No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
“Grounded in the Neighborhood, Grounded in Community”: Social Capital and Health in Community Gardens
Abstract
Purpose This paper describes how community gardens generate social capital, and with what potential implications for the health of gardeners and their communities.
Methodology/approach 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).
Findings 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.
Originality/value 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.
... Case studies of refugees and immigrants in community gardens highlight diverse motivations for and impacts of their involvement, including land tenure [30][31][32], reconnecting with agriculture [8], and community belonging [33]. Some research has shown that participation in community gardens can facilitate processes of inclusion to overcome cultural, social, and economic barriers [12], leading to increased social capital [34]. For example, a study of 55 community gardeners in Port Melbourne, Australia found that participation in the gardens connected participants with a community in which they had previously felt isolated [14]. ...
... Firth et al. [40] go on to describe four ways community gardens facilitate social capital: (1) bringing people together with a shared purpose around a common activity, which creates collective ownership, (2) providing a meeting place where people can interact and create community, (3) creating opportunities for informal interactions like growing, cooking, and eating food, which can bridge connections across communities, and (4) providing an opportunity to create connections with institutions and authorities. Shostak and Guscott [34] add to this list a fifth item, preserving cultural knowledges and practices, which is particularly important for refugee and immigrant gardeners. ...
... The light blue arrows indicate feedback relationships between gardener activities and the mechanisms of inclusion. The orange arrows indicate scholarly connections between social capital and the mechanisms of inclusion [34,42]. Conceptual framework detailing the interactions between garden management inputs, the analytical categories from our study, and the outcome of social capital. ...
Urban agriculture is an important neighborhood revitalization strategy in the U.S. Rust Belt, where deindustrialization has left blighted and vacant land in the urban core. Immigrants and refugees represent a growing and important stakeholder group in urban agriculture, including in community gardens across the Rust Belt Midwest. Community gardens provide a host of social and economic benefits to urban landscapes, including increased access to culturally appropriate food and medicinal plants for refugee and immigrant growers. Our work in Lansing, Michigan was part of a collaboration with the Greater Lansing Food Bank’s Garden Project (GLFGP) to describe the refugee and immigrant community gardening experience in three urban gardens with high refugee and immigrant enrollment. Our research describes the ways garden management facilitates inclusion for refugee and immigrant gardeners and how particular factors of inclusion in turn contribute to social capital, an important outcome that plays a critical role in refugee and immigrant subjective wellbeing.
... Therefore, it is not surprising that there has been a growing appetite for establishing community gardens as preventative health, neighbourhood renewal and environmental policy strategies for "sustainable urban living" [1,7,11,14]. Other commentators have acknowledged that policy makers should consider developing community gardens because they are cost-effective [3], address food insecurities [15,16], promote fruit and vegetable intake [17][18][19], encourage contact with nature [10], support environmental regeneration and resilience [20], and enhance social capital [18,[21][22][23]. To increase social capital and social cohesion, culture as a determinant of health has become an attractive policy response in urban areas across the world [24][25][26]. ...
... Therefore, it is not surprising that there has been a growing appetite for establishing community gardens as preventative health, neighbourhood renewal and environmental policy strategies for "sustainable urban living" [1,7,11,14]. Other commentators have acknowledged that policy makers should consider developing community gardens because they are cost-effective [3], address food insecurities [15,16], promote fruit and vegetable intake [17][18][19], encourage contact with nature [10], support environmental regeneration and resilience [20], and enhance social capital [18,[21][22][23]. To increase social capital and social cohesion, culture as a determinant of health has become an attractive policy response in urban areas across the world [24][25][26]. ...
Existing community gardening research has tended to be exploratory and descriptive, utilising qualitative or mixed methodologies to explore and understand community garden participation. While research on community gardening attracts growing interest, the empirical rigour of measurement scales and embedded indicators has received comparatively less attention. Despite the extensive body of community gardening literature, a coherent narrative on valid, high quality approaches to the measurement of outcomes and impact across different cultural contexts is lacking and yet to be comprehensively examined. This is essential as cities are becoming hubs for cultural diversity. Systematic literature reviews that explore the multiple benefits of community gardening and other urban agriculture activities have been undertaken, however, a systematic review of the impact measures of community gardening is yet to be completed. This search protocol aims to address the following questions: (1) How are the health, wellbeing, social and environmental outcomes and impacts of community gardening measured? (2) What cultural diversity considerations have existing community garden measures taken into account? Demographic data will be collected along with clear domains/constructs of experiences, impacts and outcomes captured from previous literature to explore if evidence considers culturally heterogeneous and diverse populations. This will offer an understanding as to whether community gardening research is appropriately measuring this cross-cultural activity.
... Participation in CHAMPAS appeared to lead to participants building broader ties to their local community through involvement with other related groups and this was perceived to positively impact participants' well-being. This is consistent with several studies that share the observation that positive health and well-being are potentially reliant on the improved social connections associated with community gardening, specifically that these strong connections lead to increased cooperative behaviour and trust (Liamputtong and Sanchez, 2018;Shostak and Guscott, 2017;Sonti and Svendsen, 2018;Kingsley et al., 2020;). The forming of friendships is a frequent theme of past research into gardening and is often described as an element of community and social connectedness (Firth et al., 2011;Kingsley et al., 2020). ...
Gardening has the potential to enhance health and well-being, through increased physical activity and social connectedness. However, while much is known about the benefits of garden activities, less is known about the potential health implications of more passive forms of engagement with gardens, for example, viewing gardens. In addition, much garden research is undertaken in urban settings, leaving little known about potential health impacts for rural populations. The present study explored these research gaps by gaining an understanding of the experiences and perspectives of members of a gardening appreciation group in rural Australia: The Colac Horticultural and Marvellous Property Appreciation Society (CHAMPAS). A phenomenological, qualitative methodology was applied, using semi-structured interviews for data collection. Eleven participants were selected using purposive and snowball sampling and the data were analysed by applying interpretive, reflexive thematic analysis. Four main themes and supporting sub-themes were generated. The four main themes were: (i) motivations for maintaining participation in CHAMPAS; (ii) social connections and friendships, formed from membership; (iii) sense of community and structure of CHAMPAS and (iv) the perceived health and well-being benefits of continued involvement in this group. This study found that members perceived health and well-being benefits stemmed from CHAMPAS facilitation of social connectedness, function as a community group and a way for members to share a love for home gardening. This study provides insights into the perceived and potential health-promoting effects of garden appreciation groups for rural populations.
... For some gardeners, the garden space helped to create or deepen social connections during the pandemic. This is consistent with the literature that highlights that gardening has diverse social and community benefits and acts as an escape from stresses even in non-pandemic times (Alaimo et al., 2010;Veen et al., 2016;Shostak and Guscott 2017;Cumbers et al., 2018;Scott et al., 2018;Kingsley et al., 2020). However, this sentiment seemed to be amplified during this period in our results. ...
Gardening has the potential to improve health and wellbeing, especially during crises. Using an international survey of gardeners (n = 3743), this study aimed to understand everyday gardening experiences, perspectives and attitudes during early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Our qualitative reflexive thematic and sentiment analyses show that during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, gardening seemed to create a safe and positive space where people could socially connect, learn and be creative. Participants had more time to garden during the pandemic, which led to enhanced connections with family members and neighbours, and the ability to spend time in a safe outdoor environment. More time gardening allowed for innovative and new gardening practices that provided enjoyment for many participants. However, our research also highlighted barriers to gardening (e.g. lack of access to garden spaces and materials). Our results illustrate the multiple benefits of gardening apparent during COVID-19 through a lens of the social-ecological model of health.
... Several positive effects are associated with urban gardens. Their cultivation contributes to social and urban requalification as it increases the social integration of people at risk of exclusion (particularly elderly people) and reduces the anthropic pressure on natural resources such as soil (e.g., Shostak and Guscott, 2017;Kim et al., 2020). Improving access to healthy, affordable food helps gardeners to adopt healthier dietary patterns and thus potentially reduce health risks (Diekmann et al., 2018;Garcia et al., 2018). ...
This paper assesses the contribution made by the cultivation of urban gardens to the food self-sufficiency of mountain municipalities at risk of food desertification during 2020 in South Tyrol (Italy). The pandemic-induced economic downturn and mobility restrictions have left more territories severely exposed to the adverse risk of food desertification. A food desert is a territory where people are food-insecure because of job/income loss or through the absence of food retail facilities. During lockdown, many non-essential firms were forced to close. This meant that many workers, especially those in more precarious positions, lost their jobs, while entrepreneurs had consistent financial shortcomings. Local population mobility was restricted to the municipality of residence, with reduced access to grocery stores outside that area. Disrupted food supply chains and panic buying stimulated short-term food shortages, emptied municipal food stores and meant that supplies often failed to meet local needs. This insecurity left mountain municipalities increasingly vulnerable to desertification. The most food-insecure areas are those that depend heavily on the tourism sector and those with limited access to food retail facilities or other organized forms of food supply in proximity. Their challenges through the period of Covid-19 have heightened questions about their access to food and possible initiatives to increase their food self-sufficiency. Among the initiatives most frequently debated in that period, gardening has been highly valued. This paper contributes to the debate by presenting a Decision Support System (DSS) that calculates the land required for food self-sufficiency in South Tyrolean municipalities and the percentage covered by the production of local urban gardens. The results demonstrate that urban gardens’ contribution to local food self-sufficiency is almost insignificant in these municipalities, representing less than 1 % of the municipal needs. Restricting the analysis to self-sufficiency in fruit and vegetable production only, findings derived from the DSS application confirm the insignificance of urban gardens’ production levels, which remains below 1 % of the municipal needs.
... Urban gardens are plots of land gardened collectively by a group of people (generally, elderly or voluntary associations for the recovery of disadvantaged people or pupils and students in schools) in public lands under municipal regulation or in private ones. Their cultivation contributes to social and urban requalification as it increases social integration of people at risk of exclusion (elderly people, above all) and reduces the anthropic pressure on natural resources (soil in particular) (e.g., Shostak & Guscott, 2017;Rogge et al., 2018;Schreiber & Carius, 2016, Kim et al., 2020. This practice also contributes to access to healthy, affordable food and aligns with the gardeners´ cultural and ethical values as well as to develop of healthier dietary patterns and thus potentially reducing health risks (Diekmann et al., 2018;Garcia et al., 2018). ...
Can urban gardens contribute to food self-sufficiency in mountain areas at risk of food desertification at times of Covid-19? This paper tests the contribution of urban gardens cultivation to the food self-sufficiency of mountain municipalities at risk of food desertification at times of Covid-19. Mountain areas are at risk of food desertification. Due to depopulation, food sales facilities close or relocate to more populated and distant areas. As a result, the local population has increasing difficulties in accessing food, and is therefore vulnerable to social injustice. The restrictions imposed on personal mobility to reduce Covid-19 diffusion have aggravated these difficulties, especially for those living in a municipality without any food sales facilities. As a local form of self-fruit and vegetable production and an example of a short distance supply, urban gardens could provide a solution to support the food self-sufficiency of these municipalities. Starting from this, the article proposes a model to calculate the land requirement for food self-sufficiency, and the percentage covered by local agricultural areas and urban gardens municipally. This model is tested specifically for mountain municipalities which have experimented with the growth of the gardening initiatives in South Tyrol. The results demonstrate that urban gardens' contribution to local food self-sufficiency is almost irrelevant and less than 1% of the municipal needs. The agricultural areas contribute more than urban gardens to self-sufficiency, producing food for the about 50% of municipal needs. Data related to the contribution of urban gardens to the necessary land for fruit and vegetable production for self-sufficiency confirm the limited extent of their relevance.
... This is because, according to some comments, not all community members take advantage of the opportunity of having the fair within the campus. In fact, the ecological fairs could represent a valuable opportunity for building or improving social networks, as it happens with other initiatives (e.g. in community gardens) (Shostak and Guscott, 2017). The average score for each answer was 4.87 for both commercialisation and consumer's and producer's life qualify, 4.70 for women farmer's opportunities and 4.30 for academic community interaction. ...
Purpose – This paper aims to highlight the contribution of ecological fairs to the promotion of sustainability in university campuses, based on a case study carried out at the University of Passo Fundo,
located in Southern Brazil.
Design/methodology/approach – Producers and consumers of the ecological fairs were interviewed to analyse how the social, economic and environmental spheres of sustainable development are impacted by these fairs. In total, 24 interviews were conducted.
Findings – The results showed how fairs positively impact the academic and local community while bringing sustainability into university campuses.
Research limitations/implications – The main limitations of this study were the number of interviews and the short period during when the study was conducted.
Practical implications – This case study demonstrated how the promotion of ecological fairs on a university campus plays an important role in the implementation and practice of sustainability and can serve as an example for other institutions that intend to work on similar projects.
Originality/value – This paper contributes to the literature by providing a discussion on how ecological fairs represent a good addition in the process of universities to become more sustainable and which aspects of each sustainability sphere are involved.
... This is because community gardens reduce urban decay and food insecurities, address social and economic stressors, increase healthy food choices, promote regular exercise, social interaction and trust [18,32,34,35]. As Shostak and Guscott [36] explain, community gardens "serve as a model for interventions that… "amplify" individual and community assets in support of public health". The presence of community gardens in urban spaces can also present socio-environmental challenges, including tensions resulting from building/infrastructure development and urban community gardens raising property values [12]. ...
Background
Increased global urbanisation has led to public health challenges. Community gardens are identified as a mechanism for addressing socio-ecological determinants of health. This study aims to explore motives for joining community gardens, and the extent to which participation can be facilitated given barriers and enablers to community gardening. Such a study fills a gap in the public health literature, particularly in the Australian context.
Methods
This paper presents findings from semi-structured interviews with 23 participants from 6 community gardens across Melbourne. Applying phenomenological, epistemological and reflexive methodologies and thematic analysis of the data, this study provides a snapshot of drivers of community garden participation.
Results
Results were categorised into six enabling themes to participation. These themes revolved around (i) family history, childhood and passion for gardening; (ii) productive gardening, sustainability and growing fresh produce in nature; (iii) building social and community connections; (iv) community and civic action; (v) stress relief; and (vi) building identity, pride and purpose. Time costs incurred, garden governance and vandalism of garden spaces were among the barriers to community garden participation.
Conclusion
Although an interest in the act of gardening itself may be universally present among community gardeners to varying degrees, the findings of this study suggest that motivations for participation are diverse and span a range of ancestral, social, environmental, and political domains. This study contributes exploratory insights on community garden motivations and sustained involvement across multiple urban sites in Melbourne (Australia). This study recommends extending this work by undertaking future quantitative research that can move from local case studies to a national guidelines on how to engage more people in urban agriculture activities like community gardening.
... In another project, we considered the motivations and experiences of community gardeners in Boston and Lynn, Massachusetts. The powerful testimony of the gardeners both supported ongoing investment in community gardens and allowed us to identify some of the mechanisms through which such programs can leverage social capital in support of community health (Shostak and Guscott 2017). These have been straightforward empirical projects, with clear and actionable results. ...
What does it mean to do social science—perhaps especially for those of us whose research focuses on issues of social justice—during what my students gingerly refer to as “this time we're living in”? Community based participatory research offers one important approach.
Drawing on data from an ethnographic study of urban agriculture in Massachusetts, this paper investigates the multiple meanings of soil for contemporary urban farmers and gardeners. I first consider how urban farmers speak for and with the soil in their neighborhoods to call attention to historical and ongoing environmental racism. These narratives highlight how racialized social processes – including redlining, blockbusting, white flight and disinvestment – have harmed the health of both people and the environment in urban communities of color. I then describe how urban farmers and gardeners articulate the importance of soil for health and well-being, especially for people whose relationships with the earth have been disrupted by capitalism, colonialism and racism. These narratives draw on both scientific and spiritual frameworks to highlight the healing potential of re-establishing direct relationships with nature, reclaiming ancestral knowledge about the healing properties of plants, and reconnecting with the ancestors themselves. Analysis of these interlinked narratives contributes to an emerging cross-disciplinary scholarship on the situatedness of ways of conceptualizing and interacting with soils, calling attention especially to the role of racialized inequities in the creation of harmful soil materialities and the possibilities of socioecological repair.
In an increasingly urbanized world, urban agriculture and community gardening are promoted as lever for sustainable urban development. Urban agriculture contributes to food security, provides health benefits for the population, fosters social inclusion and enhances perceived wellbeing. At the same time, from a planning perspective, urban agriculture also provides a valuable resource for urban regeneration. However, depending on prevalent farming practices urban agriculture may also have social and environmental externalities. While several of these aspects have been extensively tackled in the literature, others, in particular governance and planning aspects, are still unaddressed. Moreover, a comprehensive outline for the evaluation of urban agriculture performance from an urban sustainability perspective is still lacking. In this work we present a novel indicator-based evaluation framework for urban agriculture that captures the contribution of gardening practices to urban sustainability in a consistent, transparent and systematic way. We further illustrate the usability of our framework by testing it in Fællesgartneriet Brabrand, a community garden located in the city of Arhus, Denmark.
Social capital has become a cornerstone to community development. Unfortunately, its scope of research, particularly on policy, creates more smoke than light. This essay builds on an interdisciplinary foundation for a more inclusive approach to social capital research. Though broad evidence supports Putnam’s claims on social capital, our understanding is incomplete, partly due to scholars’ focus on individual disciplinary perspectives. We summarize social capital and its use as a development tool, and consider how to move toward a more interdisciplinary framework. We explore where communities have created and evaluated social capital, cross-disciplinary insights, empirical work suggesting cause-effect, and offer three examples of interplay between social capital and community development: the built environment, migration, and entrepreneurship. Our conclusion presents a conceptual model including all Community Capitals rather than treating them piecemeal, viewing the community as a system under what ecologists call the “law of the minimum” wherein limiting elements constrain growth.
Community gardens can bring many benefits to community members, including access to healthy, affordable foods and opportunities for social interaction. Less certain, however, is their contribution to neighbourhood resilience to crime. To date, few studies have focused on the ability of community gardens – as distinct from other types of green spaces – to promote social organization and reduce local crime. Findings of studies that do so are inconclusive, and at best suggestive of gardens’ crime-deterring effects. The present study spotlights community gardens as unique spaces promoting social capital development and attachment to place, testing the effect of new community gardens in Vancouver, BC. Using neighbourhood census data from 2005 to 2015, the effects of new community gardens, as well as median income, population size, homeownership, and ethnic diversity, on property crime are assessed with multilevel modeling. The results show significant negative effects of median income, population size, and new community gardens on crime, with the addition of just one garden reducing neighbourhood crime by approximately 49 counts, and with increases in population size (by 1,000 individuals) and median income (by CAD$1,000) lowering crime by 48 and 34 counts, respectively.
What do public libraries and communities classified as food deserts have in common? This paper will share how the Cleveland Public Library addressed food security issues in Cleveland, Ohio, through collaboration with local organizations such as The Ohio State University (OSU) Extension in Cuyahoga County and the Cuyahoga County Land Bank (CCLB). Public Libraries are changing the way they serve patrons in disadvantaged communities. Librarians are beginning to share concerns about health issues of their communities. The author provides a step-by-step approach to beginning a community garden at your local public library or community property. The program will benefit groups of all ages.
This review article addresses the concept of the social determinants of health (SDH), selected
theories, and its application in studies of chronic disease. Once ignored or regarded only as distant or
secondary influences on health and disease, social determinants have been increasingly acknowledged
as fundamental causes of health afflictions. For the purposes of this discussion, SDH refers to
SDH variables directly relevant to chronic diseases and, in some circumstances, obesity, in the
research agenda of the Mid-South Transdisciplinary Collaborative Center for Health Disparities
Research. The health effects of SDH are initially discussed with respect to smoking and the social
gradient in mortality. Next, four leading SDH theories—life course, fundamental cause, social
capital, and health lifestyle theory—are reviewed with supporting studies. The article concludes with
an examination of neighborhood disadvantage, social networks, and perceived discrimination in
SDH research.
The article presents a framework for understanding the relationship between community garden participation, and the myriad ways gardens and participation lead to emotional, social, and health impacts. Existing empirical research relating community gardens to health behaviors, such as physical activity and diet, and longer-term chronic disease-related outcomes is summarized. The research areas discussed include the effects of community garden participation on individual, social, emotional, and environmental processes; health behaviors including diet and physical activity; and health outcomes such as self-rated health, obesity, and mental health. Other mechanisms through which community gardens may affect population health are described. Applying a multitheoretical lens to explore associations between community garden participation and health enables us to delineate key aspects of gardening that elicit positive health behaviors and multifactorial health assets that could be applied to designing other types of health interventions.
Recent literature suggests that a ‘shared politics of place’ attained through joint activities fosters social integration and provides people with a means to practice co-operation (Baumann 1996, Sanjek 1998, Sennett 2012). Such a ‘shared politics of place’ is most likely to occur in the context of public space conceptualized broadly as “the setting for everyday spatial behaviour of individuals and communities, emphasizing ordinary activities of citizens,” (Lownsbrough and Beunderman, 2007, p.8). Here we explore one element of such public space- urban agriculture sites- with a view to identifying the extent to which a ‘shared politics of place’ can be created and nurtured amongst the cultivating citizenry. The paper draws on data collected on allotment gardening sites in two urban contexts: Dublin (Ireland) and Belfast (Northern Ireland) over the period 2009 to 2013. We demonstrate the centrality of allotment cultivation to the generation of solidarity, mutuality and trust among participating citizens. Individuals engaging in allotment gardening in both Dublin and Belfast create and sustain civil interfaces - dismantling barriers, exchanging knowledge, challenging stereotypes, generating empathy and getting on with the business of simply getting on with their lives. The modus operandi of allotment gardening is predicated on a willingness to disregard social and ethno-national categorizations while on site. This is not to deny that such differences exist and persist, but allotments offer a ‘space of potential’ where those differences are, at least for a time, rendered less salient.
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.
The study examines the emergence of urban gardening activities in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Drawing on ethnographic and qualitative research conducted throughout the city between 2009 and 2012, it examines the ways in which various gardening projects in New Orleans exhibit different levels and scopes of political engagement, with a particular focus on how they manifest (sometimes in contradictory ways) in the projects' missions and practices. On the basis of these findings, it is argued that current conceptualisations of political gardening are too limiting and do not account for the nuances of how politics shape, challenge and materialise in urban gardening activities. By highlighting the ever-shifting social, economic, and political context of the post-disaster recovery, the study illustrates how urban gardening is inherently political, but cautions that the extent to which gardening can subvert social injustice in the city may be limited.
For many activists and scholars, urban agriculture in the Global North has become synonymous with sustainable food systems, standing in opposition to the dominant industrial agri-food system. At the same time, critical social scientists increasingly argue that urban agriculture programmes, by filling the void left by the “rolling back” of the social safety net, underwrite neoliberalisation. I argue that such contradictions are central to urban agriculture. Drawing on existing literature and fieldwork in Oakland, CA, I explain how urban agriculture arises from a protective counter-movement, while at the same time entrenching the neoliberal organisation of contemporary urban political economies through its entanglement with multiple processes of neoliberalisation. By focusing on one function or the other, however, rather than understanding such contradictions as internal and inherent, we risk undermining urban agriculture's transformative potential. Coming to terms with its internal contradictions can help activists, policy-makers and practitioners better position urban agriculture within coordinated efforts for structural change, one of many means to an end rather than an end unto itself.
This article treats social capital as a multidimensional phenomenon along which neighborhoods are differentially organized. The authors assess this notion by linking two original surveys carried out in Chicago based on community residents (N = 8,782) and positional leaders (N = 2,822) representing six organizational dimensions. These data are used to examine both the dimensionality and structural predictors of neighborhood social organization. Results show that the social capital of Chicago communities encapsulates four distinct dimensions at the residential level and two at the leadership level. Moreover, dimensions of leadership-based social capital are for the most part inversely related to resident-based social capital and differentially predicted by concentrated disadvantage, residential stability, and racial/ethnic diversity. Based on multidimensional scaling and clustering of the communities, the authors derive a conceptual typology highlighted by four distinct groups—Cosmopolitan Efficacy, Urban Villages, Institutional Alienation, and Conduct Norms. The authors discuss implications and suggest new directions for exploration of community differentiation.
Community gardens programs for social housing in Melbourne are part of attempts to engage immigrants in urban activities. The literature argues that the gardens provide space for migrants to meet other people and thus foster social inclusion, while at the same time providing space to preserve their cultural identity. This paper will investigate the adaptation of migrants within the garden setting, by considering the extent to which cultural practices in gardening affect their ability to adapt to the host country (Australia). The findings confirm a complex relationship between historical garden practices/culture and the reality of practices in the community gardens.
In this narrative inquiry, I explored a community garden as a social context in which social capital was produced, accessed, and used by a social network of community gardeners. In particular, I focused on the distribution of social capital among members of the garden group. My findings suggest social capital can be both a benefit and cost, depending upon the position a social actor occupies within a functioning social network. Based upon this finding, I encourage leisure researchers to critically analyze social capital and study its potential for inequitable or even corrupt application, as opposed to focusing exclusively on its collective value.
Community gardens have been a part of modern American culture since the late 19th century. Participation in community gardening has ebbed and flowed in response to changing socioeconomic conditions, and thus the current economic recession has reheightened public interest. In a review of the scholarly literature from 1999 to 2010, rigorous quantitative research studies on the effects of community gardens are found to be sparse; however, a larger body of qualitative data is available. Eleven themes related to the purposes, benefits of, and motivations for participating in community gardens are identified. Community gardens can serve as an effective tool for community-based practitioners in carrying out their roles within the arenas of organizing, development, and change.
This article reports on research undertaken with members of a Melbourne urban community garden to explore the extent to which such a natural amenity provides opportunities for enhancing social capital. It is apparent even from this small qualitative study that membership of ‘Dig In’ community garden offers many benefits to its members. These benefits include increased social cohesion (the sharing of values enabling identification of common aims and the sharing of codes of behaviour governing relationships), social support (having people to turn to in times of crisis) and social connections (the development of social bonds and networks). However, the study indicates that, at least in the early stages of development, such benefits do not necessarily extend beyond the garden setting. This raises a question about the time required to develop high levels of social capital, and points to the need for further research into ‘time’ and ‘space’ aspects of community gardens.
To determine the role Latino community gardens play in community development, open space, and civic agriculture, we conducted interviews with 32 community gardeners from 20 gardens, and with staff from 11 community gardening support non-profit organizations and government agencies. We also conducted observations in the gardens, and reviewed documents written by the gardeners and staff from 13 support organizations and agencies. In addition to being sites for production of conventional and ethnic vegetables and herbs, the gardens host numerous social, educational, and cultural events, including neighborhood and church gatherings, holiday par- ties, children's activities, school tours, concerts, health fairs, and voter registration drives. In some cases, the gar- dens also serve to promote community activism. The primary concern of gardeners is to secure land tenure in the face of pressures to develop the garden sites for housing. The support organizations and agencies provide help with land tenure, as well as with advocacy, organization, and horticultural practices. Although the role of the Latino gardens in community development appears to be more important than their role in open space or agricul- tural production, the gardens can also be viewed as unique ''participatory landscapes'' that combine aspects of all three movements, as well as provide a connection between immigrants and their cultural heritage.
This paper reviews the origins and definitions of social capital in the writings of Bourdieu, Loury, and Coleman, among other authors. It distinguishes four sources of social capital and examines their dynamics. Applications of the concept in the sociological literature emphasize its role in social control, in family support, and in benefits mediated by extrafamilial networks. I provide examples of each of these positive functions. Negative consequences of the same processes also deserve attention for a balanced picture of the forces at play. I review four such consequences and illustrate them with relevant examples. Recent writings on social capital have extended the concept from an individual asset to a feature of communities and even nations. The final sections describe this conceptual stretch and examine its limitations, I argue that, as shorthand for the positive consequences of sociability, social capital has a definite place in sociological theory. However, excessive extensions of the concept may jeopardize its heuristic value.
Community gardens are viewed as a potentially useful environmental change strategy to promote active and healthy lifestyles but the scientific evidence base for gardens is limited. As a step towards understanding whether gardens are a viable health promotion strategy for local communities, we set out to examine the social processes that might explain the connection between gardens, garden participation and health. We analyzed data from semi-structured interviews with community gardeners in Denver. The analysis examined social processes described by community gardeners and how those social processes were cultivated by or supportive of activities in community gardens. After presenting results describing these social processes and the activities supporting them, we discuss the potential for the place-based social processes found in community gardens to support collective efficacy, a powerful mechanism for enhancing the role of gardens in promoting health.
Recent studies have demonstrated that income inequality is related to mortality rates. It was hypothesized, in this study, that income inequality is related to reduction in social cohesion and that disinvestment in social capital is in turn associated with increased mortality.
In this cross-sectional ecologic study based on data from 39 states, social capital was measured by weighted responses to two items from the General Social Survey: per capita density of membership in voluntary groups in each state and level of social trust, as gauged by the proportion of residents in each state who believed that people could be trusted. Age-standardized total and cause-specific mortality rates in 1990 were obtained for each state.
Income inequality was strongly correlated with both per capita group membership (r = -.46) and lack of social trust (r = .76). In turn, both social trust and group membership were associated with total mortality, as well as rates of death from coronary heart disease, malignant neoplasms, and infant mortality.
These data support the notion that income inequality leads to increased mortality via disinvestment in social capital.
To determine the association between household participation in a community garden and fruit and vegetable consumption among urban adults.
Data were analyzed from a cross-sectional random phone survey conducted in 2003. A quota sampling strategy was used to ensure that all census tracts within the city were represented.
Flint, Michigan.
766 adults.
Fruit and vegetable intake was measured using questionnaire items from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Household participation in a community garden was assessed by asking the respondent if he or she, or any member of the household, had participated in a community garden project in the last year.
Generalized linear models and logistic regression models assessed the association between household participation in a community garden and fruit and vegetable intake, controlling for demographic, neighborhood participation, and health variables.
Adults with a household member who participated in a community garden consumed fruits and vegetables 1.4 more times per day than those who did not participate, and they were 3.5 times more likely to consume fruits and vegetables at least 5 times daily.
Household participation in a community garden may improve fruit and vegetable intake among urban adults.
Urban public spaces are sites of struggles over gentrification. In increasingly diverse cities, these public spaces also host interactions among people of different class, race, ethnicity, and immigration status. How do people share public spaces in contexts of diversity and gentrification? I analyze the conflicting ways of imagining shared spaces by drawing on an ethnographic study of a community garden in a diverse and gentrifying neighborhood in New York City, conducted between 2011 and 2013. I examine how conflicts among gardeners about the aesthetics of the garden and norms of conduct reproduce larger gentrification struggles over culture and resources. Those who wanted the garden to be a lush and orderly space drew on their privilege and resources to leverage support from institutional actors and push through a vision that resonated with aesthetic preferences of affluent residents and developers. At the same time, I found that the diversity, combined with several other characteristics, created openings for cultural disruption. Utilizing relationships built across dramatic lines of class, race, and immigration difference, less privileged gardeners were able to destabilize hierarchies and defend their visions of this public space. Conflict and messy deliberation—rather than harmonious community—facilitated engagement with difference.
Under the banner of food justice, the last few years has seen a profusion of projects focused on selling, donating, bringing or growing fresh fruits and vegetables in neighborhoods inhabited by African Americans — often at below market prices — or educating them to the quality of locally grown, seasonal, and organic food. The focus of this article is the subjects of such projects — those who enroll in such projects `to bring good food to others,' in this case undergraduate majors in Community Studies at the University of California at Santa Cruz who do six-month field studies with such organizations. Drawing on formal and informal communications with me, I show that they are hailed by a set of discourses that reflect whitened cultural histories, such as the value of putting one's hands in the soil. I show their disappointments when they find these projects lack resonance in the communities in which they are located. I then show how many come to see that current activism reflects white desires more than those of the communities they putatively serve. In this way, the article provides insight into the production and reproduction of whiteness in the alternative food movement, and how it might be disrupted. I conclude that more attention to the cultural politics of alternative food might enable whites to be more effective allies in anti-racist struggles.
Community gardens are enjoying a renaissance, thought to be due to people's desire to reconnect with food, nature and community. This paper presents results from an exploratory investigation of two community gardens in Nottingham, supported by regional and national contextual analysis. It examines the nature and construction of “community” in community gardens and how they benefit their local communities. Results from case-study work show how community gardens help to build cohesion and vitality in a community, contributing to the generation of bonding, bridging and linking social capital. The composition of these capitals varies between the case-study gardens, dependent on the type of community formed. Two categories of community garden are identified in the paper: “place-based” and “interest-based”. The former are more territorially embedded in the local community, while the latter may span across diverse communities, with the social capital generated remaining within an “interest community”. These categories may not always map neatly on to one community garden, although one category may be more immediately evident. The article also suggests directions for future research, including complementary research frameworks to further develop understandings of social capital metrics.
This article analyzes an overlooked innovative experience led by black women activists, who participate in urban agriculture as a way of reassessing their cultural roots and reclaiming personal power, freed from the constraints imposed by consumerism and marketing, on the supply of food in the city of Detroit. By farming, they demonstrate agency and self-determination in their efforts to build a sense of community. Using an ecofeminist perspective, this article examines the relationship between women's resistance and the environment. By focusing on women's urban gardening, the article broadens the definition to include less formal, but no less important, forms of resistance.
The article is divided into two parts. The first deals with the implementation of the project launched by the members of the Detroit Black Community Food Security Network (DBCFSN). Government statistics and secondary research provide the backdrop to the economic problems in the City of Detroit that triggered the community response. The second part presents women farmers' attempts to transform vacant land to create a community-based food system. These activists construct the farm as a community safe space, which operates as a creative, public outdoor classroom where they nurture activism and challenge the racial and class-based barriers to accessing healthy food. In addition to improving access to healthy food by repurposing vacant land, they are transforming their communities into safe and green spaces.
Pick any current issue of a journal such as Social Science & Medicine or the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health and one is bound to see a featured article about social capital and health. Search on Pubmed for “social capital and health”,
and one sees over 27,500 articles listed (as of December 2006). Enter the same search term in Google, and you get over 9 million
hits. Yet wind the clock back to circa 1996 and one would be hard pressed to find an article in the public health literature
that even mentioned this concept. In other words, within a short span of a decade, social capital has entered the mainstream
of public health discourse, where it is now the theme of professional conferences, as well as the topic of white papers put
out by government health agencies worldwide. For sure social capital was talked about in fields outside public health prior
to 1996 – in sociology (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1990), economics (Loury, 1992), and political science (Putnam, 1993) – but
the explosion of interest in applying the concept to public health is a comparatively recent phenomenon (Figure 1.1).
Neighborhood attachment relates to one’s emotional connection to physical and social environments. Such bonds are critical for shaping how people interact with their local environments, connect with others and may be vital for fostering sustainable health behavior change related to nutrition and physical activity. Using data from a population-based survey of neighborhood environments and health in Denver, Colorado (n = 410 respondents; n = 45 block-groups) and hierarchical linear modeling techniques, we examined the relationship between objective and perceived neighborhood conditions (e.g., crime, physical incivilities, sense of safety), social processes (e.g., collective efficacy) and recreational gardening and neighborhood attachment. Results indicate length of residency, collective efficacy, and home and community garden participation are associated with neighborhood attachment. Further research is warranted to consider neighborhood attachment as an intervening mechanism through which gardens and other outdoor everyday places may influence health behavior change.
Since the 1980’s organized garden projects have proliferated in a institutional settings associated with the “roll-out” neoliberal state and the sad consequences of neoliberalism more generally: jails, schools, hospitals and other clinical settings for “at-risk” populations. This article advances the concept “organized garden project” over the richly connotative, but inchoate term “community garden,” and links the long episodic history of garden projects with changing discourses about the supposedly transformative power of gardening practice for individual and social transformation. The article highlights two organized garden projects within the San Francisco Bay area, a chief locus in the movement to using organized garden projects to produce new individual and collective subjectivities. The case studies assess, from the typically unambiguous standpoint of the garden organizers, the nature of the subjectivity that gardening practice is supposed to produce, the need for such alternative subjectivity and the “difference” such alternatives are believed to make for the individual and in the wider social, political and economic milieu.
Video-based media spaces are designed to support casual interaction between intimate collaborators. Yet transmitting video is fraught with privacy concerns. Some researchers suggest that the video stream be filtered to mask out potentially sensitive ...
We considered the relationship between an urban adult population's fruit and vegetable consumption and several selected social and psychological processes, beneficial aesthetic experiences, and garden participation.
We conducted a population-based survey representing 436 residents across 58 block groups in Denver, Colorado, from 2006 to 2007. We used multilevel statistical models to evaluate the survey data.
Neighborhood aesthetics, social involvement, and community garden participation were significantly associated with fruit and vegetable intake. Community gardeners consumed fruits and vegetables 5.7 times per day, compared with home gardeners (4.6 times per day) and nongardeners (3.9 times per day). Moreover, 56% of community gardeners met national recommendations to consume fruits and vegetables at least 5 times per day, compared with 37% of home gardeners and 25% of nongardeners.
Our study results shed light on neighborhood processes that affect food-related behaviors and provides insights about the potential of community gardens to affect these behaviors. The qualities intrinsic to community gardens make them a unique intervention that can narrow the divide between people and the places where food is grown and increase local opportunities to eat better.
Current environmental and health challenges require us to identify ways to better align aesthetics, ecology, and health. At the local level, community gardens are increasingly praised for their therapeutic qualities. They also provide a lens through which we can explore relational processes that connect people, ecology and health. Using key-informant interview data, this research explores gardeners' tactile, emotional, and value-driven responses to the gardening experience and how these responses influence health at various ecological levels (n = 67 participants, 28 urban gardens). Our findings demonstrate that gardeners' aesthetic experiences generate meaning that encourages further engagement with activities that may lead to positive health outcomes. Gardeners directly experience nearby nature by 'getting their hands dirty' and growing food. They enjoy the way vegetables taste and form emotional connections with the garden. The physical and social qualities of garden participation awaken the senses and stimulate a range of responses that influence interpersonal processes (learning, affirming, expressive experiences) and social relationships that are supportive of positive health-related behaviors and overall health. This research suggests that the relational nature of aesthetics, defined as the most fundamental connection between people and place, can help guide community designers and health planners when designing environment and policy approaches to improve health behaviors.
This paper provides a review and critique of empirical research on perceived discrimination and health. The patterns of racial disparities in health suggest that there are multiple ways by which racism can affect health. Perceived discrimination is one such pathway and the paper reviews the published research on discrimination and health that appeared in PubMed between 2005 and 2007. This recent research continues to document an inverse association between discrimination and health. This pattern is now evident in a wider range of contexts and for a broader array of outcomes. Advancing our understanding of the relationship between perceived discrimination and health will require more attention to situating discrimination within the context of other health-relevant aspects of racism, measuring it comprehensively and accurately, assessing its stressful dimensions, and identifying the mechanisms that link discrimination to health.
It is hypothesized that collective efficacy, defined as social cohesion among neighbors combined with their willingness to
intervene on behalf of the common good, is linked to reduced violence. This hypothesis was tested on a 1995 survey of 8782
residents of 343 neighborhoods in Chicago, Illinois. Multilevel analyses showed that a measure of collective efficacy yields
a high between-neighborhood reliability and is negatively associated with variations in violence, when individual-level characteristics,
measurement error, and prior violence are controlled. Associations of concentrated disadvantage and residential instability
with violence are largely mediated by collective efficacy.
Social capital has become a popular subject in the literature on determinants of health. The concept of social capital has been used in the sociological, political science, and economic development literatures, as well as in the health inequalities literature. Analysis of its use in the health inequalities literature suggests that each theoretical tradition has conceptualized social capital differently. Health researchers have employed a wide range of social capital measures, borrowing from several theoretical traditions. Given the wide variation in these measures and an apparent lack of consistent theoretical or empirical justification for their use, conclusions about the likely role of "social capital" on population health may be overstated or even misleading. Elements of a research agenda are proposed to further elucidate the potential role of factors currently subsumed under the rubric of "social capital."
There has been vigorous debate between the “social capital” and “neomaterialist” interpretations of the epidemiological evidence regarding socioeconomic determinants of health. We argue that levels of income inequality, social capital, and health in a community may all be consequences of more macrolevel social and economic processes that influence health across the life course.
We discuss the many reasons for the prominence of social capital theory, and the potential drawbacks to making social capital a major focus of social policy. Intervening in communities to increase their levels of social capital may be ineffective, create resentment, and overload community resources, and to take such an approach may be to “blame the victim” at the community level while ignoring the health effects of macrolevel social and economic policies.
This paper analyses the relationship between social capital and population health. The analysis is carried out within an econometric model of population health in 19 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries using panel data covering three different time periods. Social capital is measured by the proportion of people who say that that they generally trust other people and by membership in voluntary associations. The model performs well in explaining health outcomes. We find very little statistically significant evidence that the standard indicators of social capital have a positive effect on population health. By contrast, per capita income and the proportion of health expenditure financed by the government are both significantly and positively associated with better health outcomes. The paper casts doubt upon the widely accepted hypothesis that social capital has a positive effect on health and illustrates the importance of testing this kind of hypothesis in an extended model.
Relative to non-Latino whites, Latinos in the United States have a lower socioeconomic status (SES) profile, but a lower all-cause mortality rate. Because lower SES is associated with poorer overall health, a great deal of controversy surrounds the Latino mortality paradox. We employed a secondary data analysis of the 1991 National Health Interview Survey to test the health behavior and acculturation hypotheses, which have been proposed to explain this paradox. These hypotheses posit that: (1) Latinos have more favorable health behaviors and risk factor profiles than non-Latino whites, and (2) Health behaviors and risk factors become more unfavorable with greater acculturation. Specific health behaviors and risk factors studied were: smoking, alcohol use, leisure-time exercise activity, and body mass index (BMI). Consistent with the health behaviors hypothesis, Latinos relative to non-Latino whites were less likely to smoke and drink alcohol, controlling for sociodemographic factors. Latinos, however, were less likely to engage in any exercise activity, and were more likely to have a high BMI compared with non-Latino whites, after controlling for age and SES. Results provided partial support for the acculturation hypothesis. After adjusting for age and SES, higher acculturation was associated with three unhealthy behaviors (a greater likelihood of high alcohol intake, current smoking, a high BMI), but improvement in a fourth (greater likelihood of recent exercise). Gender-specific analyses indicated that the observed differences between Latinos and non-Latino whites, as well as the effects of acculturation on health behaviors, varied across men and women. Results suggest that the health behaviors and acculturation hypotheses may help to at least partially explain the Latino mortality paradox. The mechanisms accounting for the relationship between acculturation and risky behaviors have yet to be identified.
Within the past several years, a considerable body of research on social capital has emerged in public health. Although offering the potential for new insights into how community factors impact health and well being, this research has received criticism for being undertheorized and methodologically flawed. In an effort to address some of these limitations, this paper applies Pierre Bourdieu's (1986) [Bourdieu, P. (1986). Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood] social capital theory to create a conceptual model of neighborhood socioeconomic processes, social capital (resources inhered within social networks), and health. After briefly reviewing the social capital conceptualizations of Bourdieu and Putnam, I attempt to integrate these authors' theories to better understand how social capital might operate within neighborhoods or local areas. Next, I describe a conceptual model that incorporates this theoretical integration of social capital into a framework of neighborhood social processes as health determinants. Discussion focuses on the utility of this Bourdieu-based neighborhood social capital theory and model for examining several under-addressed issues of social capital in the neighborhood effects literature and generating specific, empirically testable hypotheses for future research.
Drawing upon Bourdieu's [1986. The forms of capital. In: Richardson, J.G. (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Greenwood, New York, pp. 241-258.] social capital theory, I test a conceptual model of neighborhood conditions and social capital - considering relationships between neighborhood social capital forms (social support, social leverage, informal social control, and neighborhood organization participation) and adult health behaviors (smoking, binge drinking) and perceived health, as well as interactions between neighborhood social capital and individuals' access to that social capital. Analyzing Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey data linked with tract level census data, results suggest that specific social capital forms were directly associated with both positive and negative health outcomes. Additionally, residents' neighborhood attachment moderated relationships between various social capital forms and health. Future studies should consider social capital resources and the role of differential access to such resources for promoting or compromising health.