting their true willingness to engage in balcony agriculture.
The independent variable is the integrated services for balcony agriculture, which is constructed based on a relevant theoretical framework and further refined according to the characteristics of balcony agriculture (Venkatesh and Goyal, 2010). These services are divided into three dimensions: technical support, material support, and information support (Beverelli et al., 2017; Zhao et al., 2024). By subdividing these dimensions, the study aims to reveal the roles of each service in enhancing residents’ willingness to participate.
The mediating variables, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, were adapted from classic scales and adjusted to fit the specific context of balcony agriculture (Davis, 1989; Fan and Garcla, 2018; Ivascu et al., 2021). The purpose of this adaptation was to better align with the background of balcony agriculture, accurately capturing residents’ perceptions of the functionality and convenience of the service, thereby reflecting the mediating role of these perceptions in influencing participation intention. The moderating variable, spatial conditions, was adjusted based on relevant research, considering the spatial characteristics of balcony agriculture (Nakano and Washizu, 2018; Bellwood-Howard et al., 2018). This adjustment ensures that the variable reasonably reflects the impact of spatial size on participation intention across different living environments, particularly in the analysis of differences under small and large balcony conditions. All variables in the study were measured using a 7-point Likert scale, with 1 representing “strongly disagree” and 7 representing “strongly agree.” Detailed information for all variables is referenced in Table 1.
Variables measurement scale.
Variable type
Variable
Measurement items
Explained variable
PW (participation willingness)
PW1: I would consider participating in balcony agriculture.
PW2: I have a strong intention to engage in balcony planting.
PW3: I would consider recommending balcony agriculture to my friends.
TS1: I can easily access practical technical guidance on balcony planting (e.g., planting techniques, pest management).
TS2: I can seek technical advice from experienced balcony planters and receive practical assistance.
TS3: I believe the technical support provided by balcony agriculture services is useful.
MS (material support)
MS1: I can easily purchase high-quality materials needed for balcony planting (e.g., soil, plants, tools).
MS2: I believe the pricing of materials provided by balcony agriculture services is reasonable and acceptable.
MS3: I believe the supply of necessary materials for balcony planting is fast and reliable.
IS (informational support)
IS1: Information services help me stay informed about the latest developments and technological innovations in balcony agriculture.
IS2: Information services provide me with user-friendly and practical guidelines.
IS3: I believe the agricultural information obtained from information services is accurate and reliable.
Mediating variable
PU (perceived usefulness)
PU1: Integrated balcony agriculture services lower the barriers to my participation in balcony planting.
PU2: Integrated balcony agriculture services help me make better choices regarding necessary materials (e.g., soil, plants, fertilizers, planting tools).
PU3: Integrated balcony agriculture services improve my planting efficiency.
PEOU (perceived ease of use)
PEOU1: Integrated balcony agriculture services allow me to participate in balcony planting with minimal effort.
PEOU2: Integrated balcony agriculture services make it easy for me to access the required planting information and resources.
PEOU3: Integrated balcony agriculture services enable me to master planting techniques more easily.
Moderating variable
SC (spatial conditions)
SC1: The size of my balcony/available planting space is sufficient to accommodate my desired agricultural activities (e.g., the number and types of plants I want to grow).
SC2: Performing daily maintenance and management in my balcony/planting space is convenient.
SC3: If I decide to participate in balcony agriculture, I believe my space is flexible enough to accommodate various types of agricultural planting activities.
Data collection
This study adopted a questionnaire survey to collect microdata, and we use SPSS 26.0 and AMOS 28.0 for the statistical analysis of valid samples.
Preliminary survey
Prior to the formal survey, a pre-survey was conducted using the “Credamo” platform to validate the effectiveness of the questionnaire, ensure clarity and eliminate any ambiguity in the question wording, and identify potential issues. Based on the feedback from the pre-survey, the research team conducted an initial analysis of the variable descriptions and made adjustments and corrections to any questions that could lead to misunderstanding or lack of clarity. This process ensured the relevance, clarity, and completeness of the questionnaire, enabling it to accurately reflect the research variables.
Formal survey
The selection criteria for survey participants in this study are as follows: first, considering the low cognition and participation in balcony agriculture, no restrictions were imposed on whether participants had prior balcony farming experience, ensuring the generalizability and representativeness of the research results. Second, the survey participants included residents from large cities, medium-sized cities, and small towns to ensure that the research results reflect the adaptability to various urban living environments. This diverse sampling approach helped provide an integrated understanding of how urban scale and structure might influence residents’ willingness to participate. Third, there were no strict restrictions on participants’ age, occupation, or income. The goal was to include residents from different age groups, professional backgrounds, and income levels to reveal differences in participation willingness and their relationships with relevant variables.
By selecting a broad and diverse group of participants, this study aimed to obtain representative data to support decision-making for integrated balcony agriculture services and provide practical insights for the development of balcony agriculture. A total of 730 questionnaires were distributed via the “Credamo” platform, with 40 invalid responses being excluded upon review. The final number of valid responses was 690, yielding an effective response rate of 94.52%.
Model construction
To examine the impact of integrated balcony agriculture services on urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony agriculture, this study constructs a multiple stepwise regression model. The regression equations consist of three main components: direct effects, mediating effects, and moderating effects.
The integrated model incorporates the aforementioned effects (Equation 7):
PW=φ0+φ1⋅TS+φ2⋅IS+φ3⋅MS+φ4⋅PU+φ5⋅PEOU+φ6⋅(SC⋅PU)+φ7⋅(SC⋅PEOU)+ξResults and discussionDescriptive statistics
SPSS 26.0 was used to analyze the demographic characteristics of the survey participants, including age, education level, occupation, and home ownership. In terms of age distribution, the majority of respondents were young adults, with those aged 26–35 accounting for 53.04%. This aligns with the 2022 Balcony Vegetable Growing Report, which states that individuals born in the late 1980s and 1990s are the primary enthusiasts of balcony gardening. This consistency indicates that the sample selection is representative and generalizable, without imposing age restrictions, ensuring broad applicability of the findings. Regarding education level, nearly 90% of the respondents held a bachelor’s degree or higher, suggesting that individuals with higher education levels exhibit a stronger enthusiasm for balcony agriculture. This result not only validates the greater acceptance of emerging lifestyle trends among highly educated groups but also highlights the diversity of educational backgrounds in the sample, ensuring that no potential participants were excluded due to educational requirements. From the perspective of occupational distribution, over 85% of the sample were employed, with company employees accounting for more than 60%. This reflects that individuals with stable employment are more inclined to participate in balcony agriculture. Additionally, the occupational diversity within the sample ensures the integratedness and representativeness of the study, as no specific occupational groups were excluded. Regarding home ownership, more than 85% of participants owned their residences, indicating that most respondents met the basic conditions for participating in balcony agriculture. Furthermore, balcony size analysis showed that 82.31% of the respondents had balconies smaller than 15 square meters. These findings confirm the diversity in housing conditions among participants and demonstrate that individuals actively engage in balcony planting even within limited space, further reinforcing the validity and representativeness of the sample selection. In summary, the characteristics of the survey sample align well with the research requirements.
Reliability and validity analysisReliability test
To ensure the reliability of the questionnaire data, a reliability test was conducted on the 690 valid responses. As shown in Table 2, the Cronbach’s α values for integrated balcony agriculture services (three dimensions), perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, spatial conditions, and participation willingness were all above 0.7, indicating strong internal consistency within the scales. The maximum Cronbach’s α value after deleting any individual item did not significantly differ from the original value, further confirming the rationality of the items and the stability of the scales. Additionally, the overall Cronbach’s α value was 0.842, demonstrating high data reliability.
Results of reliability and validity analysis.
Variable
Maximum Cronbach’s α after item deletion
Cronbach’s α
Item
Factor loading
AVE
CR
TS
0.768
0.803
TS1
0.77
0.589
0.811
TS2
0.81
TS3
0.72
MS
0.772
0.801
MS1
0.69
0.586
0.809
MS2
0.83
MS3
0.77
IS
0.703
0.755
IS1
0.65
0.501
0.750
IS2
0.72
IS3
0.75
PU
0.732
0.736
PU1
0.65
0.508
0.755
PU2
0.80
PU3
0.68
PEOU
0.748
0.809
PEOU1
0.69
0.580
0.805
PEOU2
0.82
PEOU3
0.77
SC
0.834
0.868
SC1
0.84
0.681
0.810
SC2
0.81
SC3
0.84
PW
0.850
0.865
PW1
0.74
0.628
0.870
PW2
0.81
PW3
0.88
PW4
0.73
Validity test
A factor analysis was conducted to assess the validity of the data. The results indicated that the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value was 0.911, and the Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (p < 0.001). The factor loadings for all variables exceeded 0.65, the average variance extracted (AVE) values were all above 0.5, and the composite reliability (CR) values exceeded 0.75. These results suggest that the scales exhibit strong convergent validity and internal consistency, as shown in Table 2.
Hypothesis testingDirect effects test
Regression analysis was conducted to examine the direct impact of integrated balcony agriculture services and its dimensions on urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony agriculture. As shown in Table 3, integrated balcony agriculture services significantly positively influence participation willingness (β = 0.57, p < 0.001). Among the dimensions, technical support (β = 0.42, p < 0.001), material support (β = 0.50, p < 0.001), and informational support (β = 0.48, p < 0.001) all have significant positive effects. Furthermore, the control variables age and gender are significant in all models, while education is not significant. The R2 and F values of the model are significant (p < 0.001), indicating good model fit and overall significance. Therefore, hypotheses H1, H1a, H1b, and H1c are supported.
Results of direct effects regression analysis.
Variable
PW
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
BAS
0.57***
TS
0.42***
MS
0.50***
IS
0.48***
Age
0.10**
0.11**
0.10**
0.11**
Gender
0.08*
0.08*
0.08*
0.06
Edu
−0.06
−0.05
−0.04
−0.04
R2
0.34
0.19
0.26
0.25
F
88.015***
40.821***
61.398***
57.094***
***Indicates p < 0.001, **indicates p < 0.01, *indicates p < 0.05.
Mediating effects test
Hypothesis H2 suggests that resident perception mediates the relationship between integrated balcony agriculture services and urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony agriculture, including both perceived usefulness (H2a) and perceived ease of use (H2b).
First, the mediating effect of perceived usefulness was tested. Table 4 presents the results of the mediating effect analysis for perceived usefulness and multiple regression analysis of participation willingness. The results show that technical support (β = 0.49, p < 0.001), material support (β = 0.50, p < 0.001), and informational support (β = 0.52, p < 0.001) all have significant positive effects on perceived usefulness. Additionally, perceived usefulness has a significant positive effect on participation willingness (β = 0.49, p < 0.001). Even when technical support (β = 0.23, p < 0.001), material support (β = 0.33, p < 0.001), and informational support (β = 0.33, p < 0.001) are included in the model, their impact on participation willingness remains significant. With the inclusion of perceived usefulness, its effect on participation willingness remains significant (β = 0.22, p < 0.001), and the impact of the three support services is also significant. The R2 and F values of each model are significant (p < 0.001), indicating good model fit and overall significance. These results confirm that perceived usefulness mediates the relationship between support services and participation willingness, thus supporting hypotheses H2 and H2a.
Mediation analysis of perceived usefulness.
Variable
PU
PW
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TS
0.49***
0.23***
0.08*
MS
0.50***
0.33***
0.24***
IS
0.52***
0.33***
0.21***
PU
0.49***
0.38***
0.32***
0.31***
0.22***
Age
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.09*
0.09**
0.08*
0.09**
0.09**
Gender
−0.03
−0.02
−0.04
0.09**
0.09**
0.09**
0.08*
0.08**
Edu
0.06
0.08*
0.08*
−0.06
−0.07*
−0.06*
−0.07*
−0.07*
R2
0.25
0.26
0.25
0.26
0.30
0.34
0.33
0.38
F
58.128***
62.557***
69.502***
59.477***
58.263***
70.524***
66.381***
58.991***
***Indicates p < 0.001, **indicates p < 0.01, *indicates p < 0.05.
Secondly, the mediating effect of perceived ease of use was tested. Table 5 presents the results of the mediating effect analysis for perceived ease of use and the multiple regression analysis of participation willingness. The results show that technical support (β = 0.46, p < 0.001), material support (β = 0.58, p < 0.001), and informational support (β = 0.55, p < 0.001) all have significant positive effects on perceived ease of use. Further analysis indicates that perceived ease of use also has a significant positive effect on participation willingness (β = 0.45, p < 0.001). When technical support, material support, and informational support were separately included in the model, their effects on participation willingness changed as follows: the effect of technical support decreased from 0.46 to 0.27 (p < 0.001); the effect of material support decreased from 0.58 to 0.36 (p < 0.001); the effect of informational support decreased from 0.55 to 0.34 (p < 0.001).
Mediation analysis of perceived ease of use.
Variable
PEOU
PW
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
TS
0.46***
0.27***
0.11**
MS
0.58***
0.36***
0.24***
IS
0.55***
0.34***
0.24***
PEOU
0.45***
0.33***
0.25***
0.27***
0.13**
Age
−0.12
0.05
0.07*
0.09*
0.09*
0.08*
0.09**
0.09**
Gender
0.03
−0.04
−0.03
0.08**
0.08*
0.09**
0.07*
0.08*
Edu
−0.02
−0.01
−0.01
−0.02
−0.04
−0.04
−0.04
−0.06
R2
0.21
0.34
0.30
0.22
0.28
0.30
0.30
0.36
F
45.802***
86.451***
73.934***
48.334***
52.405***
59.683***
58.431***
54.097***
***Indicates p < 0.001, **indicates p < 0.01, *indicates p < 0.05.
These changes indicate that perceived ease of use plays a partial mediating role between technical, material, and informational support and participation willingness. In conclusion, the mediating effect of perceived ease of use in the relationship between support services and participation willingness is confirmed, supporting hypotheses H2 and H2b.
Moderating effects test
Table 6 presents the moderating effect of spatial conditions on the relationships between perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and participation willingness. The results indicate that both perceived usefulness and spatial conditions have significant positive effects on participation willingness. However, in Model (3), the interaction term coefficient is −0.12 (p < 0.001), suggesting that spatial conditions negatively moderate the relationship between perceived usefulness and participation willingness, thereby failing to support Hypothesis H3a. Regarding perceived ease of use, both perceived ease of use and spatial conditions show significant positive effects on participation willingness. However, in Model (6), the interaction term coefficient (PEOU * SC) is −0.02 (p < 0.01), indicating a significant negative moderating effect of spatial conditions on the relationship between perceived ease of use and participation willingness, thereby failing to support Hypothesis H3b. These findings suggest that larger spaces may increase management complexity, require more resources and maintenance, and thereby reduce participants’ interest or willingness to engage in balcony agriculture.
Results of spatial condition.
Variable
PW
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
PU
0.49***
0.37***
0.35***
PEOU
0.45***
0.29***
0.29***
SC
0.38***
0.37***
0.38***
0.38***
PU * SC
−0.12***
PEOU * SC
−0.02**
Age
0.09*
0.09**
0.09**
0.09*
0.10**
0.10**
Gender
0.09**
0.10**
0.09**
0.08*
0.10**
0.10**
Edu
−0.06
−0.06
−0.06
−0.02
−0.02
−0.02
R2
0.26
0.39
0.40
0.22
0.12
0.34
F
59.477***
87.454***
77.233
48.334***
16.419***
59.506***
***Indicates p < 0.001, **indicates p < 0.01, *indicates p < 0.05.
This study demonstrates that integrated balcony agriculture services—comprising technical, material, and informational support—significantly increase urban residents’ willingness to participate. Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use serve as mediators in this relationship. This finding is broadly aligned existing studies examine single-dimension interventions—such as technical training or material provision (Odame et al., 2020; Wang C. et al., 2023)—and thus lack an integrated service perspective. By incorporating technical, material, and informational support into a unified framework, this study offers a more integrated account of how services collectively shape participation intentions.
This study also revealed an unexpected moderating effect of balcony space. Larger balconies do not necessarily increase participation willingness and may even reduce it due to higher management complexity and associated costs. This finding contrasts with previous studies, which generally assumed that larger space provides greater planting opportunities and higher participation willingness (Gallaher et al., 2013). These insights offer a new perspective for promoting urban balcony agriculture and highlight the importance of considering spatial heterogeneity and personalized user needs in policy design and service provision. In summary, this study enriches the theoretical framework of urban residents’ participation in balcony agriculture. It demonstrates clear innovation and complementary contributions.
Conclusion and recommendationsConclusion
This study explores integrated balcony agriculture services, focusing on how technical support, material support, and informational support influence urban residents’ willingness to participate in balcony agriculture and the underlying mechanisms. By incorporating the theories of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, the study further examines their mediating roles in this relationship. The findings indicate that integrated balcony agriculture services positively affect residents’ participation willingness through the three dimensions of technical, material, and informational support. Specifically, these services lower participation barriers and enhance engagement enthusiasm. Moreover, integrated services significantly improve residents’ perceptions of usefulness and ease of use, which serve as mediating factors, further reinforcing participation willingness. However, further analysis reveals that spatial conditions exhibit a moderating effect contrary to expectations. Larger balcony spaces may reduce participation willingness due to increased management complexity and costs. This suggests that policy formulation should consider cultural contexts and urban environmental differences when promoting balcony agriculture.
Recommendations
Based on these findings, the following recommendations are proposed:
Strengthen consumer education and training to enhance consumer stickiness
Providing professional technical support including online tutorials, workshops and practical guides can enhance consumers’ agricultural knowledge and skills, thereby increasing their trust in the enterprise’s products and services. Educational content should cover basic planting techniques to advanced agricultural practices, integrate Chinese dietary preferences and solar term farming traditions, and focus on the cultivation of local fruits and vegetables as well as solar term-adapted skills. It should also take into account balcony environment, space availability, time investment and personal hobbies to recommend suitable projects or customize material packages for consumers, meeting their multi-level needs and boosting participation and loyalty. Relying on diverse and abundant educational resources can help consumers deeply understand and practice balcony agriculture, and strengthen their reliance on and stickiness to the enterprise’s products and services. This model, centered on solar term farming experience, can be exported to high-density cities in Japan, South Korea and other regions and provide a reference for their localization adaptation.
Offer one-stop material and information sharing to stimulate purchase intent
Build a one-stop shopping solution covering seeds, soil, fertilizers, containers and tools, and select local green materials that comply with national green standards. This targeted approach addresses the pain points of balcony planting in China, lowers the industry entry threshold, and at the same time ensures the high quality and adaptability of materials, enhancing consumer satisfaction and confidence in successful planting. Regularly launching new material packages or seasonal kits can further stimulate consumer demand and drive repurchase behavior. In addition, establish community forums, social media groups or customer clubs, and link up with national agricultural departments and community governance systems to release cutting-edge agricultural research results, technological update dynamics and success stories. Provide professional Q&A services to strengthen consumers’ sense of participation and belonging, build a positive community culture and boost brand loyalty. This community-embedded service model can be further promoted to densely populated areas in developing countries.
Deepen brand communication to strengthen emotional connections with customers
By showcasing brand stories and success cases through social media, videos, blogs, and other channels, the environmental, health, and social values of balcony agriculture can be effectively conveyed, attracting a broader consumer base. Meanwhile, align closely with China’s dual carbon goals and the Healthy China Strategy to strengthen local contextual resonance. Hosting online and offline events, such as eco-themed events and family planting experiences, can strengthen emotional interactions between brands and consumers. This approach not only enhances recognition of product value but also cultivates emotional attachment to the brand, helping customers form deeper emotional connection while recognizing its product value. Brand communication should emphasize the tangible benefits of balcony agriculture for urban living, such as improving quality of life and enhancing family health, while leveraging well-crafted content and social interactions to build consumer loyalty and attachment. We should refine content planning and boost social interaction to further enhance customers’ brand trust. This policy-aligned communication model is adaptable to global regions pursuing low-carbon and healthy development.
Focus on spatial differences to provide flexible and diversified customized solutions
Tailored planting solutions should be developed for different balcony spaces, taking into account climatic differences between northern and southern China and residential type characteristics, while adapting to the prevalence of small-sized apartments. This ensures all consumers can access products and services suited to their balcony conditions. For small balconies, space-saving products such as vertical planting racks and wall-mounted containers should be prioritized to reduce maintenance difficulty. For larger balconies, diversified planting options and supporting modular planting tool kits should be offered to meet efficient management needs. Providing tailor-made services and products significantly enhances customer experience and satisfaction, further stimulating purchasing desire and participation enthusiasm. The core logic of this model features global adaptability—localized solutions merely require replacing regionally suited product categories, endowing it with significant promotion potential.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Author contributions
WC: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Validation, Writing – original draft. YY: Investigation, Writing – original draft. ZX: Conceptualization, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
ReferencesAggarwalB.RajoraN.RaturiG.DharH.KadamS. B.MundadaP. S.. (2024). Biotechnology and urban agriculture: a partnership for the future sustainability. Plant Sci.338:111903. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2023.111903AkkaraP.MohanR. (2023). “Perception and acceptance of terrace and balcony gardening for sustainable future of Bengaluru” in AI and business, and innovation research: understanding the potential and risks of AI for modern enterprises, eds. B. Alareeni, and I. Elgedawy (Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland), 787–796.BaiyinB.YangQ. C. (2024). Applications of vertical farming in urban agriculture. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci.89, 1–7. doi: 10.17660/eJHS.2024/020Bellwood-HowardI.ShakyaM.KorbeogoG.SchlesingerJ. (2018). The role of backyard farms in two west African urban landscapes. Landsc. Urban Plan.170, 34–47. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.09.026BeverelliC.FioriniM.HoekmanB. (2017). Services trade policy and manufacturing productivity: the role of institutions. J. Int. Econ.104, 166–182. doi: 10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.11.001ButterfieldK. L.RamírezA. S. (2020). Framing food access: do community gardens inadvertently reproduce inequality?Health Educ. Behav.48, 160–168. doi: 10.1177/1090198120950617, 32806951CerjakM.MediciM.FaletarI.SundeepJ. V.CanavariM. (2025). Adoption of mobile-based agricultural extension services: evidence from South India. J. Rural. Stud.120:103851. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2025.103851ChenB. X.MiyagiK.NamihiraT.KayanoD.AragakiM.SuzukiS. (2024). What motivates urban dwellers to engage in urban farming?Sustainability16:6876. doi: 10.3390/su16166876ContesseM.VlietB. J. M.LenhartJ. (2018). Is urban agriculture urban green space? A comparison of policy arrangements for urban green space and urban agriculture in Santiago de Chile. Land Use Policy71, 566–577. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.006DavisF. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q.13, 319–340. doi: 10.2307/249008DonaC. G. W.MohanG.FukushiK. (2024). Multifunctionality benefits of small-scale urban agriculture. Sustain. Sci.19, 967–987. doi: 10.1007/s11625-024-01488-4DouziechM.MannS.GalleyS.LanscheJ. (2024). A classification scheme for urban agriculture combining technical properties with characteristics related to the economic and social sustainability. Agron. Sustain. Dev.44:54. doi: 10.1007/s13593-024-00990-4FanQ.GarclaV. B. S. (2018). Information access and smallholder farmers’ market participation in Peru. J. Agric. Econ.69, 476–494. doi: 10.1111/1477-9552.12243GallaherC. M.KerrJ. M.NjengaM.KaranjaN. K.WinklerPrinsA. M. G. A. (2013). Urban agriculture, social capital, and food security in the Kibera slums of Nairobi, Kenya. Agric. Hum. Values30, 389–404. doi: 10.1007/s10460-013-9425-yGerster-BentayaM. (2013). Nutrition-sensitive urban agriculture. Food Secur.5, 723–737. doi: 10.1007/s12571-013-0295-3GodeyB.ManthiouA.PederzoliD.RokkaJ.AielloG.DonvitoR.. (2016). Social media marketing efforts of luxury brands: influence on brand equity and consumer behavior. J. Bus. Res.69, 5833–5841. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.181GrebitusC.PrintezisI.PrintezisA. (2017). Relationship between consumer behavior and success of urban agriculture. Ecol. Econ.136, 189–200. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.02.010HalgamugeM. N.BojovschiA.FisherP. M. J.LeT. C.AdelojuS.MurphyS. (2021). Internet of things and autonomous control for vertical cultivation walls towards smart food growing: a review. Urban For. Urban Green.61:127094. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127094HuangQ.WangJ. X.LiY. M. (2017). Do water saving technologies save water? Empirical evidence from North China. J. Environ. Econ. Manag.82, 1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.jeem.2016.10.003HumeI. V.SummersD. M.CavagnaroT. R. (2021). Self-sufficiency through urban agriculture: nice idea or plausible reality?Sustain. Cities Soc.68:102770. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2021.102770IvascuL.AhimazD. F.ArulanandamB. V.TirianG. O. (2021). The perception and degree of adoption by urbanites towards urban farming. Sustainability13:12151. doi: 10.3390/su132112151KanosvamhiraT. P. (2024). Sustainable urban agriculture: unlocking the potential of home gardens in low-income communities. Prof. Geogr.76, 587–596. doi: 10.1080/00330124.2024.2355179KimJ.HyunY. J. (2011). A model to investigate the influence of marketing-mix efforts and corporate image on brand equity in the IT software sector. Ind. Mark. Manage.40, 424–438. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.06.024LangemeyerJ.Madrid-LopezC.BeltranA. M.MendezG. V. (2021). Urban agriculture? A necessary pathway towards urban resilience and global sustainability?Landsc. Urban Plan.210:104055. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104055NakanoS.WashizuA. (2018). Acceptance of energy efficient homes in large Japanese cities: understanding the inner process of home choice and residence satisfaction. J. Environ. Manag.225, 84–92. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.07.082, 30075306NewellJ. P.FosterA.BorgmanM.MeerowS. (2022). Ecosystem services of urban agriculture and prospects for scaling up production: a study of Detroit. Cities125:103664. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2022.103664OdameH. S.Okeyo-OwuorJ. B.ChangehJ. G.OtienoJ. O. (2020). The role of technology in inclusive innovation of urban agriculture. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.43, 106–111. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2019.12.007OhJ. S.KimS. Y. (2017). Enhancing urban agriculture through participants’ satisfaction: the case of Seoul, Korea. Land Use Policy69, 123–133. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.04.053PayenF. T.EvansD. L.FalagánN.HardmanC. A.KourmpetliS.LiuL. X.. (2022). How much food can we grow in urban areas? Food production and crop yields of urban agriculture: a meta-analysis. Earths Future10:e2022EF002748. doi: 10.1029/2022EF002748, 36246543PolmanE.ZianoI.WuK.AnneleenV. K. (2022). Consumers believe that products work better for others. J. Consum. Res.49, 132–153. doi: 10.1093/jcr/ucab048PreetiY. H.HemavathiS. U.AnandK. R.AnkitP.ArpithaH. B.GunashreeG. N. (2024). Exploring the drivers of urban agriculture: a comprehensive analysis. Int. J. Agric. Ext. Soc. Dev. 7, 103–106. doi: 10.33545/26180723.2024.v7.i9b.1026Pueyo-RosJ.SkerjanecM.CastellarJ. A. C.AtanasovaN.ComasJ.CorominasL. (2024). Beyond food: a stochastic model to estimate the contributions of urban agriculture to sustainability. Landsc. Urban Plan.241:104930. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104930Sanyé-MengualE.OrsiniF.Oliver-SolàJ.RieradevallJ.MonteroJ. I.GianquintoG. (2015). Techniques and crops for efficient rooftop gardens in Bologna, Italy. Agron. Sustain. Dev.35, 1477–1488. doi: 10.1007/s13593-015-0331-0SongS.CheongJ. C.LeeJ. S. H.TanJ. K. N.ChiamZ.AroraS.. (2022). Home gardening in Singapore: a feasibility study on the utilization of the vertical space of retrofitted high-rise public housing apartment buildings to increase urban vegetable self-sufficiency. Urban For. Urban Green.78:127755. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127755SpechtK.SiebertR.HartmannI.FreisingerU. B.SawickaM.WernerA.. (2014). Urban agriculture of the future: an overview of sustainability aspects of food production in and on buildings. Agric. Hum. Values31, 33–51. doi: 10.1007/s10460-013-9448-4TaylorJ. R. (2020). Modeling the potential productivity of urban agriculture and its impacts on soil quality through experimental research on scale-appropriate systems. Front. Sustain. Food Syst.4:89. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2020.00089Unay-GailhardI.ChaskinR. J.BrennanM. A. (2025). How do urban agriculture initiatives communicate on farming across society? An exploration of awareness, responsibility, and pride messages on social media. Agric. Hum. Values42, 1671–1687. doi: 10.1007/s10460-025-10710-7VeenE. J.BockB. B.den Van BergW.VisserA. J.WiskerkeJ. S. C. (2016). Community gardening and social cohesion: different designs, different motivations. Local Environ.21, 1271–1287. doi: 10.1080/13549839.2015.1101433VenkateshV.GoyalS. (2010). Expectation disconfirmation and technology adoption: polynomial modeling and response surface analysis. MIS Q.34, 281–303. doi: 10.2307/20721428WangC.ChenY.SunM.WuJ. Y. (2023). Potential of technological innovation to reduce the carbon footprint of urban facility agriculture: a food-energy-water-waste nexus perspective. J. Environ. Manag.339:117806. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117806, 37030240WangX. F.OnychkoV.ZubkoV.WuZ. W.ZhaoM. F. (2023). Sustainable production systems of urban agriculture in the future: a case study on the investigation and development countermeasures of the plant factory and vertical farm in China. Front. Sustain. Food Syst.7:973341. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2023.973341WangX. J.ZhangX. G. (2023). Inventory of urban building roof space and analysis of agricultural production potential-a case study. Appl. Sci.13:10300. doi: 10.3390/app131810300WeidnerT.YangA. (2020). The potential of urban agriculture in combination with organic waste valorization: assessment of resource flows and emissions for two European cities. J. Clean. Prod.244:118490. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118490WuQ.ZhouJ. (2021). Need for cognitive closure, information acquisition and adoption of green prevention and control technology. Ecol. Chem. Eng.28, 129–143. doi: 10.2478/eces-2021-0011XieQ. J.KeM.ChenG. A. (2024). Exploring the willingness of Chinese urban dwellers to support community gardening: a case study of Wuhan, China. Forests15:280. doi: 10.3390/f15020280YuanG. N.MarquezG. P. B.DengH. R.LuA.FabellaM.SalongaR. B.. (2022). A review on urban agriculture: technology, socio-economy, and policy. Heliyon8:e11583. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11583, 36406682ZhaoH.ClarkeM.CampbellC. G.ChangN. B.QiuJ. X. (2024). Public perceptions of multiple ecosystem services from urban agriculture. Lands. Urban Plan.251:105170. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105170
Edited by: Luigi Mastronardi, University of Molise, Italy