Urban agriculture (UA) is closely linked to urban development. It serves as an effective strategy for promoting sustainable urban development. However, existing research on urban agriculture theory offers only a limited multidimensional review of its theoretical development. This paper aims to trace the developmental trajectory of representative urban agriculture theories and provide subsequent researchers with a comprehensive theoretical foundation in the field. Methodologically, this study employs a literature review and structured qualitative comparative analysis, combined with a chronological approach, to analyse representative theories of UA. Concurrently, an analytical framework comprising four dimensions—ecological, socio-economic, technological and design, and spatial relations—has been established, with four evaluation indicators defined for each dimension. This study reviews and compares representative theories across different historical periods to address two research questions: the evolution of UA theories across different historical periods, and the commonalities and differences among various theories across the four dimensions. Through this analysis, the paper discusses the commonalities, differences, and practical implications of different UA theories across each dimension. The research indicates that the ecological dimension forms the foundation of most theories. The spatial relations dimension demonstrates the spatial value of different theories. The design and technological innovation dimension reflects the connection between theory and urban development. The socio-economic dimension highlights the growing attention to UA. Chronological analysis reveals the evolution of UA theories, from the 19th-century concept of integrating agriculture into cities to the mid-to-late 20th-century idea of urban-agricultural coexistence, and finally to the diverse theoretical approaches of the 21st century. This study not only provides a comprehensive review of the development of UA theories but also offers scientific guidance for future practice and research in UA.
Xing et al. (2026) studied this question.