Upload
lauren-campbell
View
127
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 1 -
The community garden movement has gained momentum in the last ten years. As
early as 2001 it is estimated that there are approximately 150,000 community gardens in
the United States ( Kantor 25). In fact community gardens are becoming increasingly
popular in diverse urban areas such as Los Angeles, New York, Toronto, and Denver.
Even Richmond, Virginia is jumping on the community garden bandwagon. Look a little
closer around Richmond and you can find the Grace Arents Community Garden in
Oregon Hill, Tricycle Gardens, and the newly established plot by Whole Foods run by
Backyard Farmer. According to the American Planning Association community gardens
are “shared open spaces where individuals garden together to grow fresh, healthful, and
affordable fruits and vegetables. Community gardens exist in suburban and rural areas,
but are more common in urban settings” (McCormick et al. 2009, 404) . In urban areas
community gardens are commonly planted on vacant city owned land. Community
gardens can take on many forms and sizes. Some examples of community gardens
include school gardens, small scale urban farms, and neighborhood cooperative plots. No
matter what the form , all of these gardens have a shared sense of purpose combined with
a sense of mutual ownership of those involved.
During a time when “increased urbanization and associated social isolation are
frequently blamed for the health problems confronting modern society” the community
garden movement is stepping up to the plate to address such far reaching issues
(J.Kingsley & M. Townshend, 2006, 525). The areas in most need of community gardens
are those in blighted , poverty stricken neighborhoods. In these areas community gardens
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 2 -
seek to address such concerns of public health that include providing access to healthy
foods, facilitating positive social interactions, providing nutrition education, and teaching
community building. Public health pioneers, community revitalization organizers, and
citizens alike believe in the power of the community garden movement to both improve
health and community involvement. There is a growing body of both quantitative and
qualitative evidence that community gardens, if implemented properly, can be change
agents in the field of public health by providing access to healthy food, an avenue for
healthy activities, and by improving social dynamics within individual communities as
well as in society at large.
Access to healthy food is often cited as a problem in low-income urban areas.
According to Liz Scott Kantor of the USDA (2001) the individuals in these blighted
communities often have less access to cheaper and better quality foods (20). These
individuals do not have the transportation or the money necessary to get to grocery stores
that provide cheaper and fresher foods. In fact the USDA found in 1997 that on average
supermarkets are 10% cheaper than the convenience stores that are located in poorer
neighborhoods ( Kantor , 2000, 20). Instead the local mini-marts become the only source
of food in the area and these food sources are far from healthy. Nor are they affordable.
These stores take advantage of the fact that the poorer individuals in the area do not have
the money or transportation necessary to give them access to more affordable healthy
foods. Households are food secure when they have access to enough fresh and
affordable food that can sustain “healthy active lifestyles” ( Kantor, 2001, 20).
Community gardens are an example of efforts to increase food security in these poverty
stricken communities. Community gardens are effective at this because they provide a
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 3 -
quick, easy, and affordable solution to the problem at hand. Community gardens are
affordable in their relative input to output ratio. For example, a “New Jersey community
garden plot (about 700 square feet) produced vegetables worth approximately $500
during an average growing season, whereas the average cost of inputs was only $25.11”
(Alaimo et al., 2008, 99). The close proximity of community gardens to the individuals
they serve also is key regarding food security , because ultimately this increases access
by limiting the distance traveled to obtain healthy food. In turn this also reduces
transportation costs, which increases the affordability aspect of the healthy food.
Evidence shows us the power of community gardens as tools for providing access
to healthy foods. Because of this, many policymakers are coming forward as proponents
of the community garden movement. One of the many proponents is Dr. Cecilio Moron
(2006), Senior Food & Nutrition officer of the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture
Organization. Dr. Moron (2006) maintains that community gardens are an example of
food-based nutrition interventions that are an integral part of providing food security to
such urban communities (S20). Locating the gardens in low-income areas is not the only
step necessary in successful food security nutrition interventions. Community gardens
must initiate participation of the residents to help promote the far reaching effectiveness
of the nutrition intervention.
Increasing fruit and vegetable intake is one of the most important goals of
community gardens in the realm of nutrition interventions. This is of the utmost
importance because increased fruit and vegetable intake has been associated with
decreasing the risk of diseases including heart disease and cancers (McCormick et al.
2010, 399). Over the years a variety of studies have been conducted in an effort to
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 4 -
assess the effectiveness of community gardens at promoting such diet changes. More
often than not the research shows that participation in community gardens is directly
linked to an increased intake of healthy foods. As early as 1991 a Pennsylvania State
study qualified this connection when the researchers discovered that “that community
gardeners consumed several vegetables more often than their non-gardening
counterparts” ( Kantor, 2001 , 25). Numerous studies since the Penn State study have
been conducted which quantify this connection. The 2003 California Healthy Cities and
Communities Field Action Report revealed that in the diverse city of Loma Linda,
California a community garden group consisting of 40 gardeners reported that 35% of
participants “Increased average consumption of fruits and vegetables from 3 to 3.71
servings per day” (Twiss et al., 2003, 1436). In 2008 , Dr. Katherine Alaimo , Elizabeth
Packnett , Richard Miles , and Dr. Daniel Kruger conducted a more in depth research
study in Flint, Michigan, which assessed the connection between participation in urban
community gardens and fruit and vegetable intake. The Alaimo survey (2008) is one of
the largest studies on the topic of community gardens and fruit and vegetable intake to
date with a total of 766 adult participants. The results of the Alaimo study (2008) were
astoundingly similar to the results demonstrated by the CHCC Field Action Report. The
Alaimo survey (2008) in Flint Michigan concluded that there was increase in fruit and
vegetable consumption among garden participants versus non-gardeners whereas,
“respondents with a household member who participated in a community garden
consumed fruits and vegetables 4.4 times per day, as compared to 3.3 times for
respondents without a gardening household member. Of respondents from gardening
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 5 -
households, 32.4% consumed fruits and vegetables on average at least 5 times daily, as
compared to 17.8% for those with nongardening household members” (96)
Lacey Arnson McCormack, Dr. Melissa Nelson Laska, Dr. Nicole Larson, and Dr. Mary
Story (2010) conducted a review of all the existing research on fruit and vegetable intake
of urban gardeners and farmers market participants from 1980 to 2009. In their review
McCormick et al. (2010) found that there were few studies that actually try to quantify
this connection, however the authors did uncover four cross-sectional studies that found
similar results reporting that participation in community gardens was indeed linked to an
increase of fruit and vegetable consumption (406). Further more McCormick et al.
affirmed that the Alaimo study in Flint , Michigan “was a well-designed study conducted
in an underserved area where access to fruits and vegetables was limited” (406)
The McCormick et al. review uncovered other healthy results in addition to
increased fruit and vegetable intake. McCormick et al. also found that garden
participants in the University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension program, which was
comprised of a variety of community gardens, reported eating not only more vegetables
but also a greater variety of vegetables daily (406). Certainly participation is a key
element in the viability of community gardens as tools of nutritional interventions.
However, participation in community gardens is not the only element necessary for
successful nutritional changes.
Participation in garden programs coupled with nutritional education programs can
also yield effective results, especially in children. Dr. Romona Robinson, Dr. Mary
Story, and Stephanie Heim’s (2009) review of the Impact of Garden-based Youth
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 6 -
Nutrition Intervention Programs illustrated that such combined programs have the
capability to increase fruit and vegetable intake of children as well. For example
Robinson et al.’s research (2009) uncovered the McAleese and Rankin study in South-
East Idaho that evaluated the fruit and vegetable intake of sixth graders participating in a
combined experiential and educational community garden program in which,
“Students participating in the nutrition education combined with garden experiences in-
creased significantly their daily intake of fruits and vegetables from 1.9 to 4.5 servings,
when compared to 2.1 to 2.2 servings among students in the nutrition- education only
group and 2.4 to 2.0 servings among students in the control group. In addition, students
participating in the nutrition education combined with garden experiences significantly
increased vitamin A, vitamin C and fiber intake.” (276)
Information from the California Healthy Cities and Communities (CHCC) Field Action
reports showed results similar to the McAleese and Rankin study. For example 348
participants in West Hollywood, CA school gardens that combined nutritional education
with gardening reported not only a 10% increase in daily vegetable and fruit consumption
but also a 6% increase in daily physical activity ( Twiss et al., 2003, 1436). The above
research shows a clear correlation between participation in community gardening and
intake of healthy foods as well as participation in beneficial physical activity. Moreover,
studies such as the McAleese and Rankin study , demonstrate the way in which an
ongoing education program combined with gardening activities is key to increasing the
effectiveness of the nutritional implications of community gardens.
In addition to being useful in the field of nutrition intervention, community
gardens are showing positive outcomes in community building. Community gardens
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 7 -
become a place for participants to connect the tangibles acts of gardening and producing
fresh foods to the intangible benefits that play out individually and community wide. All
across the United States the voices of the community garden movement are heralding the
widespread effects that the movement has on positively changing the social fabric of their
neighborhoods.
On the most basic level community gardens serve as a sacred space in urban areas
that are often plagued by poverty and crime. An overwhelming number of community
garden participants and researchers have proclaimed that the community garden setting
makes them feel safer amidst the unsteady world that surrounds them. As early as 1995
urban studies academic researcher Karen Schmelkopf uncovered these sentiments.
Schmelkopf’s examination of a community garden in a lower income community of
Loisda, New York, found that most community garden participants in Loisda “became
involved to have a safe outdoor place as an option to their crowded apartments,” and that
these outdoor places are “sanctuaries away from the dangers, stresses, and temptations of
the street” ( 373, 378). Furthermore Schmelkopf (1995) found evidence “of increased
stability on the street ,with more people around and increased neighborhood friendliness
making the vicinity relatively safe than blocks with no gardens” (376). Resident’s
claims of safety were corroborated with evidence from a 2007 research study conducted
in a similarly crime ridden community in South-East Toronto. The study, conducted by
Dr. Sarah Wakefield et al. (2007), found community gardens in that locality actually had
no incidences of assault or vandalism in the community garden areas (99). Clearly
community gardens make people feel safe by providing a buffer to the less healthy
elements in the surrounding area.
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 8 -
Through creating an overall safe atmosphere, community gardens also create an
atmosphere that allows for more far reaching community building applications. Ellen
Teig et al. (2009), Director of the Boulder Women’s Center, explained that not only are
community gardens useful “buffers to violence crime” but that the relationships between
gardeners also builds safety and community capacity ( 1122). In the article Collective
Efficacy in Denver Colorado: Strengthening neighborhoods and health through
Community Gardens (2009) , Teig et al.’s qualitative study on gardener relationships in
Denver uncovered that interactions in the community garden environment ,
“defined acceptable behaviors around the garden place. Such social norms that discourage
violence and crime can be contagious, diffusing across neighborhood boundaries (Sampson,
2003). The social norms and standards expressed by the gardeners in this study, such as the
upkeep of the garden’s appearance or the protection of safe public spaces, have the potential to
become ingrained in a neighborhood and then spread through wider social ties to members of
other communities”(1121).
Ellen Teig et al. (2009) described this phenomena as positive place-based social
dynamics whereas community gardens become the place by which positive social norms
are dispersed (1120).
The phenomena of positive place based social dynamics is all too common within
the community garden setting. Participants in the community garden movement often
describe the garden itself as a place to learn such positive social norms such as healthy
communication, collaboration, and cooperation. The Teig et al. study in Denver revealed
that the “the garden environment encouraged gardeners to exchange actions and
assistance
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 9 -
with one another” (Teig et al., 2009, 1117). One gardener in Denver also described the
community garden as the “infrastructure [that facilitates] kids learning, neighbors
socializing and becoming comfortable and feeling they have a real community, those
things are the products in addition to whatever is grown”( Teig et al.,2009, 1119).
M.L. Olhmer et al. (2009) similarly contend that the community garden setting is a place
where individuals learn positive social integration, self efficacy, and “facilitate volunteer
skills, abilities, and relationships in distressed communities” (302). All of these activities
contribute to building healthy social capital not only with individuals but also among the
community. Urban studies researcher J. Kingsley and M. Townshend (2006) describe
social capital as having the elements of “community, sense of place, social networks,
trust and reciprocity”(526). Community gardens facilitate these elements, which is
extremely important when working towards building a strong interconnected community
comprised of empowered individuals. This interconnectedness also provides “the
potential to mediate health by encouraging social support and access to resources that are
protective against poor health” (Teig et al.,2009 1120).
These elements of social capital are compounded when the community garden
setting provides opportunities for individuals to learn from each other. Through intensive
mutual interaction participants of community gardens are encouraged to utilize healthy
communication skills in decision making and conflict resolution. This includes using
appropriate garden wide communication which Teig et al. note is “paramount to
resolving conflicts and serves as a good model for community healing and neighborhood
strengthening”(1118). Within the community garden setting there is a necessity for
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 10 -
mutual interaction among all the participants which facilitates transcendence over the
typical social barriers of race, gender, mental/physical disabilities, age, and socio-
economic status. The culmination of all these interactions and learning activities results
in strengthened bonds of the participants.
Furthermore, the mere act of working together towards common goals has
community building applications as well. For example in South-East Toronto there was
an “individual sense of pride emerging from the gardening and associated programs”
which Wakefield et al. (2007) found often “increased attachment to the community”
(98). Olhmer et. al (2009) also found that in 55% of the gardens they researched “having
a community garden in a neighborhood helped to improve residents’ attitudes towards
their neighborhood evidenced by improved maintenance of other properties, decreased
litter, and increased pride” (383).
Clearly community gardens build personal relationships and community strength.
The level of community power that the gardens implore, however, is directly related to
how effectively the community garden sustains interest from its populace. According to
Dr. LeeAnne Milburn et al. (2010) “the two factors most threatening the long-term
viability of gardens [are] lack of sustained interest and the loss of land”(74). An
organized implementation plan is key in sustaining interest. There are a number of
elements that are essential in implementing a garden that is influential in community
health interventions. First and foremost an effective community garden must have strong
leadership to invigorate the citizens to volunteer their time and energy. Milburn et. al.
(2010) suggest that “mentoring and leadership training in the first three years of a
garden's operation sustains leadership capacity” (78). As evidenced from the Robinson et
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 11 -
al. review creating a garden program that links education to garden activities is also very
important. The educational activities should relate the importance of the garden and the
benefits that the garden will provide the community. This could come in the form of
nutrition education, skills building workshops, environmental awareness activities, and
cooking classes that utilize the foods grown. Ultimately these “new learning experiences
[will] increase people's interest, investment, and ownership in the project” (Milburn et al.,
2010, 78). The process of education must be ongoing to sustain interest. A viable long
term garden needs more than just sustained interest to yield long term results. The most
important element for community gardens to achieve long term results in improving
community health is securing land tenure.
It should be noted that despite the fact that there exists a substantial number of
community garden case studies on the books today, there are very few studies that
examine the community garden’s long-term effectiveness at improving the health of
neighborhoods and individuals alike. Although all of case studies reviewed in this paper
show positive immediate implications for change, it makes one wonder how long will
these changes positively influence the surrounding communities. The unfortunate
circumstance in providing long term evidence is that community gardens are rarely long
term entities . More often than not the gardens are established as temporary projects on
vacant city land of which there is no secured land tenure. Unsecured land tenure is cited
as one of the largest barriers to the success of community gardens in providing long term
health solutions (Kantor, 2001, 25). This ultimately effects the enduring viability of
community gardens as change agents. That being said, the evidence abound
demonstrates that community gardens do deliver beneficial outcomes in the short term,
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 12 -
which suggests that they may also have to potential to deliver long term results as well.
The issue remains that without secured land tenure we will never fully realize the wide
range of benefits that community gardens bestow on the collective citizenry. More needs
to be done in terms of government collaboration with the local citizens to ensure that
secured land tenure is achieved. This could involve creating green space protection
boundaries in urban areas that gardens could be best utilized. Once more community
gardens are established with secured land tenure, more in depth research evaluations
should commence to deduce how effective community gardens are at promoting long
lasting community health promotion.
Undoubtedly community gardens are a place for individuals to be in touch with a
variety of healthy activities. Through strategically locating in disenfranchised
neighborhoods, the gardens are able to provide poorer people access to healthy and
affordable foods as well as provide a safe space recreation. Participation in the garden
also puts people in direct connection with understanding the importance of nutritional
food, which facilitates healthy diet changes. Moreover there are a wide range of social
capital and community building applications within the community garden setting. It is
through building individual social capital that the community garden becomes a place to
“nurture community capacity” in a way that co-founder and director of the Center for
Civic Partnerships Joan Twiss (2003) believes also , “increases the effectiveness of
community health interventions”(1435). The research displayed in this paper mirrors
such ongoing trends of beneficial results in terms of promoting immediate healthful
changes in both the individual participants and the peripheral community. More needs to
be done to facilitate the establishment of long term community gardens so that there can
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 13 -
long term health changes. Once community garden organizers have secured land tenure,
they must take a multifaceted approach to implementing their vision in way that
invigorates the community to stay involved in the project. This ultimately will yield a
vast array of positive outcomes that will permeate into larger community culture.
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 14 -
Works Cited Alaimo, K., Packnett, E., Miles, R., & Kruger, D. (2008). Fruit and Vegetable Intake
among Urban Community Gardeners. Journal of Nutrition Education & Behavior, 40(2), 94-101. doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2006.12.003.
Kantor, Liz Scott.( Jan-April 2001) Community Food Security Programs Improve Food Access. Food Review 24 (1), 20-26.
Kingsley, J., & Townsend, M. (2006). ‘Dig In’ to Social Capital: Community Gardens as Mechanisms for Growing Urban Social Connectedness. Urban Policy & Research, 24(4), 525-537. doi:10.1080/08111140601035200.
McCormack, L., Laska, M., Larson, N., & Story, M. (2010). Review of the Nutritional Implications of Farmers' Markets and Community Gardens: A Call for Evaluation and Research Efforts. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110(3), 399-408. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2009.11.023.
Milburn, L., & Vail, B. (2010). Sowing the Seeds of Success. Landscape Journal, 29(1), 71-89. Retrieved from Environment Complete database.
Moron, Cecilio. (2006). Food-based nutrition interventions at community level. British Journal of Nutrition 96 (Suppl 1) : S20-2.
Olhmer,M.L., Meadowcroft, P., Freed, K. and Lewis, E. (2009) Community Gardening and Community Development: Individual, Social, and Community Benefits of a Community Conservation Program. Journal of Community Practice, 17(4): 377-399.
Robinson – O’Brian, Ramona, et al. (2009) Impact of garden-based youth nutrition intervention programs: a review. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109(2): 273-280. http://sfx.library.vcu.edu/vcu?sid=Entrez
%3APubMed&id=pmid%3A19167954& sn=0002-8223
Schmelzkopf, Karen. (1995). Urban Community Gardens as Contested Space.Geographic Review 85 (3), 364 – 381. http://www.jstor.org/stable/215279.
Community Gardens as Change Agents in Community Health InterventionsDecember 15th, 2010 - 15 -
Works Cited
Teig, E., Amulya, J., Bardwell, L., Buchenau, M., Marshall, J., & Litt, J. (2009). Collective efficacy in Denver, Colorado: Strengthening neighborhoods and health through community gardens. Health & Place, 15(4), 1115-1122. Retrieved from CINAHL Plus with Full Text database.
Twiss, J., Dickinson, J., Duma, S., Kleinman, T., Paulsen, H., & Rilveria, L. (2003). Field action report. Community gardens: lessons learned from California healthy cities and communities. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1435-1438. Retrieved from CINAHL Plus with Full Text database.
Wakefield, S., Yeudall, F., Taron, C., Reynolds, J., & Skinner, A. (2007). Growing urban health: Community gardening in South-East Toronto. Health Promotion International, 22(2), 92-101. doi:10.1093/heapro/dam001.