Search results

School and community gardens have long histories grounded in social justice. Currently there are advocacy movements calling for gardening programs that foster academics and equity movements through nutrition education, neighborhood green spaces and beautification, and ecological sustainability. While the authors contributed personal experiences and useful resources for those interested in school and community gardening, the authors primarily investigated multiple theories that embraced critical and ecological pedagogies in neighborhoods, schools, urban communities. The democratic movements of food security, removal of food deserts, and socioeconomic sustainability using applicable gardening programs were the driving forces behind this chapter.

This paper describes how community gardens generate social capital, and with what potential implications for the health of gardeners and their communities.

This analysis draws on data from focus groups with gardeners from four community gardening programs, two each in Boston and Lynn, MA. The participants represent a diverse sample of community gardeners (n=32).

We identify four mechanisms through which community gardening increases social capital, with implications for individual and community health: (1) building social networks; (2) providing opportunities for resource sharing and social support; (3) preserving cultural knowledge and practice in diaspora; and (4) reflecting and reinforcing collective efficacy. We also describe gardeners’ perspectives on gardening itself as a political activity.

While much of the literature on social capital and health in community gardens comes from in-depth studies of single, relatively homogenous gardens, this analysis draws on data from focus group interviews with a diverse group of participants who garden in varied neighborhood settings. In contrast to studies that have suggested that the social capital generated in community gardens does not extend beyond the group of individuals actively involved in gardening, our study identifies multiple community level benefits. Consequently, this paper lends support to recent calls to consider community gardening as strategy for amplifying community assets in support of public health.

In recent years, quite a number of local initiatives in Berlin have turned former empty lots or brownfields into publicly accessible open (green) spaces, some only temporarily, others on a more permanent basis. A few of those projects – often inspired by those created in New York City – can be identified as community gardens. Collective gardening, in the form of community gardens, is still a rarely known form of creating, shaping and using public space in Germany. However, for more than a decade Berlin has experienced an increase in the emergence of those kinds of grassroots initiatives. Although there are much older examples of open spaces created by and for residents, as discussed below, most of the existing gardens today have been created since the year 2000. The question is, what led to the recent rise in community gardening projects in Berlin? To answer this question, this chapter will examine the local governing context in Berlin in which the recent rise of community gardening has taken place and compare community gardens across a 20-year temporal divide.

This paper aims to examine urban community gardens from the urban planning perspective. The paper analyses the Berlin case study Himmelbeet and its relation to the concept of critical placemaking (Toolis, 2017) and placemaking principles of Madden and Schwartz (1999).

The study is based on participatory action research. It examines one specific case study in Berlin where the author volunteered for several years. The set of placemaking principles is used as an ex-post analysis tool to evaluate how the community garden meets the criteria of placemaking.

The paper shows that the urban community garden can be considered as a placemaking scheme although it was not planned with placemaking instruments. The garden’s placemaking process shows strategies to challenge issues of exclusion, disinvestment and depoliticization of public spaces and thus exemplifies the possibilities of citizen-controlled placemaking processes.

The paper links placemaking with urban community gardens by assessing the placemaking principles and discussing the criteria of critical placemaking. The paper also contributes to a better understanding of urban community gardens in relation to current trends of austerity and urban inequalities.

What does the intersection of food gardening and public librarianship look like? This chapter examines the question through a close analysis of three case studies that represent the spread of this phenomenon in the United States and Canada. This is a first step toward identifying areas for further research that will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of how food gardening in and around public libraries addresses community-level health disparities. Although it is the case that food gardens and related programming are no strangers to public libraries, this topic has not received sustained attention in the LIS research literature. Public libraries have long been framed as key institutions in increasing consumer health literacy, but a more recent trend has seen them also framed as key institutions in promoting public and community health, particularly through the use of the public library space. This chapter examines food gardens at public libraries with this more expansive understanding of how public libraries address health disparities, by considering how this work occurs through novel partnerships and programs focused on transforming physical space in local communities. At the same time, public interest in food gardens parallels increased awareness of food in society; food and diet as key aspects of health; food justice activism; and a long history of community empowerment in the face of the proliferation of food deserts through myriad activities, including community food gardens. The authors consider how food gardening in public libraries parallels these trends.

Community gardens are increasingly used as interventions during the resettlement of refugees and other migrants. Little is known about how garden programs might support their mental health and wellbeing. Given the links between climate change and forced migration, community gardens are especially relevant, as they can also support climate change mitigation. This study aims to document psychosocial outcomes of gardening programs for refugees and migrants, and mechanisms leading to these outcomes.

The authors searched major databases and the grey literature up to 2021, resulting in the inclusion of 17 peer-reviewed and 4 grey literature articles in a thematic, qualitative analysis.

Four consistent themes arose from the analysis: community gardening programs promoted continuity and adaptation (81% of articles), social connectedness (81%), overall wellbeing (95%) and a sense of meaning and self-worth (67%). The results suggest that community gardens can strengthen psychosocial pillars that are key to the recovery and resettlement of refugees and migrants. The land-based and social nature of community gardening may enable connections to the land and others, nurture a sense of belonging in the host country and provide a link to the past for those from agricultural backgrounds.

Further participatory action research is needed to develop guidelines for the successful implementation of community gardens by resettlement organisations.

This review indicates that community gardens can be effective psychosocial interventions as part of a network of services supporting the resettlement of refugees and migrants.

The nonhuman world is under substantial threat from human activities and economies. Rewilding gardens and community action can build relationships of care with the nonhuman, restore habitat, connect people and land, and empower humans to work with and for the nonhuman. Stories about family relationships to land and through land, and creating a wild garden are used to explore place attachment, creating relationships of care through gardening, and purposeful rewilding of a garden; stories about participation in a community service organization examine how collective action can take rewilding ideas out into the larger community. By consciously creating care for the nonhuman and participating in rewilding, we can actively build ecological paths forward for ourselves and our nonhuman neighbors.

Urban community gardens (UCGs) are important sources of community, food and greenspaces in urban environments. Though UCGs in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) of Ontario, Canada, were considered essential during the COVID-19 lockdowns and therefore open to gardeners, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on food security and UCG use among garden members and managers is not fully understood.

This was an exploratory qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven managers and eight members of nine gardens in the GTA. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

The results suggest that UCGs helped participants be resilient to COVID-19 pandemic-related stressors through the provision of cultural ecosystem services. Therefore, this study supports the current literature that UCGs can help foster resilience during crises. While participants in this study did not end up being food insecure, participants did express concern about community food security.

Results contribute to the current body of literature, and can be used to further update and develop UCG policies, as well as help develop UCG infrastructure and management strategies for future crises.

The impacts of the pandemic on Canadian UCGs are not well understood. This research paper investigated the impact of the pandemic on UCG use and food security, as well as the link between UCG use and increased resilience to COVID-19-related stressors.

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on the invisible incarcerated women population who are convicted of a crime and serving a sentence in a residential correctional facility in the United States (US). Even though correctional populations have been declining in the past years, the extent of mass incarceration has been a significant public health concern even before the pandemic. Moreover, the global spread of COVID-19 continues to have devastating effects in all the world's societies, and it has exacerbated existing social inequalities within the US carceral complex.

We base our findings on data collection from two comparative clinical sociological garden interventions in a large Southeastern women's prison and a Midwestern residential community correctional facility for women. Both are residential correctional facilities for residents convicted of a crime. In contrast, in prison, women are serving longer-term sentences, and in the community corrections facility, women typically are housed for six months. We have developed and carried out educational garden programming and related research on both sites over the past two years and observe more closely the impact of COVID-19 on incarcerated women and their communities, which has aggravated the invisibility and marginalization of incarcerated women who suffered a lack of programming and insufficient research attention already before the pandemic.

We argue that prison gardens' educational programming has provided some respite from the hardships of the pandemic and is a promising avenue of correctional rehabilitation and programming that fosters sustainability, healthier nutrition, and mental health among participants.

Residential correctional facilities are distinctively sited to advance health equity and community health within a framework of sustainability, especially during a pandemic. We focus on two residential settings for convicted women serving a sentence in a prison or a residential community corrections facility that offers rehabilitation and educational programming. Women are an underserved population within the US carceral system, and it is thus essential to develop more programming and research for their benefit.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the dynamics of youth engagement in urban agriculture, particularly through youth gardens in distressed neighbourhoods of Cape Town. This examination is crucial due to the limited involvement of youth in urban agriculture, which poses a threat to the sustainability of these practices despite their recognised contributions to urban development.

The research employs a qualitative methodology to explore the motivations, challenges and experiences of young urban farmers. Semi-structured interviews with youth participants from selected urban community gardens, complemented by virtual ethnography, form the core of the data collection process. This approach provides an in-depth understanding of the factors influencing youth participation in urban farming.

The study reveals that youth engagement in urban agriculture is motivated by various factors, including entrepreneurial aspirations, environmental justice activism, and a dedication to food justice. These findings suggest that for urban agriculture initiatives to be effective in such settings, they must acknowledge and address the specific motivations and contextual challenges faced by young people.

The study’s findings are context-specific to the distressed neighbourhoods of Cape Town, which may limit their generalisability to other urban settings. Future research could expand the scope to include a comparative analysis with other cities.

The insights gained from this study can inform the design of urban agriculture initiatives that better engage youth, thereby fostering community development and sustainable urban practices.

This research offers novel insights into the underexplored area of youth engagement in urban agriculture within distressed urban environments. By focusing on the voices and experiences of young urban farmers in Cape Town, the study contributes to the development of targeted policies and programmes that aim to promote inclusive and sustainable urban agriculture practices, particularly by enhancing youth involvement.