In the cities of industrialized countries, the sudden keen interest in urban agriculture has resulted, inter alia, in the growth of the number and diversity of urban collective gardens. While the multifunctionality of collective gardens is well known, individual gardeners’ motivations have still not been thoroughly investigated. The aim of this article is to explore the role, for the gardeners, of the food function as one of the functions of gardens, and to establish whether and how this function is a (...) motivating factor for them. We draw on a set of data from semi-structured interviews with 39 gardeners in 12 collective gardens in Paris and Montreal, as well as from a survey on 98 gardeners and from field observations of the gardeners’ practices. In the first part we present the nature and diversity of garden produce, and the gardeners’ assessment thereof. In the second part we describe the seven other functions mentioned by the gardeners, which enables us to situate the food function in relation to them. We conclude that the food function is the most significant function of the gardens, and discuss the implications for practitioners and policy makers. (shrink)

This paper reports experiences of health and well-being common to actors in community gardens in Berlin and Paris. Community gardening has become an ever growing phenomenon since the 1990s, and to a larger extend since 2000 in western European cities. Despite the promising research from the US that has shown that community gardens have a potential for health promotion, there is a dearth of evidence from Europe. This study tries to fill this gap and maps the potential of community gardens (...) for health and well-being as explained and experienced by the gardeners. The effect of community garden projects on human health and well-being cannot be reduced to the effect of nature on health alone. This study shows that there are at least two other major mechanisms at play, if we want to understand the phenomenon or evaluate its effects, namely the effects of community and 'free and open spaces'. Gardeners report health-related experiences with green space, such as stress relief and feeling of calm and vitality and increased well-being through sensual experiences and observing nature. Furthermore the garden projects open up a social space, which for many gardeners creates experiences of health through regular social contact, experiences of joy of sharing and having activities together. Furthermore, the community garden project was proposed to create a context and opportunities for flow, creativity and self-efficacy if it is a free and open space. However, not all experiences on well-being in CGPs are postive, and to all these spaces and their effects there are also certain limitations and conditions. Moreover, this study makes a theoretical contribution to the concept of health and well-being on the basis of the fuzziness around the concept of health encountered in the field. I propose that a holistic concept of health might be most suitable to describe health related to bottom-up community action like community gardens. To assess the effects of such projects in terms of well-being, this concepts should be dissentagled into the concept of health and happiness, whereas happiness in turn relates not only to life satisfaction but also to eudaimonian happiness related to meaning and doing good. Although this research project could not be comprehensive enough to provide all necessary evidence to evaluate health effects of community gardens, we believe that it provides viable paths for investigations into community driven health promotion and emerging healthy settings. (shrink)

In the United States, interest in urban agriculture has grown dramatically. While community gardens have sprouted across the landscape, home food gardens—arguably an ever-present, more durable form of urban agriculture—have been overlooked, understudied, and unsupported by government agencies, non-governmental organizations, and academics. In part a response to the invisibility of home gardens, this paper is a manifesto for their study in the Global North. It seeks to develop a multi-scalar and multidisciplinary research framework that acknowledges the garden’s social and ecological (...) or material dimensions. Given the lack of existing research, we draw on the more extensive literature on home gardens in the South and community gardens in the North to develop a set of hypotheses about the social-ecological effects of urban home food gardens in the North. These gardens, we hypothesize, contribute to food security, community development, cultural reproduction, and resilience at multiple scales; conserve agrobiodiversity; and support urban biodiversity. They may also have negative ecological effects, such as stormwater nutrient loading. Because of the entanglement of the social and the ecological or material in the garden, we review three theoretical perspectives—social ecological systems theory, actor-network theory, and assemblage theory—that have been or could be applied to the multi-scalar and multidisciplinary study of the garden. We also review sampling and analytic methods for conducting home garden research. The paper concludes with a discussion of opportunities to extend the research agenda beyond descriptive analysis, the primary focus of garden research to date. (shrink)

This paper presents a case study of Gardens and Green Spaces (GGS), a resident-driven, grant-funded project in Cleveland, Ohio working toward community change. Through both placemaking and entrepreneurial strategies, the main grant objectives are to effect change at the intersection of food (and agriculture), arts, and culture in Kinsman, a 96% Black Neighborhood on Cleveland’s east side. While community development (CD) projects are often designed by outside ‘experts’ who inform the scope and focus of grant-funded projects, this project is rooted (...) in the hypothesis that a resident-driven approach to CD will lead to increased community buy-in and participation, resulting in more lasting and substantive community change. GGS works across sectors, integrating arts, culture, and food to promote placemaking and community-based entrepreneurial engagement as a path towards greater health, equity, and economic resilience. This paper argues that community-based and resident-driven development—although not without its own challenges—can result in more holistic community transformation across sectors, with the potential for greater resident participation, sustainability, and equity. The case study presented in this paper, including in-depth interviews and neighborhood surveys, is an examination of the pilot phase of GGS, and argues that both placemaking and entrepreneurialism represent a negotiation between market driven community development and a solely philanthropic model. It provides insight into more equitable and sustainable change that has the potential to shift the traditional paradigm of expert driven, or “outside-in” community development. (shrink)

Community gardens are of increasing interest to scholars, policymakers, and community organizations but there has been little systematic study of community garden management at a broad scale. This study complements case study research by revealing shared experiences of community garden management across different contexts. In partnership with the American Community Gardening Association, we developed an online questionnaire. Results from 445 community garden organizations across the US and Canada reveal common themes as well as differences that are particularly significant across different (...) organizational sizes. The findings suggest that organizers see multiple benefits, and respondents confirmed recent expansion of gardening efforts. Analysis then focuses on challenges, which are closely related to garden management. We address garden losses as well as challenges to routine operation. Key challenges included funding, participation, land, and materials. We developed a typology based on organization size, to reveal distinctions between small organizations (serving 1 garden), medium-sized organizations (2–3 gardens), large organizations (4–30 gardens) and very large organizations (31 or more gardens). These categories shed light on different needs for funding, land, material, and participation. Together, this analysis suggests that community gardens can be linked through the work it takes to sustain them rather than specific causes or outcomes. Community gardens can be better integrated into local food systems through analysis of how people involved with this work navigate these shared processes. (shrink)

This research contributes to emergent theories on subject formation by showing how community garden participants in a small rural town in Northern Peru came to embrace a set of ideas and practices related to organic agriculture. Most CG scholarship describes the myriad benefits for participants and their communities, as well as individuals’ motivations for wanting to grow their own food. Relatively little research has explored how various kinds of gardens and their organizers produce subjects. Drawing from scholarship on community gardens (...) and subject formation, I examine the emergence of what I call an “organic subjectivity” among garden participants. Based on interviews and fieldwork conducted in Peru, I argue that the making of organic subjects in the CG is the result of three primary influences: the changing agrarian context in the community marked by the adoption of conventional farming practices, the influence of the garden organizer as the agent of an organic ideology, and the material practices associated with CG participation. This case study reinforces the notion that CGs produce subjects and that such subjects could well be oriented towards an agenda of progressive agrarian change that promotes environmental awareness and ecological farming practices, key elements of emerging alternative food networks in the global North and South. (shrink)

Ample research documents the health benefits of community gardens, but our understanding of the factors shaping gardener participation is limited. Neighborhood demographics and garden frames have each been theorized to play a role in shaping who participates in community gardens. Yet, our understanding of the interplay between these factors is underdeveloped and this body of work lacks consideration of the racial and class makeup of gardeners on a large scale. With a nation-wide survey that includes measures of gardener demographics (N (...) = 162), the present study considers the extent to which community garden frames and locations simultaneously shape participant demographics. I combine these factors into a conceptual model explaining community garden participation as an iterative process of framing, accessibility, and representation, all situated within a garden’s surrounding community. Results show some base correlations between gardens focusing on healthy food access or symbolic food labels and gardener demographics, but ordered logistic and negative binomial regressions show stronger evidence of community demographics shaping gardener demographics. At the same time, _t_-tests comparing mean neighborhood and gardener demographics shows a consistent under-representation of Latinx community members among gardeners. As theorized in the model presented, community garden locations are important for shaping what demographics are represented among gardeners, but how community garden benefits are framed can limit garden accessibility, and subsequently neighborhood representation, especially for Latinx residents. This model helps illustrate the mechanisms through which garden organizers and advocates can develop more inclusive community gardens through fostering representation from people of color and the working-class. (shrink)

Since 1984, the AHV journal has provided a key forum for a community of interdisciplinary, international researchers, educators, and policy makers to analyze and debate core issues, values and hopes facing the nation and the world, and to recommend strategies and actions for addressing them. This agenda includes the more specific challenges and opportunities confronting agriculture, food systems, science, and communities, as well as broader contextual issues and grand challenges. This paper draws extensively on 40 years of AHV journal articles (...) and reviews and begins with a focus on a limited number of key grand challenges (climate change and global warming; threats to democracy and the growing neo-nationalism, populism, and authoritarianism; and increasing national and international inequality). With these challenges as the underlining context, the remainder of the paper addresses core journal themes of sustainable agriculture and local food systems, citizen and public science, and empowered communities. Highlighted are numerous important journal contributions to the analyses and recommendations to address these hopes and themes. I conclude that these themes and hopes not only deserve to live but are essential for changing and redirecting an unsustainable and destructive environmental, economic, political and social agenda to a viable, livable and just democratic society. (shrink)

Food security is becoming an increasingly relevant topic in the Global North, especially in urban areas. Because such areas do not always have good access to nutritionally adequate food, the question of how to supply them is an urgent priority in order to maintain a healthy population. Urban and peri-urban agriculture, as sources of local fresh food, could play an important role. Whereas some scholars do not differentiate between peri-urban and urban agriculture, seeing them as a single entity, our hypothesis (...) is that they are distinct, and that this has important consequences for food security and other issues. This has knock-on effects for food system planning and has not yet been appropriately analysed. The objectives of this study are to provide a systematic understanding of urban and peri-urban agriculture in the Global North, showing their similarities and differences, and to analyse their impact on urban food security. To this end, an extensive literature review was conducted, resulting in the identification and comparison of their spatial, ecological and socio-economic characteristics. The findings are discussed in terms of their impact on food security in relation to the four levels of the food system: food production, processing, distribution and consumption. The results show that urban and peri-urban agriculture in the Global North indeed differ in most of their characteristics and consequently also in their ability to meet the food needs of urban inhabitants. While urban agriculture still meets food needs mainly at the household level, peri-urban agriculture can provide larger quantities and has broader distribution pathways, giving it a separate status in terms of food security. Nevertheless, both possess (unused) potential, making them valuable for urban food planning, and both face similar threats regarding urbanisation pressures, necessitating adequate planning measures. (shrink)

Few topics have been addressed through as large a range of perspectives and interests as urban agriculture (UA), yet the literature has been loosely characterized by a divergence and disconnect between research conducted in the global north (GN), and that in the global south (GS). In cities of the global south, UA is widely analyzed through a productivist lens, focusing on food production and individual or household-level contributions of urban farming to food security, household income, and livelihoods. Meanwhile, in cities (...) of the global north, engagement with UA also speaks to food production and food security but is just as often focused on environmental and social movements, civic engagement and justice, and more recently urban sustainability and resiliency. We argue that productivist and post-productivist dichotomies are somewhat displaced as differences between the GN/GS are becoming less pronounced. Furthermore, such a dichotomy reinforces assumptions about the nature of urbanization itself, eliding both the commonalities among urban spaces and specificities that come from each place. By examining how UA is approached and written about in different contexts, we hope to highlight the gaps, but also to illustrate convergent themes, particularly those that increasingly characterize contemporary UA research. After elaborating on these tensions, we will build on the increasing relevance of the convergences by suggesting some potentially fruitful future directions for UA research. We conclude with ideas about how novel theoretical concepts might be used to identify overlapping themes in useful and insightful ways, and to increase the significance and reach of UA research. (shrink)

Since its origins as an academic newsletter, _Agriculture and Human Values_ has evolved to be one of the leading journals publishing critical scholarship of the food and agricultural system. This essay illustrates and comments on the evolution of the scale and scope of research published in the journal over the years.

Consumers have a growing desire to know where their food comes from and how it is produced, not only for health and safety reasons, but also to satisfy a nostalgia or a perception of “true”, “healthy”, “authentic” and “traceable”. The commercial urban agriculture sector attempts, at least in part, to respond to a growing demand from citizens for locally produced food and for local agriculture that can be signalled to consumers with the help of quality signs, such as reserved designations (...) and added-value claims labels. To date, however, we can wonder about the issues of establishing an added-value claim “urban agriculture” to promote the distinction and development of food products from commercial urban agriculture. This study, using semi-directed interviews with 16 urban farmers and managers of urban agriculture businesses in Quebec, explores their perception of an added-value claim "urban agriculture" to certify their food products. The results of the thematic analysis carried out showing seven main issues, namely: notion of urbanity, sustainability of agricultural practices, valorization of hyper-locality, community, regulations, ownership concerns and relevance of the claim. These issues underline that the logic of commercial urban producers is not only mercantile but also community, social and environmental. In this sense, legislating a movement, under the establishment of a public food label to meet the market's needs and promote the development of this industry, can reveal the various forms of power, exclusion and inequality embedded in urban agriculture initiatives but also some niche opportunities for them. Thoughts are proposed to promote products from urban agriculture from the perspective of increasingly nurturing cities. (shrink)

This paper examines sustainable agriculture’s steady rise as a legitimate farm management system. In doing this, it offers an account of social change that centers on trust and its intersection with networks of knowledge. The argument to follow is informed by the works of Foucault and Latour but moves beyond this literature in important ways. Guided by and building upon earlier conceptual framework first forwarded by Carolan and Bell (2003, Environmental Values 12: 225–245), sustainable agriculture is examined through the lens (...) of a “phenomenological challenge.” In doing this, analytic emphasis centers on the interpretative resources of everyday life and the artful act of practice – in other words, on “the local.” Research data involving Iowa farmers and agriculture professionals are examined to understand how social relations of trust and knowledge are contested and shaped within and between agricultural social networks and organizational configurations. All of this is meant to further our understanding of what “sustainable agriculture” is and is not, who it is, and how these boundaries change over time. (shrink)

This paper aims to fill the gap in literature concerning community gardens in post-communist countries by focusing on the situation in Prague, Czechia. It introduces Prague′s newly emerged community gardens and presents the results of a first representative survey of these gardens. Information was gathered about eleven of the sixteen larger community gardens and the data were collected by semi-structured interviews with the managers of the particular gardens. The paper compares the Czech community gardens as representatives of civic agriculture forms (...) in post-communist countries with their counterparts and stresses their similarities and differences. The results show that the new community gardens reflect much of what can be seen elsewhere in terms of spatial and organizational design, as well as reasons for starting them, motivations for participation and some of the challenges experienced. However, in contrast to many community gardens in the USA, Canada and UK that focus on food and nutrition provision, in Prague the community is more of a priority than food and the other mentioned benefits. The paper shows that different activities, events and functions make gardens important hubs of their communities and potential tools of further community involvement and social change. (shrink)