Evaluating Community Gardens in a Health Disparate Region: A Qualitative Case Study Approach

Community gardens and wellbeing amongst vulnerable populations: a thematic review

The aim of the thematic review is to document the effects of community gardens on wellbeing amongst vulnerable populations. We searched for articles published between 1980 and 2017 in major databases resulting in the inclusion of 51 articles. Vulnerable populations included, amongst others, ethnic minorities and refugees, socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods or low-income or food insecure families. Our findings suggest that community garden participation may have a positive impact on physical health, such as reducing body weight and hypertension, and increasing physical activity and food knowledge. However, findings relating to community gardens and their potential to enhance food security were inconsistent. Furthermore we found that community gardens can have a positive influence both at the individual level (i.e. self-esteem, independence, personal control, etc.), particularly for refugees; the relational and social level (i.e. relationships, social connections, community and neighbourhood). Community garden participation have the potential to enhance wellbeing amongst vulnerable populations. However, two articles in our review presented potential food safety concerns related to community gardens, indicating that, particularly in urban settings, attention must be given to minimizing potential food safety concerns, e.g. by using raised garden beds. Based on this review, we recommend that further research and evaluation on non-US-based community gardens is carried out, as community gardens are practiced globally but there is little research to document the effects of community gardens on wellbeing amongst vulnerable populations outside of the USA.

Placemaking in Action: Factors That Support or Obstruct the Development of Urban Community Gardens

The paper examines factors that support or obstruct the development of urban community garden projects. It combines a systematic scholarly literature review with empirical research from case studies located in New Zealand and Germany. The findings are discussed against the backdrop of placemaking processes: urban community gardens are valuable platforms to observe space-to-place transformations. Following a social-constructionist approach, literature-informed enablers and barriers for the development of urban community gardens are analysed against perceived notions informed by local interviewees with regard to their biophysical and technical, socio-cultural and economic, and political and administrative dimensions. These dimensions are incorporated into a systematic and comprehensive category system. This approach helps observe how the essential biophysical-material base of the projects is overlaid with socio-cultural factors and shaped by governmental or administrative regulations. Perceptual differences become evident and are discussed through the lens of different actors.

Sowing social inclusion for marginalised residents of a social housing development through a community garden

ISSUE ADDRESSED

In addition to food, physical activity, mental health and environmental benefits, community gardens (CGs) provide opportunities for social inclusion and increased social capital. These are particularly important to the socially isolated residents of social housing developments (SHDs). This scoping study explored the feasibility of a CG program for tenants of SHD in inner eastern Melbourne by assessing their interest in, and requirements for, inclusively designed CGs.

METHODS

In this phenomenological enquiry, focus group discussions, supported by photo-elicitation, were employed. Three focus groups (N = 19) were conducted with self-selected participants who consented to participate. Two focus groups were conducted with English-speaking tenants while a third focus group was conducted with Mandarin-speaking tenants.

RESULTS

There was a demand for CGs by the English-speaking participants driven by desire for networking, social connectedness and inclusion; for improved access to fresh produce, connection with nature, physical activity and mental well-being. Participants expressed interest in a garden located near their SHD with supportive physical and social environments including disability access, plot autonomy, fencing, socio-cultural events, training programs and management opportunities. However, the Mandarin-speaking tenants maintained that age, language difficulty and neighbourhood insecurity posed significant barriers to their participation.

CONCLUSION

Guided by the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, social inclusion and community development theories, the study recommends that to establish socially inclusive CGs, a dynamic relationship of the design principles of a CG and the socio-ecological determinants of health should be established to address any barriers and successfully facilitate engagement. In addition, CG programs need to be guided by community development principles. Future research could employ community-based participatory research models in the implementation and evaluation of a CG program for socially isolated population groups.

What gardens grow: Outcomes from home and community gardens supported by community-based food justice organizations

Supporting home and community gardening is a core activity of many community-based organizations (CBOs) that are leading the food justice movement in the U.S. Using mixed methods across multiple action-research studies with five food justice CBOs, this paper documents myriad layers of benefits that gardening yields. Our participatory methods included conducting extensive case studies with five CBOs over five years; quantifying food harvests with 33 gardeners in Laramie, Wyoming, and surveying them about other gardening outcomes (20 responded); and conducting feasibility studies for assessing health impacts of gardening with two of the five CBOs, both in Wyoming. Analyses of these diverse data yielded four categories of gardening benefits: (1) improving health; (2) producing quality food in nutritionally meaningful quantities; (3) providing cultural services; and (4) fostering healing and transformation. Examining these results together illustrates a breadth of health, food, and cultural ecosystem services, and social change yields of home and community food gardening in these communities. It also points to the need to support CBOs in enabling household food production and to future research questions about what CBO strategies most enhance access to and benefits of gardening, especially in communities most hurt by racism and/or insufficient access to fresh food.

Feasibility of an experiential community garden and nutrition programme for youth living in public housing

Objective

Few published community garden studies have focused on low socio-economic youth living in public housing or used a community-based participatory research approach in conjunction with youth-focused community garden programmes. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility (i.e. demand, acceptability, implementation and limited-effectiveness testing) of a 10-week experiential theory-based gardening and nutrition education programme targeting youth living in public housing.

Design

In this mixed-methods feasibility study, demand and acceptability were measured using a combination of pre- and post-programme surveys and interviews. Implementation was measured via field notes and attendance. Limited-effectiveness was measured quantitatively using a pre–post design and repeated-measures ANOVA tests.

Setting

Two public housing sites in the Dan River Region of south central Virginia, USA.

Subjects

Forty-three youth (primarily African American), twenty-five parents and two site leaders.

Results

The positive demand and acceptability findings indicate the high potential of the programme to be used and be suitable for the youth, parents and site leaders. Field notes revealed numerous implementation facilitators and barriers. Youth weekly attendance averaged 4·6 of 10 sessions. Significant improvements (P<0·05) were found for some (e.g. fruit and vegetable asking self-efficacy, overall gardening knowledge, knowledge of MyPlate recommendations), but not all limited-effectiveness measures (e.g. willingness to try fruits and vegetables, fruit and vegetable eating self-efficacy).

Conclusions

This community-based participatory research study demonstrates numerous factors that supported and threatened the feasibility of a gardening and nutrition programme targeting youth in public housing. Lessons learned are being used to adapt and strengthen the programme for future efforts targeting fruit and vegetable behaviours.