Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

Inclusive community gardens : planning for inclusive and welcoming spaces in Vancouver Lowcock, Ashley Sarah Aug 31, 2014

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
310-SCARP_2014_gradproject_Lowcock.pdf [ 16.24MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 310-1.0075860.json
JSON-LD: 310-1.0075860-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 310-1.0075860-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 310-1.0075860-rdf.json
Turtle: 310-1.0075860-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 310-1.0075860-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 310-1.0075860-source.json
Full Text
310-1.0075860-fulltext.txt
Citation
310-1.0075860.ris

Full Text

Planning for Inclusive and  Welcoming Spaces in Vancouver Inclusive Community Gardens This project was initiated through a Master’s Project proposal for the School of Community and Regional Planning (SCARP) and supported by the Greenest City Scholars Program: a collaboration between the City of Vancouver and UBC Sustainability. The current document  became part of the forthcoming Green-est City Scholar Project entitled: Community Gardens: Not Just Vibrant Green Spaces—which aims to con-tribute to Goal 10 of the Greenest City Action Plan (2011).    Thank you to my SCARP Project Supervisor Stephanie Chang and Greenest City Mentor Thien Phan for all their support, draft edits, and excellent suggestions and direction. Thank you, also, to Wendy Mendez and James O’Neill, of the City of Vancouver Social Policy Food Group, for their valuable advice and com-­ments.  Thank you to Cinthia Page at Can You Dig It! Possibilities, for inviting me to attend the CYDI Garden Coali-tion Dialogues and for her many contributions to the planning guide.   This project would not be possible without the expertise of several champions of local food including the fantastic number of community garden coordinators who welcomed me into their gardens and sat with me during work parties and many conversations with gardeners at local community garden events.  This project relied on the time taken by many of Vancouver's Community Gardeners and Coordinators to fill out the Community Gardener Survey certified by the UBC Behavioural Research Ethics Board Certifi-cate#H14-00891.  Thank You,  Ashley Lowcock MSc. School of Community and Regional Planning University of British Columbia Acknowledgements Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  ........................................................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE AND OUTLINE ......................................................................................................................................... 2 THE VANCOUVER CONTEXT .................................................................................................................................. 3 Growing in cities ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 How to Build Inclusivity .......................................................................................................................................... 4  Growing on City Land ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Growing on Parks Land ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Section ONE: What it Means to be Inclusive INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY GARDENS ...................................................................................................................... 9 Current Strategies for inclusive Community Spaces  ....................................................................................... 9 What it Means to be Inclusive  ............................................................................................................................. 9 Five components of Inclusion .............................................................................................................................. 12 Best Practices .......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Section TWO: Growing together, Opportunities for inclusion in Vancouver INCLUSIVITY IN VANCOUVER ................................................................................................................................ 21 Snapshot of Vancouver Gardens ....................................................................................................................... 21 Vancouver’s Community Gardeners ................................................................................................................. 22 Inclusivity of Vancouver’s Community Gardens .............................................................................................. 25 CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES ..................................................................................................................... 27 Challenges of Inclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 27 Support for Inclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 28 Importance of Programming ............................................................................................................................... 29 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................ 30 Section THREE: How to Plan for Inclusivity GROWING TOGETHER  ........................................................................................................................................... 37 Garden Culture in Vancouver ............................................................................................................................. 37 Why Does Inclusion Matter? ................................................................................................................................. 38 HOW TO BUILD INCLUSION .................................................................................................................................... 39 Planning for Inclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 39 Elements to Consider ............................................................................................................................................. 40 Process of Inclusive Planning................................................................................................................................ 41 Five Goals of Inclusive Planning .......................................................................................................................... 42 QUICK GUIDE TO PLANNING  ............................................................................................................................... 53 References .................................................................................................................................................................. 55 Appendix A—Community Gardener Survey: Questions and Responses ......................................................................... 56 Appendix B—Community Garden Coordinator Survey: Questions and Responses ....................................................... 59 Tables Table 1: Five A’s of Food Justice and Relation to Community Gardens  ....................................12 Table 2: Chi square tests were performed for each demographic group of gardeners  .......23 Table 3: Percentage of gardeners experiencing meaningful change in experiences ...........26 Table 4: Preferred form of external support ......................................................................................29  Figures Figure 1: Motivation for joining a community garden in Vancouver.  .........................................24 Figure 2: Intent and the outcomes coordinators felt for each factor of inclusivity ...................25 Figure 3: Percent of positive responses by participants from gardens with high  and low intent towards inclusivity   ....................................................................................27  Qualitative Snapshots A. Stories from the Garden: Growing alongside Industry  ..............................................................8 B. Stories from the Garden: Mount Pleasant  ....................................................................................19 C. Stories from the Garden: the East Side .........................................................................................35  Demographic and Spatial Analysis Inset One: Community Spaces and Demographics .......................................................................31 Inset Two: Gardens and the Greenest City .......................................................................................33     List of Tables and Figures  1 The City of Vancouver’s Food Strategy (2013) de-­scribes a just and sustainable food system as one where ‘food production, processing, distribution, consumption and waste management are inte-grated to enhance the environmental, econom-ic, social and nutritional well-being of Vancouver and its residents’1. To bolster community well-being through food systems, community food as-sets must be physically, economically and social-ly accessible to all citizens. Disparity in social ac-cessibility places pressure on Vancouver’s Food Strategy goals, which aim to increase food ac-cess to all citizens, particularly in potentially non-inclusionary food initiatives, such as community gardens.  This document provides some context for com-munity gardens in Vancouver, identifies current benefits and values associated with gardens and their members, and provides a Community Gar-den Planning Toolkit designed to assist leaders and gardeners in the creation of more welcom-ing and inclusive gardens.  Gardens are of special interest due to their high visibility, role in citizen activism and engagement, capacity for skills and network building, and, per-haps most importantly, their localization on land that is often publically owned.  Gardens are a common feature in Vancouver neighbourhoods and a hub for fostering neighbourhood cohesion and resilience. In this study, a deeper under-standing of these unique spaces was informed by a variety of sources both qualitative and quanti-tative. The concept of inclusivity was explored through consultation of existing community gar-den guidelines; participation in dialogues with Can You Dig It (CYDI) — a coalition of local gar-deners in MetroVancouver; and visits to commu-nity garden events in Vancouver. A snapshot of inclusivity in Vancouver was gathered through a survey of 223 community gardeners and 20 com-munity garden coordinators.   Regardless of their demographics, since joining a community garden, respondents were found to:  Build neighbourhood cohesion by meeting more of their neighbours and building more trusting relationships  Feel a more meaningful sense of belonging to the community and participate in more com-munity projects  Experience a higher quality of life, a greater sense of accomplishment and greater physi-cal and mental well-being  Transform underutilized spaces to grow food as a collective and replace produce they would normally purchase from conventional grocery stores However, participants in Vancouver’s community gardens have been, for the most part, under-representative of the diversity in communities that the gardens serve2. While not necessarily inten-tional, community gardens may not feel inclusive and welcoming  as a result of differences across social barriers, such as: cultural norms with re-spect to urban agriculture, food preferences, and preparation; as well as technical barriers in-cluding physical accessibility and language. Dia-logues with community leaders and garden coor-dinators revealed that unless there is intent be-hind building inclusion, bridging soft and tech-nical barriers, and providing programming around culture, new immigrants, seniors, and those with accessibility challenges are unlikely to participate fully in community gardens. Participa-tion is important not only because of the many personal benefits experienced by community gardeners, but also in terms of equity around public spaces and creating a broader sense of belonging in Vancouver communities.  Executive Summary  2 The inspiration for this project follows from a re-cent UBC study on Vancouver community gar-den spaces  investigating the issue of equity and social differences. Seto (2012) found that, of the 197 respondents from 27 gardens across Vancou-ver, some population groups (particularly visible minority, non-English language speaking, lower-income, and lower-educational status individu-als) were disproportionately under-represented among the gardeners surveyed—when com-pared to City of Vancouver census statistics2.  While not necessarily intentional, Seto (2012) found that exclusion could result from differences across cultural norms with respect to agriculture, food preferences, and preparation. Differences are likely to result in misunderstanding around so-cial practices, perceptions, and motivations around community gardening. More technical barriers include physical accessibility and lan-guage. Baker (2004) notes that strong local food networks, coordinators with appropriate lan-guage skills, sustainable funding, and support from the local municipality are necessary com-ponents for successful community gardens3. The next step for the City is to create a better un-derstanding of what it means to be inclusive and how to create public spaces that are welcoming and respectful, and celebrate the broader com-munity. This report summarizes research into Van-couver’s community gardening culture. The pur-­pose is to capture the value of gardening as a community and to support garden coordinators in creating inclusive spaces for all citizens who desire to participate and engage with their com-munity through gardening. In this study, garden coordinators, gardener coa-litions, passionate community champions, and gardeners themselves were asked to share their values, stories, and advice on the benefits of community gardening and how to better create more welcoming community spaces.  A comprehensive evaluation of inclusivity in com-munity gardens was accomplished through a project methodology which asked WHAT inclusivi-ty means, WHO benefits from inclusion, and HOW to create inclusive spaces.  The project was carried out in three distinct parts:  Purpose and Outline Part 1: Inclusive Gardens WHAT does it mean to be inclusive, and how does this apply to commu-nal gathering spaces and citizen engagement? What are the benefits of gardening together in an inclusive space? Local and international best practices along with local experts were consulted to determine what qualities were necessary to create inclusive spaces.  Part 2: Opportunities in the City of Vancouver Gardeners and coordinators were surveyed to determine WHO uses Van-couver’s community garden spaces, what motivates neighbours to gar-­den together, and how leaders currently plan to be inclusive.  Part 3: How to Plan for   Inclusivity Outcomes of phases 1 and 2 were consolidated into a comprehensive guide that explains HOW current and future Garden Coordinators can plan for more welcoming and inclusive community garden spaces in Van-couver. How can the City facilitate inclusivity in Vancouver’s public spac-­es.    3 Growing in cities Food as Leverage Morgan (2009) argues that food planning may be one of the most important social movements of the early twenty-first century due to the multifunctional character of food that enables policies to connect with a wide range of community campaigns4. In the City of Vancouver‘s Greenest City Action Plan (GCAP)(2011), local food is one of ten sustainability goals, with food as a 'powerful part of a just and sus-tainable city' —reducing the ecological footprint through decreased use of fossil fuels and protection of food-production lands and related biodiversity5.   Cities such as Vancouver are in a unique position to facilitate or hinder the momentum of food in policy. Food has the unique power to convene advocates and leaders from diverse perspectives and present solutions to a multitude of urban problems. By captur-ing positive externalities, food policy can leverage cross-departmental goals including those of econom-ics, arts, culture, waste, safety, education, and energy conservation6.  Food Policy in Vancouver The Vancouver Food Strategy (VFS) (2013) is intrinsical-ly linked to GCAP (2011), aiming to coordinate all as-pects of the food system; to link both food policy and community programs; and to grow more food in the City. The VFS underpins many of the forthcoming goals, currently underway, in the City’s Healthy City Strategy (HCS), including support for access to healthy and nutritional food for citizens; providing op-portunities for neighbours to connect, promoting ac-tive living outdoors. The VFS also bolsters the City’s commitment to promote neighbourhood food system resiliency through the building of networks and social capital by working cooperatively together to make decisions, fostering civic engagement and combat-ing social isolation7.  The Many Roles of Community Gardens During war time, collections of individual plots were provided to citizens for the purpose of growing food. These allotment gardens, have traditionally been used as the main source for family food production and continue to be spaces for neighbours to connect and work together4. Community gardens are one piece of a broader food movement which is gaining ground in local planning across North America and Europe6. Here community gardens are presented as one of many initiatives to support Vancouver’s goals through food.   Community gardens are widely recognized as a space for food production, sustainable food practic-es, and neighbourhood resilience8 and are regarded as powerful community food assets and gathering places which promote sustainability, neighbourhood livability, urban greening, community building, inter-generational activity, social interaction, crime reduc-tion, exercise and food production3. Converting underutilized spaces into public forums of interaction and dialogue not only encourages strong-er community ties but also supports the creation of  complete and sustainable neighbourhoods—where community members are within five minutes of natural space, amenities, green infrastructure and food as-sets5. To be successful, community members must also feel welcome in these spaces.  While the VFS ensures the creation of more food assets such as community The Vancouver Context  4 garden plots, urban orchards, farmers markets, and community kitchens etc., the VFS also recognizes that further research is needed to determine accurate baselines for food access. This is one way to ensure that 'Vancouver’s neighbourhoods have equal ac-­cess to healthy, local food'5. How to Build Inclusivity As part of a City initiative to investigate inclusion in community gardens, a collection of stories from: gar-deners and community garden coordinators; dia-logues with the CYDI coalition on collaborative ways to share strategies towards welcoming spaces; and conversations with leaders passionate about food and inclusion, were connected through a framework of inclusivity. From these discussion, themes around intent on building inclusion, bridging soft and tech-nical barriers, and provided programming around culture have emerged. Unless inclusion is deliberate and purposeful, new immigrants, seniors, and those with accessibility challenges are unlikely to partici-pate fully in community gardens. Participation is im-portant not only because of the many personal ben-efits experienced by community gardeners, but also in terms of equity around public spaces and creating a sense of belonging in the neighbourhood. As part of this study, current participants in communi-ty gardens were surveyed in order to understand gar-dener demographics, motivations, and the benefits they receive from these vibrant spaces. Since urban food systems are complex, baseline data are neces-sary for meaningful and effective evaluation and monitoring of broader socio-economic, cultural and ecological factors. Garden level guidelines for community based plan-ning are suggested as a bottom up method of inte-grating food systems into the sustainable community system.  Engaging neighbours in the community food project process is the first step in providing food ac-cess to a broader range of Vancouver citizens. Guidelines are meant to encourage early building of intent around inclusion before the design of the garden is even considered. The current project provides the foundation from which the City of Vancouver and community garden societies can facilitate cultural engagement and in-clusion. The report aims to: encourage an under-standing of cultural differences around community food spaces and programming; educate citizens as to the various forms community gardens take in the Vancouver context; and demonstrate how garden-ing together can enrich and empower the surround-ing community.  The Toolkit is divided into three sections:   Inclusivity: What does it mean to be inclusive?   Best practices around creating inclusive community spaces from local and international examples are provided for inspiration.  Section One Growing Together: Community Gardening in Vancouver  A look at community gardens in Vancouver and the gardeners that use them. Findings from gardener and garden coordinator surveys and interviews are presented. Roles of the City of Vancou-ver and garden coordinators in creating inclusive gardens are pro-posed and recommendations are provided  for each. Section Two Guide to Planning for  Inclusion  A planning process to build community participation through five components of food justice and inclusion is proposed. Considera-tions for inclusivity and engagement  activities are also provided as guides to engaging with neighbours. Section Three   5 Definition: A community garden on Parks land is defined as a space operated by a non-profit society that provides a community de-velopment program. Programs must feature at least one of the following:  Producing food and flowers for the personal use of society members  Encouraging the involvement of schools, youth groups, and citizens who do not have an assigned plot in gardening activities  Increasing the ecological biodiversity of Vancouver through organic principles, and provide increased understanding of local food pro-duction Process: If park land is the most suitable site for a community garden, the following process is followed:  1) Community consultation: flyering  and an online survey must be un-dertaken to ensure there is neighbourhood support for the garden  2) Site: Staff will help to identify and develop a garden site to deter-mine the layout of the plots, structures and fences 3) Approval: Proposal and site plan will approved by the Parks Board 4) Agreement: As part of the proposal, the society and Parks Board must sign a user agreement license, for up to 5 years, specifying the term of garden use, management responsibilities, user fees and ac-cess procedures.   5) Site preparation: The staff will prepare the site for planting by re-moving grass, ploughing the soil, providing water hookup, and add-ing compost  6) Maintenance: After site preparation the garden society is responsi-ble for garden maintenance, and will be run at no cost to the Board  Full details on Community Gardening on Parks Land can be found here: More information on City Parks: http://vancouver.ca/people-programs/parks-board-community-gardens-policy.aspx  The Vancouver Context  Community gardens may be located on either City or Parks Board property, but not administered by the City of Vancouver or Parks Board. The process for each is outlined below:  Parks Board Land9  6 Definition: A community garden on City-owned land is defined as a place, operated or overseen by a non-profit society, where people grow and maintain ornamental and edible plants.  The purpose should serve at least one of the following:  Produce edible and ornamental plants for the personal usage of the society members;  Grow food for the garden members’ benefit through skill building pro-­grams or city approved economic development training opportunities  Grow food to donate to charitable causes Process: Once a suitable site has been located, the following pro-cess is followed:  1) Community consultation: Consultation by City and society indicating neighbourhood support for the garden; 2) Site Plan: A comprehensive plan must be provided showing the layout and dimensions of the plots, proposed temporary structures, fences, and an ornamental perimeter garden between community garden and ad-jacent land. Gardens must have fully accessible paths and provisions for seniors and/or disabled persons. Two plots must be designated for non-profit, child-care, or charitable donation.   3) Approval: The site plan must be approved by city staff.  4) Insurance: The City requires $2million liability insurance for all gardens prior to issuing or renewing a license. 5) Signing User Agreement: The society must sign an operating license, up to 5 years, specifying terms of use, management responsibilities, and procedures. 6) Membership Agreement: The society creates its own membership agree-ments according to Operating Guidelines. 7) Site Preparation: the City will prepare the site for planting by removing undesirable vegetation, leveling the land, adding compost and provid-ing a water service to the property 8) Maintenance: After site preparation, the garden society is responsible for garden development and maintenance at no cost to the City  More info on City Land, (not Park Land): http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/CommunityGardensGuidelines.pdf  City Land10 (Streets, Boulevards, Not City Parks)  7 Section One INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY GARDENS ....................................................... 9 Current Strategies for inclusive Community Spaces  ........................ 9 What it Means to be Inclusive  .............................................................. 9 Five components of Inclusion ................................................................ 12 Best Practices ........................................................................................... 12 What it Means to be  Inclusive  8 A. Stories from the Garden Growing Alongside Industry When I arrived, the garden was filled with gardeners busy with maintenance projects and personal plot designs. Food is laid out near the shed, a few members are working on a very successful com-posting project, while another gardener paints signs for the communal plots. All projects are gar-dener run.  A new gardener is shown her plot and Jan runs through the overgrown soil, which has-n't received much care this year. Digging in immediately, Jan points out all the useful plants that have overgrown, and provides helpful notes on their medicinal properties. She makes special note of the perennial flower in the corner; urging the newcomer to keep a few flowers for the benefit of pollinators. Jan had started the garden in partnership with Kiwassa Neighbourhood House as part of the Wallstreet Healthy Community Project. The idea was to create a ‘positive presence’ in the neighbourhood by creating a safer space in the underutilized Park. Fifteen years later Wallstreet Community Garden is experiencing incredible demand from neighbours for more space, but there’s not enough support for  the administra-tive resources necessary to maintain an expan-sion.  Jan moves on to welcome a new couple who simply desire space to grow their own vegetables. While she eagerly helps to prepare the plot, the other gardeners seem more than willing to share their feelings about the community space. ‘It’s the year of the hops’ one gardener says joyfully, as she plucks a small hops seedling out of her garden. Wallstreet sits along the CP Rail line leading in-to the Port, where trains carry bags of hops into the City to supply the booming local brewery sce-ne. ‘in a few months, the entire fence will be covered in hops’. An intimate reminder of how indus-­try and nature are deeply connected in the city. When asked about inclusivity and community, neighboring gardeners gathered around in a little group, believed that all the plots should be raised, not only for accessibility but as a pest deterrent and to provide for  better growing conditions. One gardener mentions the pool of tools that each gardener can borrow whenever they need one, she feels a deep connection with the community even though she’d since moved away, “It’s nice to know that there is somewhere you belong, ra-­ther just sitting in a park’, “and there’s something for you to do” another gardener chimes in. Alt-­ 9 Current Strategies for  Inclusive Community Spaces The purpose of Section One is to present themes on what it means to be an inclusive garden and demon-strate what inclusive and welcoming gardens might look like. The following two sections will describe who is responsible for creating inclusive spaces, the im-portance of inclusive community spaces, and how that vision can be achieved.  Inclusive Garden Guidelines and Local  Strategies  Review of current community garden guidelines on inclusion, dialogues with the CYDI coalition of inclusiv-ity, and conversations at community garden events were consulted to inform the definition of inclusivity.  During visits to community gardens, unstructured in-terviews with citizen organizations and garden coor-dinators were designed to capture thoughts on inclu-sive gardens and the strategies that current gardens use to create more welcoming spaces.  Coordinators were asked to describe: the governance structure of garden management, how the design of the garden was created, and what strategies they employ for welcoming neighbours and building inclusivity into community garden planning. They were also asked about garden programming and projects and the outcomes they hoped to achieve.  Based on the literature, a framework for inclusion is presented as the foundation for a planning toolkit. Examples of local, national, and international best practices for inclusive engagement strategies and community food projects were investigated for inclu-sive Vision, strategy, and outcomes based on the framework.  What it means to be Inclusive Coordinator Perspectives and Guideline Strategies Community garden guidelines, literature on engage-ment, and discussions with garden coordinators and neighbourhood food champions were analyzed with NVivo to code for key themes on inclusion.  The most popular themes that emerge from both the literature and community leaders include: Engage-ment and community, communication and policy, design and location, sustainability, and empower-ment. Engagement and Community Actively connecting with community organizations and neighbours in person is an essential part of the community gardening process. Almost every garden coordinator felt that the minimum requirement of signage at the site and flyering the proximate neigh-bours was sufficient for attracting gardeners, with long waitlists as part of the justification.  However, perceptions about the purpose and role of community gardening in neighbourhoods may differ based on cultural norms. Effective communication on the role of Community Gardens in Vancouver, includ-Section One  10 ing multiple language and face-to-face engage-ment is required for successful inclusion of the com-munity. Communication and Policy Misunderstandings can arise when perspectives on community work do not align along cultural or physi-cal lines. Clarity on policy and procedures is critical to successful inclusion of diverse community members. Effective communication is important. Coordinators recognized that web based communication such as social media and email were insufficient for all mem-bers, but felt that better alternatives were not current-ly available.  The Can You Dig It Coalition of gardeners recom-mend that welcoming gardeners individually, provid-ing personal orientation with clear documentation, and explaining procedures in multiple ways is im-portant for connecting with a broader range of com-munity members. Coordinators which are under-standing and which possess appropriate language skills are important components for successful com-munity gardens6. Empowerment and the Community A fundamental planning concept engendered by Jane Jacobs states, that to be successful community space, designated areas must exist beyond their pri-mary use. For community gardens, this means that growing food serves as an integral part of the local community. A local champion in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver expressed this need very suc-cinctly: “Gardens can not just exist in and of them-­selves”. Gardens must have multiple elements includ-­ing a diverse number of activities (bee keeping, chil-dren friendly areas, permaculture gardens, etc.); in-teresting landscapes (wildflower gardens, art displays, orchards, etc.); appropriate and adequate spaces to gather and socialize (benches, tables, shaded areas, etc.); opportunities to engage with others, and facili-tation of neighbourhood resiliency through knowledge transfer and resource sharing. Design and Location Best practices typically look at design in terms of most efficient use of light, soil, and water. Plot design is fo-cused almost exclusively on physical accessibility for seniors and those with accessibility constraints. Plots in Vancouver have become very prescriptive in design: occasionally raised, rectangular plots, arranged in rows. Although well designed for physical accessibil-ity, this type of design is conducive to an allotment style of gardening, where the primary purpose is per-sonal crop cultivation. Personal use is only one aspect of community gardening in Vancouver and commu-nal plots are becoming more common (see Map 1 on pg. 31).   Inclusive Community Gardens  11  At five separate garden events, coordinators were asked how garden design was decided upon. In only one of five gardens were members free to create and build their own plots. Originally there were some ap-prehensions that this strategy would create tension over varying sizes, however, this has never been a problem. “People chose as much as they could han-­dle, and often ended up trading for smaller or larger plots.” A variety of plot sizes allows for varying degrees of agricultural comfort and skill sets. Larger plots can be used more efficiently by those with farming experi-ence and allow those with time constraints to man-age much smaller spaces.  Sustainability Sustainability is usually discussed in terms of social, economic, and environmental components. Garden-ers need to build strong connections and be commit-ted to the maintenance of the garden in order for the garden to succeed over the long term. In Portland, the addition of an economic mechanism which al-lows for financial self sufficiency has been a major component to sustainability of the project11. Baker (2004) also notes that sustainable funding and support from local municipality are necessary for successful gardens3.   Garden coordinators placed significant emphasis on sharing resources as a means of connecting garden members and maintaining the quality of the garden space. Many gardeners felt that large projects that allowed gardeners to work exhaustively toward a common goal—such as building plots, fences, and sheds—made relationships stronger. As one gardener stated “We share together and we suffer together”.  Best practices almost always emphasize organic growing and sustainable agricultural techniques. Edu-cation and capacity building for agricultural skills is consistently mentioned in community gardening guidelines.  Inclusive Community Gardens  12  Inclusive Community Gardens Five Components of Inclusion To connect the emerging themes to the broader food system, a framework was developed to related com-ponents of community gardening and inclusion to the five components of food security found in the food systems literature12,13,14. Table 1 defines Accessibility, Availability, Adequacy, Acceptability, and Agency as they relate to food security and how they translate to inclusivity in Community Gardening.  These components are convenient in that they pro-vide a foundation from which garden coordinators can create inclusive goals for their community gar-den, while also linking the garden to the broader food system. Another advantage of these components, is that they can relate to any community food project, and not simply community gardens.   Best Practices Based on the criteria outlined by the five components community gardens run by local, national, and inter-national organizations were selected  as examples of best practices.  Best practices were chosen based on how well the vision, mission, and goals reflected at least one of the five components.   Theme  Definition4  Component of Inclusive Community Gardens Accessibility  Physical and economic access to food for all at all times  In an inclusive garden, all gardeners have equitable access to participate and benefit from the gardening process. Barriers to participation and a sense of belonging are identified and over-come as a community.  Availability  Sufficient food for all people  An inclusive garden is one where participants feel as though a suf-ficient amount of land, resources and food is available and sus-tainable; regardless of culture, class, ethnicity, age, or ability. Adequacy  Access to food that is nutritious and safe, and produced in envi-ronmentally sustainable ways  An inclusive garden promotes healthy, safe, and nutritious food of sufficient quality and quantity. This includes adequate education, training, programming, connections and support needed for suc-cess from plot to plate. Acceptability  Access to culturally acceptable food, which is produced and obtained in ways that do not compromise people's dignity, self-respect or human rights  An inclusive garden is one which celebrates diversity. The process of growing food and building community through cultivation, har-vest and sharing should be respectful of the entire community and acceptable to all of its members.   Agency  The policies and processes that enable the achievement of food security  An inclusive garden is one where policies are established to ena-ble all of the above. Procedures and organization that facilitate and encourage community building, respects diversity, and cre-ates understanding. Table 1: Five A’s of food justice and how each relates to inclusive community gardens  13 Section One Farmerson57th Location:  Vancouver, BC. Created: 2009 Design: Three Sections including Therapeutic Gardens, Market Garden and Growing Eden Garden. Wheelchair accessible Website: http://farmerson57th.wikispaces.com/ Contact: farmerson57th@gmail.com Managing Organization: BC Coalition of People with Disabilities (BCCPD) Goal:  Changing the culture of long-term care organizations through the Eden Alternative; A therapeutic method of care focused on moving decision making closer to elders through companionship and the opportunity to give meaningful care to other living things.     Programmes and membership:  Therapeutic Gardens: Plots for Pearson Residents and Community plots for various groups including Disabled Independent Gardeners Association (DIGA). Agriculture classes in partnership with alternative high school. Volunteers with resident gardeners to help assist in planting, tending, harvesting. Wheelchair accessible.  Market Garden:  flower and vegetable market crops grown according to organic principles, by experienced market gardeners, donation of fruit and vegetables for the monthly community kitchen and a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) program, of 30 participating families.  Growing Eden: Priority plots for families who receive a housing subsidy and/or are low income.  Accessibility  14 Best Practices Downtown Intercultural Gardeners Society (DIGS)  Location:  Vancouver, British Columbia. Created: 2006 Garden Design: 100 gardeners in 50 plots including communal spaces and plots for individuals, families and organizations. Three tiered raised beds to offer fully accessible garden areas. Education arena. Size: 4,000-square-foot  Website: http://www.digsvancouver.ca/ Managing Organization: West End Residents Association Goals:   Promote intercultural relations between Canadian-born and non-Canadian-born residents of the downtown peninsula of Vancouver through organic, community gardening in a supportive, healthy and inclusive environment.   Develop a secure, ecological, organic garden through collaborative learning, teaching and support.    Include organic gardening, food security, ecology, enjoyment, learning, teaching and socializing (community), respect, support, working together and sharing.   Programmes: Tasks and challenges are tackled cooperatively. Each member is encouraged to contribute and participate in all activities according to their skills. The rooftop is open and accessible to the public from 8:00 am to 8:00 pm . Membership: DIGS facilitates a welcoming, democratic and diverse community of members through a membership requirement for project participants of 40% or more foreign born members which reflect the demographics of the downtown peninsula.  Other forms of diversity respected by DIGS include: race, gender, age, religion, handicap, sexual preference, family and other lifestyle choices. Availability  15 Section One Hazelnut Meadows Community Garden Program  Location:  Surrey, British Columbia. Created: 2006 Garden Design: Individual plots, greenhouse to start and grow seedlings, fruit tree orchard. Size: 80 individual plots   Website: http://www.dcrs.ca/services/settlement-services-and-community-programs-department/food-security-program/ Managing Organization: DIVERSEcity Food Security Program Goals:  Allow participants to grow food and the ability to feed family and friends supports self-reliance and independence.   Provide an opportunity to save money and supplement diet with healthy produce.  Assist with lowering the cost of healthy, organically grown fruits and vegetables.  Build capacity through education around growing produce suitable for Canadian climates, seed saving, organic gardening, introduction of natural means of pollination and pest control, greenhouse gardening, composting and Canadian growing cycles.  Provide opportunities for cultural exchange and sharing events, community building and promotes understanding with integration as an outcome. Programmes: The Food Security Program provides opportunities for immigrant and refugee families to increase their food security through multicultural cooking groups and community garden activities. DIVERSEcity’s Food Security Program is comprised of the Community Kitchen Program and the Hazelnut Meadows Community Garden Program. The Community Kitchen program assists immigrants with cooking and food safety concerns, in Canada.  Membership: The majority of plots in the garden are registered to immigrant and refugee families, with some plots registered to established Canadian families. About 60 per cent of the garden is tended to by new Canadians. The rest are established Canadians  Having a plot to tend also makes them feel grounded – part of the land and the country. Those immigrants from rural backgrounds also share some of their agricultural knowledge with other gardeners. Adequacy  16 Best Practices H.O.P.E Garden Location:  Toronto, Ontario. Created: 2006 Garden Design: 100 gardeners in 50 plots including communal spaces and plots for individuals, families and organizations. Three tier raised beds to offer fully accessible garden areas. Education arena. Size: 4,000-square-foot  Website: http://greenestcity.ca/about/ Blog: hopecommunitygarden.wordpress.co Managing Organization: GreenestCity Goals:  Reduce social isolation and resist homogenization in the rapidly changing neighbourhood of Parkdale.   Emphasis on growing food, increasing knowledge and skills in organic gardening and food preparation.  Engage newcomers, visible minorities and mental health survivors in food and community programming.  Foster a sense of cooperation, community stewardship and individual empowerment in the community.  Beautification and promotion of pollinators through flowers.  Programmes: Provision of garden space and the materials required for growing food;  Delivery of hands-on workshops and activities that teach gardening and food preparation using fresh, affordable ingredients;  Provision of age and skills appropriate learning materials and instruction;  Creation of safe spaces for sharing food and stories that celebrate community and build relationships. HOPE gardeners take part in evening work parties, workshops, talks, art projects and potlucks in the park.   Membership: A Garden steering committee supports the management of the garden and plan activities. Plots are free but there is always a long waiting list to join the garden. Gardeners sign a contract to participate and agree to certain principles, from growing organically to respecting fellow gardeners Visitors and large group tours are welcome.  Adequacy  17 Section One Global Roots Garden  Location:  Toronto, Ontario. Created:  Garden Design: Eight plots devoted to particular ethnic communities with large populations in Toronto. Many of the beds are raised, allowing seniors to work without straining their backs. Most of the gardens are wheelchair-accessible. Size: Eight Global Roots plots  20 x 13 feet  Website: http://thestop.org/global-roots-gardens  Managing Organization: The STOP Goals:  Education and capacity building.  Demonstration of the variety of crops that can grow in the Canadian climate given experience and knowledge.  Ability to grow crops that would appeal to Toronto’s ethnically diverse population.  Demonstrate the amount of food  that can be produced in a small space.  Knowledge transfer from experienced seniors to youth gardeners Membership: The garden is tended by both senior and youth gardeners representing Chinese, Tibetan, South Asian, Somalian, Italian, Latin American, Polish, and Filipino communities. Intergenerational partners are usually connected culturally to promote knowledge and skills transfer from senior to youth, and promote participation of seniors through translation by youth.  Programmes: The seniors have also been involved in New Crop Animation Project; taste-testing and providing horticultural assistance to Greenbelt farmers who are also raising crops not traditionally grown in the province. The youth gardens are connected through a partnership with CultureLink, a newcomer settlement group in southwest Toronto. Gardeners meet once a week to tend the plots, socialize, and cook food together. Outcomes: The garden sustains an immensely diverse range of vegetables and demonstrates the range of produce that can be grown in the Province.   Acceptability  18 Best Practices GROW Community Gardens Location:  Belfast, UK. Created: 2008 Garden Design: Members and local community contribute to design. Three separate gardens based on similar model. No individual plots. Combination of ground plots and raised beds for accessibility.  Size:  All communal, variable size Website: http://www.grow-ni.org/ Contact: info@grow-ni.org Managing Organization: GROW Goals:  Support development of healthy, inclusive communities   Build capacity and empower people of all backgrounds, ages, and abilities  Promote well being and build community cohesion  Develop knowledge and skills for organic gardening and healthy eating  Promote values of food security and sustainable practices for local communities and government Programs: Grow actively encourages mutual understanding through specialist workshops on cultural understanding and respect. Grow also runs cooking demonstrations and healthy eating workshops as part of the community gardens. Members decide as a collective what to grow, tending the garden, cooking and running events.   Membership: Membership is free to all participants. The committee attempts to create a garden that reflects the makeup of the local population. Special reservations are made for seniors programming and the organization actively sought partnership with  local asylum seekers and refugee organizations.  Local residents are invited to any events, trips or celebrations. Grow and the community actively share, knowledge, plants, seeds and ideas for the garden.  Agency  19 B. Stories from the Garden  Mount Pleasant  In Mount Pleasant, I met with a coordinator at a mid-week work party—an attempt to provide more opportunities for gardeners to participate—as she works away on the compost, sorting out what doesn’t belong. The gardeners don’t all have a grasp of how the compost operates and the signs seem ineffective at preventing weeds from being tossed in the mix. ‘it’s like a garden cycle: weeds get pulled, they go into the compost, and they go back into the garden’. They get many members of the community coming through the garden: Students from a local music academy, workers on lunch, local ‘park guys’ who tend to po-­lice the garden when no one is here, rather than steal the veggies as some perceive: ‘[The park guys] are not going home and sautéing an onion’ she ex-­plains. I ask about inclusivity at the garden. She shows me a large plot along the length of the southern fence. Shoe’s more of the ‘let communal plots be commu-­nal’ camp, where communal plots are open to who-­ever wants to garden there. But there were issues of maintenance and harvesting when there was no one to take ownership and no one knew who ‘owned’ the produce. Now the ‘communal gar-­dens’ are for the gardeners only, and the harvest is monitored. They had a potato roast in the garden last year, which was a bit hit! As for accessibility, they can’t seem to fill their raised plots near the centre of the garden. It was offered to an elderly gar-­dener with balance challenges but she refused due to her attachment to her own plot and the stigma associated with having the ‘disability plot’.   A neighbour who hopes to one day have a plot is also helping out at the work party. She tells me about the Japanese Senior’s Association that she volunteers with and their connection with com-­munity gardening. If there’s going to be inclusion there ‘needs to be intent towards inclusion’, she tells me.  As we walk to the north side, the coordinator points out the orchard which was paid for by the City and that the gardeners agreed to maintain. ‘It’s a missed educational opportunity... Many people walking by don’t know how to take an apple off without damaging the tree’.   I speak to seven year vet of the garden who’s described as a ‘wealth of knowledge’. He shows me around his plot and boasts about his intentions. How much do you think you can grow in this plot? He asks. I have no idea, I answer. LOTS, he says! He tells me about Italy where his family had lots of land to grow produce. It’s great it is to have such a variety of gardeners.   20 Section Two INCLUSIVITY IN VANCOUVER ................................................................. 21 Snapshot of Vancouver Gardens ........................................................ 21 Vancouver’s Community Gardeners .................................................. 22 Inclusivity of Vancouver’s Community Gardens ............................... 25  CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES ...................................................... 27 Challenges of Inclusion .......................................................................... 27 Support for Inclusion ............................................................................... 28 Importance of Programming ................................................................ 29 Recommendations ................................................................................. 30 Growing together,  Opportunities for inclusion in Vancouver  21 Snapshot of Vancouver  Gardens Section Two provides insight into the current demo-graphic of Vancouver’s community gardeners and how they benefit from being part of a community food project. As part of an investigating into opportu-nities for inclusive planning in Vancouver, results from a comprehensive survey developed for both com-munity gardeners and community gardener coordi-nators are presented.  The purpose is to understand who the community garden members are—those that currently utilize community food spaces—and relate their experienc-es to community garden management within the framework of inclusivity. Details of surveys and sum-marized responses for Coordinator and Gardeners are available in Appendix A and B respectively. Discovering Community Gardeners in Van-couver  In May 2014, an online Community Gardener Survey was administered to capture a snapshot of garden-ers in Vancouver, and assess their relation to commu-nity and food. Gardeners were asked about:   General demographic information (economic status, cultural identification, education);   Level of garden participation;   Interaction with other gardeners and neighbours;   Meaningful experiences from their involvement in a community food project; and,  Motivation for participating in a community food project. A Garden Coordinator Survey was also created to understand how coordinators perceive inclusion with respect to their garden policy and operations. All community gardens were identified through a public City of Vancouver website. Coordinators were asked to complete the Garden Coordinator Survey and forward the Community Gardener Survey on to their members. Cultural Diversity, Perception and Participa-tion Respondents for the Community Gardener Survey were asked to self-identify with respect to ethno-cultural identification. While this lead to some difficul-ty in categorizing respondents, it provided a snapshot of the diverse cultures of gardeners.  As an alternate assessment respondents were asked to provide the their country of birth as well as their parent’s country of birth as a proxy for cultural similar-­ity and generation in Canada. Respondents from Canada and the US were grouped for analysis as cul-tural perception of community gardens are compa-rable. Experiences Reflecting Community and Food To assess meaningful experiences, gardeners were provided with multiple statements about community food systems and cultures corresponding to three general categories: Knowledge and Skills, Attitudes, and Behaviours. Categories were adapted from the Community Food Projects indicators of success pro-ject provided by the Community Food Security Coali-Section Two  22  tion designed to assess the collective impacts of the USDA funded Community Food Projects Competitive Grants Program15.  For the purposes of this project, the categories are broadly defined as:     Knowledge and skills: Abilities and understanding reflective of inclusivity and food systems (healthy food choices, sustainable practices, diverse cul-tures, etc.);   Attitudes: Feelings towards aspects of the com-munity and gardening (Sense of belonging, ac-cess to gardening space, connection to culture, etc.); and   Behaviours: Actions that reflect connection with food system and inclusion (Eating healthier, being more active in the community, building relation-ships, etc.)  Respondents were asked to indicate whether joining a community garden had made a meaningful differ-ence in the three categories and were also given the opportunity to provide additional factors in each cat-egory.   Vancouver’s Community  Gardeners The survey received 223 respondents from 20 commu-nity gardens across the city. Participation rate ranged from < 5% to >50%, with a median of 25% from each garden. A diversity of cultures, income, and house-hold sizes of participants was represented. A snapshot of community gardener demographics can be found in Insets One and Two (pg. 31—34). Responses were analyzed with the purpose of deter-mining who currently utilizes public community gar-den spaces based on gardener demographics and how experiences differ based on three measurable elements of inclusivity: accessibility, connection to community, and perceptions. Elements were compared between gardeners  based on demographics using Chi-square analysis—which measures the statistical independence of an element of inclusivity (accessibility; connection to community; and perceptions) from a given demo-graphic (income; place or birth; age). A significant result is defined here by a less than 5% probability that elements of inclusivity are independent of de-mographics (p<0.05).  Tests were used to  determine whether or not a signifi-cant difference existed between demographic groups (income; place or birth; age) with respect to access to the garden, community connections, and perceptions of purpose for community gardening (Table 2). Results reveal differences and potential barriers and opportunities for improved garden ac-cess, connection and commitment, and perception of the garden.   Time spent in the garden, whether in the communal area or in a personal plot, did not vary by de-mographics. Time commitments may be more reflec-tive of minimal effort required to maintain a personal plot and to fulfill required membership hours. Number of new neighbours met and connected with outside the garden were also independent of demographics.  Most gardeners met less than 6 new neighbours since joining the garden (55%), and many did not connect with them outside the garden (43%).  Most gardens hold work parties where gardeners can connect, but only very occasionally hold neighbourhood events given successful grants to that effect.  Inclusivity in Vancouver  23 Only some of the elements of inclusivity varied signifi-cantly between groups, and were investigated fur-ther, specifically:  Mode of transportation and household income  Place of Birth and both distance and connections with community gardeners Access to Community Gardens Physical access of community gardens was assessed by distance from community gardens, mode of trans-portation and relation to demographics. Spatial anal-ysis was conducted using ArcGIS. Location data for gardeners were used to calculate both the average distance gardeners travelled and the average dis-tance of users who often travelled by either active transportation, public transportation, or personal ve-hicle.  Travel to the garden was dependent on income lev-el, where low income groups were more likely to take transit, middle income groups were more likely than others to bike or drive to gardens, and high income groups were more likely to walk. Gardeners that drove or took transit typically lived further away than those that walk or bike (See Map 2, pg. 34) These results may be an indication of where parks, and therefore, gardens are typically located. An ANOVA revealed that low income gardeners were, on average, almost a kilometer further away from their gardens than gardeners with high household income (1614 m for low income households versus 671 m for high income households, p < 0.01). Garden-ers born outside Canada or the US also travelled about a kilometer further than Canadians or Ameri-cans (2017 m for those born outside Canada or US versus 1109 m for Canadian and Americans, p < 0.01) Community Connections Connection to community did not depend on age, or income level, however, the number of new gar-Table 2: Variables used in Chi-squared tests to explore relationship between demographic factors and elements of inclusivity. Section Two  Factors Elements of Inclusivity Demographics  Access Community Connections Perceptions Age Place of Birth Income Mode of Trans-portation Connection with garden-ers/neighbours Time spent in Garden Motivation for Participation 12 or younger Outside Canada or US Low (>30,000) Walk None More than 2 hours a day Personal Growth and Well-being 13 - 18 Born in Canada or US Low Median (30,000—60,000) Bike 1-3 1 - 2 hours a day Community and Culture 19-25   High Median(60,000-100,000) Public Transit 4-6 1 - 3 hours a week Food Security 26-35   High (>100,000) Drive 7-9 4 - 6 hours a week  36-45     10-12 About 2-3 hours a month  46-55     13-15 0 - 1 hours a month  56-65        66-75        Over75         24  deners met was dependent on place of birth. With the exception of garden coordinators, gardeners born outside Canada or the U.S. typically met a higher than expected number of new gardeners (10-12), than gardens born in Canada or the U.S. (7-9). Gar-dens may provide an opportunity for newcomers to connect with their community, while gardeners born in Canada or the U.S. are already connected to other gardeners or have other ways to connect beyond community gardening.  Significance for tests using cultural demographics should be considered with some caution. Response rates may not be sufficient to provide an accurate assessment of diversity in community gardens, as the samples from each demographic group were not completely balanced.   Perceptions and Participation When gardeners were asked an open ended ques-tion about how they found out about the community garden and why they chose to join their community garden, motivations were wide ranging but fell into three broader, and evenly distributed, categories:   Personal growth and well-being (connection to nature, therapeutic, enjoy gardening, personal achievement, skills and knowledge development);   Community building and connections (meeting neighbours, feeling a sense of belonging, sharing in garden culture, beautifying the neighbourhood, helping others); and   Food security (Growing vegetables, access to space, saving money, connection to food).  There was no connection between place of birth and motivation for joining the garden. Lower income indi-viduals mentioned personal growth and well-being significantly more often than higher income house-holds (Fig 1). Low income groups may not have the resources or time to adequately grow and prepare much of the produce, placing more value on health and a sense of achievement an actually growing vegetables.  The significantly high emphasis on growing vegetables may be related to the popularity of community gar-dening as an activity in and of itself. Avenues for find-ing out community gardens were overwhelmingly by word-of-mouth from friends, family and neighbours, internet searches including the CoV website, or pass-ing by the garden while in the neighbourhood. The homogeneity in both motivation and connecting to the garden suggests that current community garden-ers already have a similar perspective on gardening culture and are already connected and engaged in some way with the neighbourhood.  Figure 1: Percent of gardeners reporting particular motivation for joining a community garden in Vancouver. Gardener s provided an open ended response which was then coded by the researcher and grouped into broad categories. Multiple codes were possible for each response.   Inclusivity in Vancouver Household Income  25 Inclusivity of Vancouver’s Community Gardens For the Community Garden Coordinator Survey, co-ordinators in were asked about:  The number and types of plots which exist in the garden;  Availability and demand for community garden space;   The Vision, if any, for the community garden;   What challenges they face in participation and how they are attempting to overcome these challenges;   Their aspirations for the garden; and,   What the City can do to facilitate these goals.  Questions were also designed to identify potential barriers to participation in community gardens and how funding from the City could best, with the aim of making gardens more inclusive spaces for the en-tire community.  Coordinators were also asked to advise on language or any other barriers they were aware of, with re-spect to responding to the online survey.  Early Intent to Build Inclusion The Garden Coordinator Survey received responses from 20 gardens in Vancouver. Each garden was given a score on structure, policy, intent and out-comes regarding inclusion.  Scores were based on inclusivity with respect to:  The number of structural components that exist in the garden (benches, fences, communal areas, etc.);  The number of policies and procedures around inclusivity and understanding (welcoming com-mittee, representative membership, education, etc.);  The level of intention around components of in-clusivity coordinators had when creating the community garden; and,  The amount of positive change coordinators saw in community members reflective of the compo-nents of inclusive gardens Scores for structure and policy were assessed by cal-Section Two Figure 2: Relationship between strong intent and the outcomes coordinators felt for each factor of inclusivity  Factors of Inclusivity  26  culating the proportion of components incorporated into the garden space and policy respectively, of those presented in the survey. Scores for Intent and outcome were based on the level of intent or amount of positive change as a weighted measure for each component of inclusivity. Components were based on best practices.  A clear relationship exists between the level of intent garden decision makers have towards inclusion and the amount of positive change experienced among the garden members, for each component (Fig 2). The number of structural interventions that the govern-ing body chose to include in the space reflective of level of intent, however, policies and procedures around inclusivity were less of a priority for most com-munity gardens.  Few gardens had a welcoming committee or a re-quirement to live in the community. None of the coor-dinators reported having multilingual committee or programming around culture. Gardeners themselves were more likely to gain meaningful skills and knowledge in gardening and sustainability, connect around mutual participation in community projects, and improve quality of life , but were much less likely to learn about cultural foods or connect with neigh-bours from different cultures (Table 3).   Connection to Gardener Experience Gardener experience is also connected to the level of effort placed by coordinators on elements of inclusivi-ty and programming. Six gardens with responses from both the Community Gardener Census and the Coordinator Survey were used to compare level of intent and outcomes with Figure 2: Relationship between strong intent and the outcomes coordinators felt for each factor of inclusivity  Table 3: Percentage of gardeners experiencing meaningful change in knowledge , attitudes, and behaviour towards food and communi-ty. Experiences are self reported   Knowledge and Skills Attitudes Behaviours Learning about sustainable and organic gardening prac-tices Participation in community projects Improve overall quality of life More likely  (75– 100%)  Learning how to work with others on a community project Sense of belonging in the neighbourhood Become more active in the communi-ty Gaining gardening or farming skills Access to gardening space  Get outdoors more often  Less Likely (> 50%)  Knowledge of healthy food choices Confidence in preparing healthy meals Eat a wider variety of fruit and vege-tables Learning about local food and agriculture Connection to your culture Build relationships with neighbours of different race, class and/or culture  Learning about the diverse cultures and people in the neighbourhood Interaction with people from different cultures   Inclusivity in Vancouver  27 the self-reported knowledge, behaviour, and attitudes of their community garden members.  Breaks in level of intent occurred at a score of <45 (Low), 45—55 (Medium), >55 (High). Compared with garden that expressed weak intent towards building inclusion, gardeners belonging to community gardens which expressed strong intent were much more likely to learn about local food and agriculture; interact with, learn from, and build more relationships with people of different cultures; were more likely to talk with more neighbours; more likely to learn about envi-ronmental issues and the importance of community spaces; more likely to participate in community pro-jects and experience a higher level of quality life (Figure 3). Members of gardens with medium levels of intent experienced a wider range of outcomes.   Challenges of Inclusivity Perceptions and Participation Much of the tension within gardens and between neighbours has to do with differing perceptions of what a garden is, a scenario also reported by Seto (2013). Regardless of a person’s culture or income, a person may believe that food grown in public spaces belongs to the public. In diverse groups, there are many opportunities for miscommunications and mis-understanding over help and garden practices5. Neg-ative signage addressing theft may be lost on those with language barriers and may also create a sense of attrition between gardeners and neighbours. Alt-hough many of coordinators I spoke with recognized that perceptions differed amongst cultures, even with-in the garden, policy and procedures around cultural understanding were rarely a consideration for garden management (41% cited minimal intent around policy for inclusion of marginalized populations; and 35% for clear procedures around cultural understanding).  Inclusivity of Surrounding Community All but two community garden coordinators felt that their gardens were representative of the surrounding population with respect to culture, age and accessi-bility.   When asked about what makes the community gar-den inclusive, the most common factors were beauti-Figure  3:  ConnecƟon  between  level  of  intent  to  be  inclusive  and  gardener  responses  reflecƟve  of  community  connecƟon,  posiƟve  experience,  and  inclusion.  Values  represent  the  proporƟon  of  gardeners  which  responded  posiƟvely  to  the  below  statements  grouped  into  gardens  with  strong  intent  and  weak  intent  towards  components  of  inclusion.   Section Two Strong Intent Weak Intent  28  ful landscaping (46%) and communal seating (37%). Having a partially fenced or completely open garden was also noted as an welcoming strategy (31%), along with communal spaces (25%), interesting pathways (19%), community focus, spaces for children and loca-tion (12% each).  Most coordinators that were interviewed did not share this sense of garden diversity, particularly towards ac-cessibility. Most conceded that inclusion was an ongo-ing process, but almost all garden membership was advertised through flyers, internet sites and English lan-guage signage. Few partnered with local organiza-tions for membership, and those that did were often short lived partnerships. The most common reasons for group plot abandonment was the time commitment or loss of committed staff from partnering organiza-tions. Commitment to the Community Garden Eleven of fourteen coordinators also felt that commit-ment to garden maintenance and participation was a significant challenge from both gardeners and neighbours. Most attempted to resolve issues of neigh-bourhood respect with discussion and invitations to participate. Encouraging gardeners ranges from mak-ing events more social to creating more strict policies around participation. Expectations of community gar-dening from multiple perspectives is clearly very di-verse among community members. Therefore, framing is an important consideration for the both City and organizations involved in community food projects: How community gardens function within the commu-nity, expectations of both the neighbourhood and of the gardeners themselves. Support for Inclusion Partnerships All coordinators reported having support from external partners which, for the most part, were citizen organi-zations or private companies. Only two gardens were partnered with organization having physical or cultural inclusivity as a priority. Funding from partners came largely in the form of operational support  (materials, administration, website)(77%), general financial sup-port (61%), and garden maintenance  (community events and volunteer honourariums)(46%). Only two gardens dedicated funding toward workshops and learning.  City Support It’s possible that coordinators would like to incorpo-­rate programming into the function of the community garden, but do not have the resources to do so. How-ever, when asked to rank the types of external support from the City coordinators felt would be most benefi-cial to garden management, the demands were very similar to support received from current partners (Table 4).  Barriers to participation which coordinators felt could be addressed by the city included providing more space to accommodate demand (41%) and the con-tinued maintenance of the surrounding land (tree pruning, compost services, city garden landscaping) (41%).  Design restrictions were mentioned, on more than one occasion, as a barrier to neighbourhood inclusion. One coordinator felt that by building a trellis to create more shade ‘members and the local community could better utilize the space to meet in, relax in, gather in’.   Because many gardeners find out about gardens through the City of Vancouver webpage, one coordi-nator felt that the City had a great opportunity to ‘...do a lot more in promoting that website in different languages and through various community organiza-tions’, for example, through the creation of a bro-­chure about community gardens. One coordinator also suggested that the City consider more support for aboriginal programming. Challenges and Opportunities  29 Section Two Given all necessary resources to create more inclusive gardens, 61% of coordinators would create more beautiful spaces (including trees and gardens) with communal seating.  The second most common strate-gy was to post more signs in multiple languages (38%).  One or two coordinators suggested creating more opportunities to gather, educational workshops, and community notice boards/sharing stations.  Importance of Programming Programming (activities, education, workshops, etc.) that promote cultural understanding, skills develop-ment, and education is a powerful tool for inclusion. The need for intent around inclusion was a strong mes-sage from all cultural groups and organization consult-ed during this project. Those working with isolated populations feel as though programming is one of the most important components for citizen engagement and inclusivity. However, garden programming was low on the list of support needs, according to coordi-nators.  Doris Chow of Potluck Café and Catering was eager to chat about her plans for a Chinese seniors focused garden in Chinatown. Lack of funding and space meant that she had to partner with a developer for very loose tenureship over two years. Bureaucracy and political battles eventually cause the project to fold, which was truly a loss for the neighbourhood.  Doris explained that there needs to be programing to keep people interested and involved.  ‘Gardens can’t just exist in and of themselves’. For seniors this means a space to rest and socialize. For the community this means using the streets and blurring the boundaries so that you feel like you’re in the garden, but you’re in a public space. It may be that coordinators feel that waiting lists are enough to prove that adding more plots is the highest priority and more support to run those extra plots is re-quired. Coordinators may also feel that this is the most costly aspect of running a garden and more support in this area would free up opportunities for program-ing. It may also not be part of the collective value sys-tem.  In any case, the City has an opportunity to partner with groups to increase education for both citizens and coordinators about the benefits of community gardens and the opportunity for inclusion and en-gagement.  Table 4: Preferred form of external support as reported by community garden coordinators. Rank given by each coordinator was summed for each form of support. Ranking scores were weighted and summed to reach a final score. Form of External Support  Score Rank   One Two Three  Operational Support (compost, soil, utilities, tools)  6 3 3 27 General Financial Support  4 4 3 23 Infrastructural Support (land, utility infrastructure, buildings, fencing, plots)  5 3 2 23 Creating Partnerships (creating garden networks, facilitating partnerships with or-ganizations or city departments, finding sponsors)  1 2 0 10 Training and Development (garden management training)  0 2 2 6 Garden Programming (education sessions for gardeners, community building, events funding)  0 2 2 6 Garden Design (garden structure design, site selection, plot organization)  0 0 0 0  30 Recommendations Because cities have influence over space, municipali-ties are in a unique position to shape the environment to favour or hinder the local food movement6. After his retirement from the Toronto Food Policy Council, former Chair, Wayne Roberts, reflected on food policy so far, and provided insightful recommendations as to the changes are required in order to facilitate a sec-ond, more institutional movement for local food.  While Roberts’ (2014) recommendations to food policy advocates relates to the citywide food system they still resonate strongly at the community level as well. Here, I present his five fundamental recommendations for food policy6 adapted for the promotion and en-couragement of diverse and inclusive community gar-dens in Vancouver: 1) Advocate: Empower and educate citizens, pro-mote the benefits of community food projects and influence external policies to allow for more creativity in design, structures that promote inclusivity, and effi-cient use of limited space in Vancouver. 2) Coordinate: Take a more proactive approach to identifying spaces for coalitions, and dialogues be-tween community champions and gardeners. Facili-tate partnerships between cultural groups and organ-izations with the capacity to run programming and maintain the space. 4) Support: The high cost of operations and infrastruc-ture may be one reason for the low prioritization of programming. Coordinators already spend a signifi-cant amount of time applying for grants and com-peting with other community food groups. The City may consider dedicated funding or incentives for programming, for both community garden groups that have the materials and partners that have the facilities, such as neighbourhood houses. 3) Innovate: Take a more active role in finding spaces (particularly in lower income neighbourhoods) and champion the creation of communal spaces in crea-tive ways, for example, underutilized parking areas or rooftops. This recommendation is particularly relevant given that Parks Board and City land are generally more stable, yet increasingly more limited. 5) Facilitate: Make it easier to create animated and welcoming spaces in communal gardens. Utilize the Expression of Interest application process to influence the design and programming for community garden spaces. For example, ensure that applicants have programming potential through a neighbourhood house, community kitchen or cultural group. Ensure that there is a minimum area set aside for communal growing, harvesting and socializing. Expand the re-quirements for neighbourhood support to include mul-tiple languages and contact with local civic organiza-tions.    Challenges and Opportunities  31  Inset One: Community Spaces and Demographics Map 1: Location of gardens on City and Parks Board property for which the amount of growing space dedicated to communal plots was reported in the Garden Coordinator Survey (n=12). There is a trend toward dedicating more space for communal growing, where cultivation and harvest are shared amongst the community gardens. The space is shared by everyone, which allows for better and more intensive use of limited growing space in the City.    32   Most popular reasons for Community Gardening:  Share in the culture of gardening and build a sense of com-munity (60%)  Desire for more/adequate space for gardening (46%)  Desire to grow my own fruits and vegetables (42%)  Sense of empowerment and achievement (28%)  Well-being and the environment (19%)  Community gardens located on City and Parks Board land re-main part of the public realm. However, maintenance of com-munity gardens are the result of community effort Most community gardeners ask for contributions in time or money to share in the harvest and the use of the plots and compost Plots are often in high demand from neighbours familiar with the gardening culture. Membership is on a first-come-first-serve basis and waiting lists can be 3 years. Inset One: Community Spaces and Demographics Map 1: Location of gardens on City and Parks Board property for which the amount of growing space dedicated to communal plots was reported in the Garden Coordinator Survey (n=12). There is a trend toward dedicating more space for communal growing, where cultivation and harvest are shared amongst the community gardens. The space is shared by everyone, which allows for better and more intensive use of limited growing space in the City.    33  Inset Two: Gardens and the Greenest City Map 2: Average distance from the community garden for which gardeners will use a given mode of transporta-tion. Only 14% of community gardeners drive to their plots. Of those that drive very few use the car as their only means of getting to the gar-den. Most gardeners use ac-tive transportation. Those that live within about 700 m beyond which gardeners are more likely to bike up to about 1.5 km. Gardeners that drive live about 2 km away on average, and those that take public trans-ports are even further at about 4 km.  34  Inset Two: Gardens and the Greenest City Map 2: Average distance from the community garden for which gardeners will use a given mode of transporta-tion. Only 14% of community gardeners drive to their plots. Of those that drive very few use the car as their only means of getting to the gar-den. Most gardeners use ac-tive transportation. Those that live within about 700 m beyond which gardeners are more likely to bike up to about 1.5 km. Gardeners that drive live about 2 km away on average, and those that take public trans-ports are even further at about 4 km. Greenest City Goals  Local Food: 82% of gardeners reported that the food they grow in the garden replaces produce they would otherwise purchase at the store. Gardeners also support many other food projects such as famer’s markets, green grocers, and healthy corner stores.  Zero Waste: Most gardens have a self managed composting sys-tem which is also frequently used by members of the neighbour-hood. Some gardens also partner with food procurement chari-ties, such as quest, which gardeners can donate personal crops towards. This further reduces the diversion of fresh and healthy or-ganic foods from the waste system.   Green Transportation: Very few gardeners travel to their garden by car (14%). Most travel is active walking or biking.  Access to nature: Many gardeners are within a five minute walk to their garden. Gardens add interest and a connection to the Earth, providing participants with access to physical and mental well-being and a sense of personal achievement and empower-ment. 78% of gardeners report that being part of a garden has made a meaningful difference in the amount out time they spend outdoors, 60% report that they get more physical exercise.  Lighter Footprint: All community gardens use only organic and sustainable cultivation practices. Lower food miles also mean that gardeners are reducing consumption from the globalized food system. Each gardener is taking a personal role in the action plan by creating, supporting, and maintaining urban food systems. Pol-linator gardens are a feature of many community gardens which serve to increase biodiversity and pollinator abundance.  35 C. Stories from the Garden The East Side As I sit on one of the old lawn chairs in a well used gathering space, the gardeners gradually come together and casually start chatting about the day, recipes, projects and people in their lives. Fresh cinnamon buns and hotdogs are on the menu today: if only the gardeners can work out her dis-count grill. I already feel welcome here. The lot was transformed from a neighborhood dump-ing ground to a beautiful space that neighbours wanted to be a part of. There were no complaints about converting the space to a garden. Many of the gardeners mention a ‘wildness’. It’s not sterile, there are different sections to just sit and gather. There’s also a native garden that adds a richness to the space. In their first year, the coordinators had $750 dollars in grants, not a lot to put a garden together. Soil was free, and the wood for plots and shed was all found. It brought people together. ’We suffer together’ one garden says of their many projects. Everyone built and designed their own plot. The coordinators did have a plan to make them all the same size, but when everyone came together, folks were building their own plots in all different sizes to suit their needs— adding interest to the garden. There was a concern that people would take issue with size, but gardeners generally took what they could manage;; people still swap to this day. There’s lots of experience in this garden, even a few farmers, and everyone is willing to teach and share in the culti-vation and harvest. Another garden arrives, with family in tow, and the conversation is begins to carry itself. She had nev-er gardened but wanted to teach her children about plants and how they grow. Now she comes to the garden for peace, meditation, and community. ‘one of the most basic human needs is a sense of belonging.. and you can feel it in this garden… It feels like a family’. ‘We also get vegetables’ her husband pipes in. The gardeners really strengthened their connection through yoga in her living room. They have a few yoga teachers as members and they miss the ones that leave. ‘The more times we meet, the strong-­er the sense of community’. They also hold potlucks, and movie nights for neighbours to join. A multi-­cultural meal night in one of the gardeners kitchens features a new cultural dish every month. ‘Breaks are important. We take a lot of breaks in this garden’. There’s a strong sense of trust among the gardeners and many children are brought to play as the  36 Section Three GROWING TOGETHER  ........................................................................... 37 Garden Culture in Vancouver ............................................................. 37 Why Does Inclusion Matter? ................................................................. 38  HOW TO BUILD INCLUSION .................................................................... 39 Planning for Inclusion ............................................................................. 39 Elements to Consider............................................................................. 40 Process of Inclusive Planning ............................................................... 41 Five Goals of Inclusive Planning .......................................................... 42  QUICK GUIDE TO PLANNING  ............................................................... 53 How to Plan for Inclusivity  37 Section Three Section Three provides insight into why programming for community projects is so valuable and the oppor-tunity that community gardens provide for creating welcoming spaces and engaged citizens. This section then provides recommendations for how garden co-ordinators can create more inclusive and welcoming community garden spaces.   Garden Culture in the City Connection to Community According to a recent survey conducted by the Van-couver Foundation (2012), one-third of residents find it difficult to make new friends in MetroVancouver and one in four say they are alone more often than they would like to be. People who felt alone and isolated experienced poorer health, lower trust and a harden-ing of attitudes toward other community members16. The Vancouver Foundation identifies several key weaknesses MetroVancouver’s community connec-­tivity:  We only know the names of at least two of our neighbours;   We typically have never visited a neighbours house or invited neighbours over;  We seldom see our neighbours;  We prefer to keep to ourselves, or have little inter-est in getting to know our neighbours;  Most of us do not do simple favours for our neigh-bours; and,   Barely a majority of us think that the ties in our neighbourhood are growing stronger.  While being cordial is a start, more interaction is nec-essary for developing greater trust, greater commit-ment to community and the willingness to work to-gether in the neighbourhood’s interests. The Community Gardener Survey revealed that most gardeners have met at least four or more new neigh-bours since joining their community gardens (62%), most of whom connect with at least one of these neighbours outside the garden (55%). One third of gardeners have met and maintained relationships with at least four or more new gardeners outside the community garden. At one garden party in East Vancouver, neighbours gathered around a grill and chatted openly about each other and their strong sense of belonging. The more time they spend together the more strongly connected they feel. One gardener felt like fellow gardeners were more like a family and invited them over to cook and stretch together regularly. Trust and sharing were mentioned frequently.  While the Vancouver Foundation report found that metroVancouverites were participating less in neigh-bourhood and community activities15, 78% of the community gardeners surveyed felt more involved in community projects and 96% felt a strong sense of belonging since joining a community garden.  The most often-cited reason for not participating in neighbourhood and community life is a feeling that oneself has little to offer (Vancouver Foundation, 2014). An East Vancouver garden coordinator felt that one of the reasons their community garden felt so welcoming was the opportunity for gardeners and neighbours to contribute to projects that suited their interests, skills, and abilities.  Diverse projects provide opportunities to build a di-verse set of personal and communal assets, achieved through communal participation working toward a common goal. There is an opportunity for community gardens to encourage capacity building while also building valuable connections with neighbours.   Connection to Diversity When asked about their connection to the communi-ty since joining a community garden, most communi-ty gardeners felt gardening had provided and mean-ingful and positive change in their sense of belonging in the community, their participation in community projects, their ability to connect and talk with neigh- 38 bours, and their interaction with other generations.  Although the Vancouver Foundation found that most people be-lieved that newcomers would feel welcome in their neighbourhood, they discovered limits to diversity as an opportunity to build mean-ingful relationships with those from different cultures. Over one-third of people in metro-Vancouver reported that they have no close friends outside our own ethnic group and generally believe that people prefer to be with others of the same ethnicity. Similar to our survey, less than 50% of gardeners that felt they had connected with, or built strong relationships with people from other cultures.  Why Does Inclusion Matter? Creating community gardens that are inclusive and welcoming from the start, is the foundation to creating food projects that en-sure all community members have access to benefits of community gathering spaces17. A focus on inclusion creates gardens which are:  Safe and secure for everyone  Productive for growing appropriate crops  More easily self-managed and maintained  More engaging and animated Gardener participation may be a result of cultural preferences for food procurement and socialization (Seto, 2013;; Baker, 2004). it’s important to ensure that participation is not solely based on the per-ception of belonging or informal community networks. Each com-munity member should have equal opportunity to engage in citizen programming based on an informed choice. Garden coordinators do not tend to advertise a new garden beyond the City require-ment for flyering and posting a sign at the site. No deeper level of engagement is required which further separates neighbours with differing perceptions of what that space means to them.  A Can You Dig It gardener said it best: “...Like permaculture, it is im-­portant to plant different types of plants in one plot. It enriches the soil, it replenishes nutrients and it prevents erosion. Ike permaculture we will have successful gardens that represent the diversity in our communities” By creating gardens where everyone belongs and can contribute based on their skills, interests and abilities -  we build more resilient communities and assure the development of strong, sustainable, fun and beautiful community gardens. Growing Together  39 Planning for Inclusion Some elements to consider for the planning process are recommended on the following page. A process for creating strategic and sustainable plans is presented through six steps from Vision to Action; the pro-cess has been adapted for creating inclusive and welcoming gardens. The planning process is summa-rized in a Quick Guide for core garden planning groups to reference when coming together to openly discuss expectations, goals, desires, and values.   The Five broad goals for creating inclusive and welcoming spaces are presented as a central theme from which a strong and sustainable plan can be developed. The goals include: Accessibility, Availability, Adequacy, Acceptability, and Agency.  Supportive material on these five goals of inclusion, as related to community gardens, are also provided, and include: considerations for planning and creating inclusive spaces, examples of actions and projects for creating inclusive spaces, and activities inspired from both City of Vancouver Food Champions and the Can You Dig It Coalition Dialogues.  Section Three Acceptability Agency Adequacy Availability Accessibility Sufficient food, space and resources for all  community members Physical, social and economic access to food, space and resources for all community members Access to food that is nutritious and safe, and produced in environmentally sustainable ways Access to culturally acceptable food, which is produced and obtained in ways that do not compromise people's dignity, self-respect or human rights The policies and processes that enable the achievement of inclusive food spaces  40 Building Inclusion Organization + Trust (Comfort) What Already Exists? Team + Community Champions Resources + Capacity Removing barriers to planning   Group Size—Determine the size of a group gardeners will work best in. A group of less than 3 is unlikely to capture the values of the community and more than 12 may prevent quick resolutions and decisions.   Build Trust and Relationships — Meet with neighbours and organizations before bringing them into the larger discussion to create comfort, confidence, and trust   Partner Up —Find partners which reflect a dynamic group of representatives from the community to meet and advise on programming and design  Connect with the Community—Find community champions that are in tune with community needs. Ask what opportunities or goals exist in the neighbourhood that could be enhanced by a community garden. Would other food projects be a better fit?  Volunteers—Provide meaningful opportunities for  volunteers to use their skills in completing projects. Focus on building skills and knowledge through training.   Be Realistic—Be creative but keep in mind what is possible given current and potential resources  Share—Map and utilize resources which gardens have or can access  Timing—Schedule planning events so that a diverse group of neighbours can attend  Communication— Make sure language of notices and policies are multilingual, positive and encouraging  Space & Location— Choose locations which are familiar, central, close to transit, and easily accessible  Ask for Feedback — Allow members to provide feedback on benefits and needs. Be sure to also celebrate project success.  Neighbourhood— take time to assess the feel and function of the neighbourhood and how a community garden fits in that context  Research— Explore existing resources on engaging with diverse groups Elements to Consider18,19,   41 Assessment Opportunities and possibilities can be more readily assessed with a clear picture of who’s involved, how connected the core group is to the neighbourhood and what resources are available.  Task 1: Identify physical and social resources that exist in the community. Reach out to community champions and organizers that will take on a main role in the community garden planning process.   Task 2: Create a neighbourhood map of local business, community spaces,  and resources. Identify neighbours with special knowledge, skills, and interests by surveying the neighbourhood. Don’t be afraid to knock on doors.  Vision The visioning process creates opportunities for open dialogue, understanding, and building trust and relationships. The vision also provides a foundation from which to build community through gardening and provides an expectation when members join.   Task 3: As a group, begin to create a clear vision based on values and principals your share.   Task 4: Agree on a one to two sentence statement that captures the values and direction of you garden.  Objectives Task 5: Define key challenges and opportunities that the garden wishes to address for each goal of inclusion; e.g., Acceptability of cultivation practices for newcomers  Task 6: Evaluate the issues together and determine the direction of change; e.g., there are a group of elders which love to garden but have no family to share agricultural knowledge and recipes.  Task 7: Identify objectives and actions to accomplish and prioritize objectives and set timelines for achievement  e.g. we would like see more seniors in the garden within the year Strategy Task 8: Create potential projects to address the objectives of the community garden. Be creative and open to all suggestions. Encourage as many different ideas as possible; e.g.,  Accessibility - building only communal plots with benches or one learning plot and individual benches  Task 9: Group the projects into strategies that based on objectives and goals.  Task 10: As a collective, select the strategy that serves the community the most given the vision and available resources. Determine how you will make decisions beforehand; e.g.,  majority, consensus, leadership etc.  Action Task 11: Identify champions for each action and work together to outline the process on implemen-tation. Assign tasks, identify resources and create a timeline that works for everyone.  Task 12: Agree on governance structure and establish a way to coordinate and monitor community commitment to the garden and its members Evaluation Task 13: Agree on who and how the group will evaluate the success of the garden plan in achieving its vision and objectives.   Task 14: Track metrics and compare with vision and objectives. Make sure evaluations are docu-mented and transparent.   Task 15: Feedback from gardeners and the community is a great way to develop trust and build relationships.  4 5 6 Process of Inclusive Planning 3 1 2 Section Three  42 Acceptability Agency Adequacy Availability Accessibility Five goals for inclusion Below are the five goals for inclusion developed specifically for community gardens. Consider how each decision affects how the garden welcomes and includes members of the neighbourhood, what the garden’s role is within the broader community and  how the vision for the garden will be achieved. The following pages expand on each goal and provide a foundation for group discussion and planning. In an inclusive garden, all gardeners have equitable access to participate and benefit from the gardening process. Barriers to participation and a sense of belonging are identified and overcome as a community.  An inclusive garden is one where policies are established to enable all of the above. Procedures and organization that facilitates community building, respects diversity, and creates understanding. An inclusive garden is one which celebrates diversity. The process of growing food and building community through cultivation, harvest and sharing should be respectful of the entire community and acceptable to all of its members.   An inclusive garden promotes healthy, safe, and nutritious food of sufficient quality and quantity. This includes adequate education, training, programming, connections and support needed for success from plot to plate. An inclusive garden is one where participants feel as though a sufficient amount of land, resources and food is available and sustainable regardless of culture, class, ethnicity, age, or ability. Building Inclusion  43 Planning for Accessibility  The design of each element will determine who can access the garden. Invite a diverse group of neighbours and local organi-zations to participate in the design process. Physical, Mental, + Cultur-al Accessibility  By being actively involved in the planning and building process, neighbours will have a sense of ownership and feel more wel-come in the space   Ask neighbours what they’d like to see in the garden, what skills or resources  they have, and show them how they can contrib-ute to the space Comfort + Resources  Seek out neighbourhood champions to discover the needs of the surrounding community and determine how the community gar-den can fill that role.  Create a process around celebration and fun that reflects the talents and skills of the gardeners and the community Cultural Connection + Sense of Belonging Activity Draw Your Food Space TO BRING: large sheets of paper and coloured markers/crayons  A ‘food space’ can be any physical place where participants engage with food, like a garden they had in the past, their current garden, or their dream garden. Community food asset, such as a community kitchen, farmers’ market, or local eatery are also food spaces.  Ask participants to choose and draw a food space. Encourage creativity and imagination, and make sure everyone feels comfortable. Their drawings can be detailed or simple, or they can ask to have someone else draw it for them. Share the gardens and their experiences with the rest of the participants.  Discuss how the current garden space might be improved and any barriers that might prevent the garden from being the ‘perfect’ space. For example, discuss what types of plants they would grow and why? Why is it a ‘dream’ garden and not a real garden?   Write down important points, hopes, and expectations as you go through the activity. Summa-rize the dream garden and create a poster or document that can be easily shared with gar-deners. Sit down as a group and discussion actions and champions that can make expectations a reality in the garden.   A B C  44  Rest— proximity of seating and tools to plots  Mobility—Layout of plots and path size/material  in relation to garden entrance  Physical access—Plot seating and raised beds  Technical—Access to communal tools Gardeners socialize in diverse ways:  Facilitate the formation of bonds and groups based on interest, ability and culture to create a sense of belonging and comfort.  Overcome language barriers by making creative pictures and multilingual signs together  Consider different materials and strategies to distinguish the community garden from public space, like trees and  pathways instead of fences  Open the space to non gardeners through multiple entrances, pathways, and communal seating and gathering spaces Creating Accessibility Cultural Groups Design for Access Blending with Streets 1 2 3 “Just because you can’t grow here, doesn’t mean it can’t be your space too”  Doris Chow, Potluck Café and Catering CONSIDERATIONS Proximity to pedestrian friendly streets, transit, and gardeners Access to shared resources and tools Creating a sense of belonging for all gardeners  45 Planning for Availability  Neighbours and garden members are likely to feel more welcome and be more committed to a project when they are part of it. In-volve the community in every step of the planning process from vision through construction all the way to programming. Strategic + Sustainable  Incorporate values of the community by celebrating the history, design and culture of the surrounding neighbourhood.   A creative and vibrant space that feels more personal and is well visited, creates interest for neighbours while deterring theft Secure + Welcoming  Create spaces in which gardeners and neighbours can share re-sources  Ideas, passions, skills, knowledge, and tools can be shared in com-mon spaces, in secure sheds, at communal plots, social webpag-es and even neighbourhood kitchens. Encourage a culture of  sharing TO BRING: Large paper, Markers, Large Pot, Potable Stove Before you begin planting the garden, organize a stone soup event in the garden space. Invite neighbours through posters, knocking on doors and word-of-mouth. Ask each invitee to bring their favourite vegetables and upon arrival Introduce everyone to the space and talk about what everyone brought and why, and then discuss what everyone would like to see in the gar-den. Throw all the vegetables into a large pot and cook them together. As the soup cooks, walk around the garden and talk about light, soils and map out areas which will have the most sun, where the drainage is. Come together and map out the garden layout and invite each neighbour to write what they would grow and what would be the best spot to grow it. Finalize the plans and invite neighbour back to help plant the communal garden spaces. Build boxes together. Invite children in the neighbourhood to create beautiful signs that clearly differ-A B C Activity Growing Together  46 Creating Availability Cultural Groups  Conversation—Social seating in open spaces   Sharing—Secure and accessible spaces  to share   resources and skills  Safety—High visibility and community presence  Security—Personalizing plots Design for Acceptability Focus on the history and culture of the neighbourhood:  Map community assets and spaces of interest to animate local businesses  Blur boundaries between public and garden space with creative fencing  Host community activities and partner with local artists Blending with Streets  Hold fun and educational events to create connections between neighbours  Encourage gardeners to contribute based on theirs skills, abilities and interests  Open dialogues with gardeners on the various way they can contribute 1 2 3 ’You have to meet, and sit together, and share together. My problems, I always share my problems. My happiness, I always share.  Community Gardener CONSIDERATIONS Creating secure and open spaces that facilitate sharing Determining the role of the community garden in the neighbourhood Creating interest for neighbours and gardeners alike  47 Planning for Adequacy Capacity Building  Building regular programming into the growing season builds skills and confidence in community gardeners  Programs in partnership with local neighbourhood houses and food networks can expand the  gardener skill set and improve confidence Health + Well-being  Events that incorporate organic growing and healthy eating pro-vide a great health benefit to the community   Encouraging opportunities for gardeners and neighbours to con-tribute and be part of garden maintenance and renewal provides a sense of purpose and activity in outdoor spaces Knowledge + skills  Development  Encouraging member-member skills transfer can help to create a culture of trust and strengthen the community  Building the capacity and confidence of gardeners promotes a healthy garden for both plants and people.   TO BRING: Large calendar, sticky notes with three colours, lots of markers, ideas! Provide everyone with a few sticky notes of each colour. Assign a colour for something to learn, something to share, and an idea for socializing. Ask gardeners and neighbours to write down one thing they want to learn, one thing they’d be willing to teach, and one event they’d like to see happen in the garden using the appropriate colour. Ask the participants to place the stickies on the calendar for a date that works well for them. Work through the calendar as a group and set down a garden schedule for the season. Each event should have a host (or more), some enthusiastic participants, and a firm date & time. Display the calendar in a clear spot in the garden. Follow up with hosts and send reminders to gardeners about events. A B C Activity The Community Board  48 Creating Adequacy Community Groups  Training—Spaces to facilitate workshops and education    Comfort—Number and size of shaded and covered areas for socializing   Food—Surfaces for communal cooking and eating   Design for Acceptability Focus on the assets of the neighbourhood:  Engage with local schools, kitchens, and markets to hold events at the garden  Explore opportunities to generate funding for your garden through local business and neighbours. Trade skill building or funds for fresh vegetables in a CSA or with a local restaurant. Blending with Streets  Encourage gardeners to engage with each other in the garden and outside, for example cooking together  List gardeners' gifts and wishes: Skills they are willing to share and things they wish to learn. Provide space and opportunity for gardeners and neighbours to share their gifts 1 2 3 Like permaculture it is important to plant different types of plants in one plot…to have successful gardens that represent the diversity in our communities. CYDI Coalition and Dialogues CONSIDERATIONS Creating comfortable spaces to rest and socialize Developing the skills and knowledge of the community over time Improving the health of gardeners and the environment.  49 Planning for Acceptability  Space dedicated to cultivating and cooking cultural foods cre-ates interesting and welcoming spaces for newcomers  Empower seniors to pass on valuable cultivation, harvesting, and preparation knowledge to younger generations Experiment and  Experience  Creative spaces where members can experiment can foster ex-citement and collaboration between cultures, status, and genera-tions  Collaboration Contributions  Create opportunities for recognition and demonstration of the skills and knowledge each gardener possesses  Encourage members to identify their own goals and abilities to contribute as a member and to learn from one another Skills + Asset Mapping Leadership should meet each new gardener  in person, welcome them into the space, and introduce them to the community.  Create a package for each gardener that provides a clear picture of expectations and re-sponsibilities. At the same time, ask each gardener what their expectations are for the garden and what they would like to give and what they would like to receive. Throughput the season, revisit those expectations and ask for feedback from gardens. Ask what they learned, what they achieved, how they felt, and what could be done differently. At the end of the season, Celebrate! Be sure to recognize gardeners  for the hard work. Acknowledge and highlight achievements and projects that were successful and even those that weren’t. Most importantly have fun! A B C Activity Feedforth and Feedback  50 Creating Acceptability Community Groups  Farming Techniques—Spaces dedicated to growing or experimenting with culturally acceptable crops  Networking— Seating and demonstration plots/accessory activities such as bee keeping to allow for interaction with neighbours.  Space and Structure: A well planned garden is adaptable and responsive to changing needs. Try incorporating cultural and physical opportunities in your garden. Cultural crops may require different shapes, structures, or growing conditions. Think about a garden plan, ask what gardeners would like to grow and what they require to grow it.   Design for Acceptability  Character of the neighbourhood: Focus on the identity and design of the neighbourhood when designing the garden. Ask neighbours what they would like to see in the garden.  Invite neighbour to contribute. Invite children to paint signs and fences.   Schedule regular neighbourhood events, potlucks, and artists. Blending with Streets 1 2 3 In our gardens we grow more than food, we cultivate relationships. CYDI Coalition and Dialogues CONSIDERATIONS Shared spaces to be creative and connect to culture Leverage community assets and resources to build garden capacity Building networks among gardeners and neighbours  51 Planning for Agency Fair  + clear Policy  A Community Garden Plan that describes community gardener objectives , expectations and responsibility will help to create a sustainable organization  Members that understand and feel part of garden governance are more likely to participate fully Culture of Understanding   Partnering with local organizations and non profit groups also adds diversity to the planning process and helps to generate creative ideas from different perspectives  Working together as a group to create policies  builds trust and understanding among members Governance +Partnership  Partnering with local organizations and non profit groups ensures a broader inclusion of the surrounding community  Planning and maintaining a garden in full partnership with the community creates a sense of ownership and commitment Activity Say it in Many Ways TO BRING: Policies, blank sheets, creativity Not everyone will have perfect understanding of procedures, or will interpret policies in the same way. Once the members have agreed on structure of governance, and the policies to guide them toward their vision, sit down as a committee, or team, or collective, with your words laid out in front of you. Take each procedure, expectation, and responsibility, and find at least three different ways of expressing it. Use colours, pictures, language, pictograms, drawings, sayings, and/or colloquial-isms. Encourage creativity, clarity, and understanding. Create a clear and organized document that can be emailed, posted and distributed to each gardener. Hold an orientation at the garden and walk through the policy and the garden to-gether. Ask for one comment from each member to ensure they’ve read through and under-­stood. A B C   52  Participation—Explore various governance models that encourage participation in all activities, for example, open committees or cross-committee membership.   Perceptions—the role and use of a community garden may be viewed different across participants.  Create a policy with clear vision, objectives, and expectations with participation from all gardeners. Use less formal and more positive language.  Creating Agency Community Groups  Signage— Create signs in multiple languages with the help of the community. Include pictures wherever possible.  Policy—Space to post easily accessible documents on site. Orient new gardeners at the site and provide  a welcoming package to take home. Design for Agency  Open membership—Consider opening the membership to neighbours without plots.  Communal growing, composts, bee keeping, workshops and events are just some of the excellent chances neighbours have to participate. Blending with Streets 1 2 3 Finding and maintaining a sense of home and belonging is dynamic, delicate and requires nurturing. It is difficult to maintain and is on-going. CYDI Coalition and Dialogues CONSIDERATIONS Multiple perspectives of community groups and isolated populations Community governance and collaboration throughout the process Building trust and commitment from the beginning  53 From Process to Planning Objectives Vision Assessment Strategy Evaluation Action Section Three Core Group   Identify community champions and organizers   Assets  Create a neighbourhood assets map of local groups, neighbours and businesses  1 2 Community  Create a clear vision based on values and principals your share.   Openness   Building trust and relationships.  3 4  Challenges  Define key challenges and opportunities that the garden wishes to address    Direction  Evaluate the issues together and determine the direction of change   Prioritize  Identify + prioritize objectives and actions  5 6 7  Projects  Create projects to address objectives   Packages   Group projects into strategies   Selection  Select the  most appropriate strategy  8 9 10  Champions  Identify champions, assign tasks, identify resources and create a workable timeline.  Governance  Agree on a structure and method of coordinating and monitoring achievement 11 12  Metrics   How you will evaluate the success of your garden  Monitor  Compare  achievements with vision and objectives..  Feedback   Continuously assess expectations from both the garden and its individual members  13 14 15  54 From Process to Planning Accessibility Agency Acceptability Adequacy Availability Strategy #1 Project #1 Project #2 Strategy #2 Quick Action 1st year 5 year goal Strategy #3 Quick Guide  Welcome  55 References 1 Vancouver Food Strategy. 2013. City of Vancouver. Pg. 10. Accessed July 31, 2014. http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/vancouver-food-strategy-final.PDF 2 Seto, D. 2012. Diversity and Engagement in Alternative Food Practice: Community Gardens in Vancou-ver, B.C. Masters Thesis. UBC. 3 Baker, L.E. (2004), Tending cultural landscapes and food citizenship in Toronto’s community gardens. Geographical Review, 94: 305–325. doi: 10.1111/j.1931-0846.2004.tb00175.x  4 Morgan, K. (2009), Feeding the city: The challenge of urban food planning. International Planning Stud-ies, 14: 341-348. doi: 10.1080/13563471003642852  5 The Greenest City 2020 Action Plan. 2011. City of Vancouver. Pg. 65-67. Accessed July 31, 2014. http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/Greenest-city-action-plan.pdf 6  Roberts, Wayne. Food for City Building: A Field Guide for Planners, Actionists & Entrepre-neurs.  Hypenotic Inc. Toronto: 2014.  7Vancouver Mayor’s Engaged City Task Force Final Report. 2014. City of Vancouver. Accessed July 31, 2014. http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/final-report-engaged-city-task-force-2014.pdf 8 Strengthening Neighbourhood Resilience: Opportunities for Communities & Local Governments. 2013. Vancouver Foundation. Accessed July 31, 2014. http://resilientneighbourhoods.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Resilient-Neighbourhoods_web_sm.pdf 9 Parks Board Community Garden Policy.  2012. City of Vancouver. Accessed July 31, 2014. http://vancouver.ca/people-programs/parks-board-community-gardens-policy.aspx 10 Operational Guidelines for Community Gardens on City Land Other Than City Parks. 2013. City of Van-couver. Accessed July 31, 2014. http://vancouver.ca/files/cov/CommunityGardensGuidelines.pdf 11 International Making Cities Livable Conference. Amber Baker, Program Director, Village Gardens & Karen Cellarius, Senior Research Associate, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA. Village Gar-dens: Building Community and Healthy Food Source  12  Toronto Public Health (2006), Food Security: Implications for the Early Years. Toronto Ontario: Toronto Public Health. Accessed July 31, 2014 http://www.toronto.ca/health/children/pdf/fsbp_ch_1.pdf 13  Atlantic Health Promotion Research Centre (2006), Thought About Food?: Understanding the Relation-ship Between Public Policy and Food Security in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia Nutritional Council. Accessed July 2013 http://nsfoodsecurity.org/resources/LensDocument.pdf 14 10 Centre for Studies in Food Security. 2006. Food Security Defined. Ryerson University, http://www.ryerson.ca/foodsecurity/definition/ 15Community Food Security Coalition (2010), Community Food Projects Indicators of Success. National Research Centre, Inc. Boulder CO. Accessed July 31 2014. http://www.commdev.org/userfiles/CFP_IOS_FINAL_Report-22Apr2011_0.pdf 16Vancouver Foundation Research 2012 - Connections and Engagement, A survey of Metro Vancouver-http://www.vancouverfoundation.ca/initiatives/connections-and-engagement 17 Can You Dig It! (2013), Benefits of Community Gardening. Possibilities. Accessed July 31, 2013. http://cydi.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/A.-Benefits-of-CG.pdf 18 Frog Hollow Neighbourhood House (2014), Generating Citizenship Seniors + Youth. Accesses July 2014 http://www.froghollow.bc.ca/uploads/GeneratingCitizenship_toolkit.pdf 19 Can You Dig It Possibilities Gardener Coalition Dialogues (2014), Possibilities, Vancouver, BC. Canada.  56 Communication  Average Minimum Membership  (n = 20) Plot Fee ($) 23  0 Min Garden Space (ft^2) 52 6 Max Garden Space (ft^2) 68 15 Membership hours per year  required (if any) 10 0 How long is your waiting list? 47 0  No.               Percent How do members find out about joining the garden? (n = 20) CoV/Parks Website 7 0.35 Events 1 0.05 Organization 2 0.10 Email/Newsletters 3 0.15 Garden Website/Online 9 0.45 Posters/Flyers 1 0.05 Walk-by/Garden Sign 7 0.35 Word-of-Mouth 9 0.45 Do you communicate garden events with indi-viduals on the waiting list?  (n = 16) YES 11 0.69 NO 5 0.31 How do you communicate with members about work and social events?   (n = 20)  Email 19 0.95  Telephone 10 0.50  Social Networking Page (e.g. Face-book) 9 0.45  Website 6 0.30  Garden Notice Board 10 0.50  Member Meetings 9 0.45  Member handbook 2 0.10  Member Orientation 3 0.15  Other 4 0.20 How do you communicate with members about policy and procedure?   (n = 20) Email 20 1.00 Telephone 3 0.15 Social Networking Page (e.g. Face-book) 2 0.10 Website 4 0.20 Garden Notice Board 6 0.30 Member Meetings 12 0.60 Member Handbook 6 0.30 Member Orientation 9 0.45 Other, please specify... 4 0.20 Opportunities to Connect More than 1 a week 1 a week 2 - 3 times a month 1 a month Less than 1 a month How many work parties do you typically hold?  (n = 20) 0 2 2 10 6 How many social gatherings or events do you typically hold? (n = 20) 0 1 1 3 13 Appendix A: Coordinator Survey  57 Garden Arrangement and plot Allocation   No. Plots Percent Total Plot Type (n=18)  Individual Plots 714 39.67 Charity plots (food grown specifically for donation) 11 0.61 Communal plots (For all garden member use) 89 4.94 Community plots (open to public) 5 0.28 Group plots 53 2.94 Community Centre/Neighbourhood House Plots 34 1.89 Educational Plots 56 3.11 Accessible plots for the physically impaired 68 3.78 Other 30 1.67 Existing Structures in the  Community Garden (n=19)   Structure No. Gardens Percent Signs in multiple languages 7 0.37 Signs with diagrams and/or pictures  10 0.53 Dedicated space for community gathering 10 0.53 Fence surrounding garden 12 0.63 Wheelchair accessible pathways 14 0.74 Ground farming/gardening plots 8 0.42 Storage space 18 0.95 Community notice board 14 0.74 Dedicated space for gardeners to share resources (seeds, tools, books etc.) 12 0.63 Space specifically designed for children 8 0.42 Benches or surfaces for seating 18 0.95 Shaded areas 11 0.58 Covered areas 3 0.16 Personalized signs or art for plots 10 0.53 Seating next to plots for accessibility/rest 9 0.47 Tables or surfaces for eating 9 0.47  10% Communal Plots 4 0.22  Structure 1044 54.97 Community Garden Organi-zation  and Policy (n=19)  Policy No. Gardens Percent Welcoming Committee 3 0.16 Multilingual Welcoming Committee Members 2 0.11 Required orientation for new members 7 0.37 Gardeners must live in the neighbourhood to become mem-bers 4 0.21 Membership must be representative of the surrounding neigh-bourhood 5 0.26 Programs that encourage cultural understanding 3 0.16 Educational programs for growing or cooking 8 0.42 A clear vision or mission: (Please explain) 8 0.42 Vision that Includes Diversity 3 0.16  Policy 478 25.15  58  Creating Inclusive Gardens   Indicate how strongly the managing organization intended to incorporate the following into the goals and operation of the Community Garden Strong        Intention Some   Intention Minimal   Intention No Intent Avoided Physical accessibility 10 4 2 0 0 Cross-cultural connections 6 7 1 1 0 Creating a sense of belonging 14 2 0 0 0 Community building 15 2 0 0 0 Culture of sharing resources and knowledge 12 4 0 0 0 Secure and safe spaces 9 5 2 0 0 Sustainable and organic growing 15 2 0 0 0 Cooking skills and healthy eating 4 6 7 0 0 Agricultural skills and knowledge 6 9 1 0 0 Experimenting with cultural or non-traditional crops 4 4 7 2 0 Mapping and utilizing assets/skills of garden members 6 6 4 1 0 Opportunities for members to work together 15 1 0 1 0 Policy on inclusion of marginalized populations 7 2 7 1 0 Creation of open and welcoming spaces 15 1 1 0 0 Clear procedures with cultural consideration and understand-ing 6 5 6 0 0       level of meaningful impact you've noticed in the garden community, whether intended or not Strong Positive Change Some   Positive Change Minimal   Positive Change No Change Negative Change Physical accessibility 7 5 3 3 0 Cross-cultural connections 5 4 4 2 0 Creating a sense of belonging 10 4 1 0 0 Community building 11 7 0 0 0 Culture of sharing resources and knowledge 8 5 1 0 0 Secure and safe spaces 3 6 2 3 0 Sustainable and organic growing 7 1 1 0 0 Cooking skills and healthy eating 3 8 7 2 0 Agricultural skills and knowledge 6 3 2 1 0 Experimenting with cultural or non-traditional crops 3 7 5 3 0 Mapping and utilizing assets/skills of garden members 5 5 3 1 0 Opportunities for members to work together 12 4 0 0 0 Policy on inclusion of marginalized populations 7 5 5 3 0 Creation of open and welcoming spaces 10 5 0 1 0 Clear procedures with cultural consideration and understand-ing 4 8 4 4 0       Scores  Max possible Average Max Min  Structures (n=19) 100 55 82 35  Policy (n=17) 100 28 67 11  Intent Score 60 49 60 37  Outcome Score 60 45 60 34   59 Demographics    Region of Birth (n=210) Parent Region of Birth (n=205*) Africa 3 3 Asia 8 17 Canada 154 129 Caribbean 2 2 East/South-east 7 14 Eastern Europe 3 7 Europe 15 54 Latin America 3 4 North America 179 149 Oceania 2 3 Scandinavia 2 2 South Asia 1 3 South Europe 1 2 USA 23 26 Western Europe 7 39 Some or No High School High School Diploma Some         College or   University College  Diploma/Certificate University     Degree Post Graduate Degree Level of education completed  (n=214)  3 9 29 32 88 54 Aboriginal English French Non-Official What languages do you speak at home? (n=210)  1 206 14 30 Detached Semi-detached/Multi-Family Mobile Home Townhouse Co-op Other What type of home do you live in?  (n=214)  35 17 139 0 9 15 7 Average No.   Average House-How Many People in your House-hold (n=107)  0.49  2.21  Under $5,000  $5,000 to $9,999   $10,000 to $14,999  $20,000 to $29,999  $30,000 to $39,999  $40,000 to $49,999  $50,000 to $59,999  $60,000 to $79,999  $80,000 to $99,000 $100,000  or more  Total annual household in-come (n=215)  3 3 3 19 18 15 22 36 32 47 Appendix B: Gardener Census  60 Mode of Transportation Walk Bike Public Transit Car Wheel-chair   What are the primary ways you travel to your garden ((n=218) 168 76 14 43 5   Commitment to Garden > 2 hours a day 1 - 2 hours a day 1 - 3 hours a week 4 - 6 hours a week About 2-3 hours a month 0 - 1 hours a month  Time spent in your own individual plot?  (n=212) 2 14 114 49 29 3   Time Spent in the communal areas of the garden? (NOT in your own plot) (n=205) 1 4 33 8 101 58  Connection to Community  None 1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15 > 15  garden members do you regularly talk to AT the gar-den? (n=215) 4 73 76 30 19 3 10  garden members do you regularly talk to OUTSIDE the garden? (n=215) 62 98 40 10 3 1 10 new neighbours have you met since joining the gar-den? (n=215) 31 50 38 25 20 6 45 new neighbours do you regularly talk with outside the garden? (n=215) 92 77 26 10 2 2 2 Connection to Food System  No. Responses Percent of        Respondents What happens tot eh vegetables you grow in your community garden plot? ((n=218)  I don't grow fruit and vegetables in the garden 5 0.02 Donated to local organizations 29 0.13 Gets composted 35 0.16  Shared with other community gardeners 97 0.45 Shared with neighbours 122 0.56 Replaces groceries I would otherwise buy at the store 177 0.82  Included in family meals 183 0.85 None 4 0.02 Do you get fresh fruit and vegetables from any of the following community food projects?   Community Kitchens 4 0.02  Food Bank 4 0.02 Urban Farms 38 0.18  Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) 13 0.06 Farmer's Markets 172 0.80 Pop-up markets 16 0.07 Community Gardens 88 0.41 Home Garden 56 0.26 Healthy local corner store 85 0.39 Green Grocers 103 0.48 None 12 0.05 YES 83 0.39 Do you have space to garden at home?( n=214)  NO 131 0.61  61 Gardener Experiences Please select aspects for which you experiences meaningful change since joining a community garden No. Respons-es Percent of Respondents A) Knowledge and Skills towards Food and Community (n=216)    None 12 0.05  Other 14 0.06   Knowledge of healthy food choices 77 0.36  Learning about local food and agriculture 118 0.55   Learning about the diverse cultures and people in the neighbourhood 121 0.56   Knowledge of environmental issues and importance of green spaces 125 0.58   Learning about sustainable and organic gardening practices  147 0.68  Learning how to work with others on a community project 161 0.75   Gaining gardening or farming skills 182 0.84 B) Behaviours and Connection toward Food and Community  (n=216)    None 3 0.01   Other 18 0.08  Earning money through sale of harvested fruit and vegetables 2 0.01   Confidence in preparing healthy meals 32 0.15  Connection to your culture 35 0.16  Interaction with people from different cultures 86 0.40   Knowledge of the benefits of local food production 86 0.40  Interaction with people from different generations 121 0.56  Ability to talk with, or get to know, more of your neighbours 148 0.69  Participation n community projects 155 0.72   Sense of belonging in the neighbourhood 170 0.79  Access to gardening space 199 0.92   C) Attitudes and Relationship toward Food and Community (n=216)   Other 7 0.03  None 4 0.02  Eat a wider variety of fruit and vegetables 84 0.39  Build relationships with neighbours of different race, class and/or culture 111 0.51  Eat more fresh fruit and vegetables 116 0.54  Get more physical exercise 127 0.59   Practice sustainable farming/gardening 147 0.68  Improve overall quality of life 159 0.74   Become more active in the community 161 0.75  Get outdoors more often  168 0.78 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.310.1-0075860/manifest

Comment

Related Items