Beyond the Community Garden

Ellison, Lewis; Bakshi, Nilesh; Fletcher, M.; Vale, Brenda; Brown, andre

doi:10.26686/wgtn.14973978

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a part of urban green space, community gardens provide a wide range of benefits such as the revitalization of vacant lots, improving neighborhood appearance, safety, and prosperity (Ohmer et al, 2009), carbon sequestration (Ellison et al, 2021), and slowing down rainwater runoff (Gittleman et al, 2017). Community gardens also provide services for their users and residents by promoting social interaction, community building, improved diet with increased vegetable intake (Litt et al, 2011), stress relief (Hayashi et al, 2008), physical activity (Gregis et al, 2021), and economic benefits for being a local and affordable food source (Kantor, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

People’s Reasons Not to Participate in Community Gardens in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods of Roanoke, Virginia

Kordon

Miller

2023

ArtGRID - Journal of Architecture Engineering and Fine Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although community gardening provides numerous environmental, economic, health, and social benefits, public involvement and support are still not at the desired level for their permanency in cities. While there are numerous studies regarding people’s motivations to participate in community gardening, empirical research is very limited for people’s reasons not to participate in community gardening. For increased involvement and public support, knowledge about people’s reasons not to participate in community gardening is important. Using a survey instrument, this research identified people’s primary reasons that negatively influence their participation in community gardening in five disadvantaged neighborhoods of Roanoke, Virginia. Descriptive statistics, T-test, and factor analysis procedures were used at a 95% significance level. Results showed that the statements associated with “theft and damage”, “difficult access”, “too much effort”, and “no personal interest” were the main reasons not to participate in community gardening. Based on these, this research brings design and maintenance recommendations for the increase of more successful community garden projects. In the long term, this can contribute to the long-term survival of these landscapes in cities by providing higher public involvement and support for community garden projects.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

People’s Reasons Not to Participate in Community Gardens in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods of Roanoke, Virginia

Kordon

Miller

2023

ArtGRID - Journal of Architecture Engineering and Fine Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For estimating carbon sequestration rates of green roofs, green walls and urban landscaping (trees, shrubs and lawns), the literature presents only a few studies related to estimating carbon sequestration in cities (Meurk et al, 2013), urban parks (Ellison et al, 2021;Schwendenmann and Mitchell, 2014) or turf grasses (Huh et al, 2008). Schwendenmann and Mitchell (2014) provided the carbon sequestration rates of urban park trees as 0.623 kg CO2 m -2 yr -1 , and Huh et al (2008) provided the carbon sequestration rates as 0.25 kg CO2 m -2 yr -1 for soil organic carbon within turf grass of New Zealand golf courses at a soil depth of 0-0.25m.…”

Section: Māori Namementioning

confidence: 99%

Regenerative Architecture: Carbon Sequestration and Habitat Provisioning through Building Design

Varshney

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p><strong>The urban built environment is one of the most significant contributors to global carbon emissions, and the annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is one of the core environmental issues driving global climate change. Rapid urbanisation is also causing natural ecosystems to be replaced with a heterogeneous urban matrix and patches of built-up areas, resulting in fragmentation, habitat degradation, and damage to biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. A fundamental rethinking of architectural and urban design could move towards the halting of ecosystem degeneration and an increase in their regenerative capacity. As the world is becoming increasingly urbanised, there is a growing need to incorporate nature-based solutions into building design to minimise or offset the harm they create. Increasing green spaces within urban built environments through building-integrated vegetation, such as green roofs and green walls, is primarily adopted for the purposes of stormwater management, evapotranspiration cooling and shading. Biodiversity conservation and carbon capture are often generated as a by-product of integrating vegetation into building design and are not the main focus. This research integrates vegetation into architecture by emulating the natural ecosystem to create a built ecosystem that could generate quantifiable carbon sequestration (the process of actively removing CO2 from the atmosphere) and habitat provisioning (providing living space for plants and animal species). On the one hand, building-integrated vegetation and urban green spaces have the potential to sequester atmospheric carbon and store it in the above- and below-ground biomass. On the other hand, these same green spaces, if strategically vegetated, provide important habitats for a wide variety of species, including insects, birds, and mammals and can act as potential stepping stones which connect habitat patches and reduce fragmentation. The relationship between these two ecosystem services is multifaceted and complex dependent upon vegetation type, substrate type, environmental conditions, and management strategies. This research thus explores the relationship between two aspects of regenerative design, i.e., carbon sequestration and habitat provisioning, to address the interrelated issues of climate change and biodiversity loss. Such projects that aim to regenerate urban ecosystems through architectural interventions need a context-based design evolution approach, as ecology is specifically location-dependent. The CO2BIRD (Carbon sequestration and Biodiversity-Integrated Regenerative Design) framework, prepared as an outcome of this research through a combination of literature review, quantitative and qualitative research methods, considers this context-based approach through holistic thinking: seeing a building and its surroundings as a unified system. And because biodiversity is location-specific, this research explores the practical implementation of the CO2BIRD framework by conducting a case study of an existing urban built environment, i.e., Wellington City, New Zealand. Birds are regarded as the primary species for biodiversity monitoring in urban built environments in New Zealand and globally due to their ease of identification and significant role in ecosystem functioning. However, this research focused on the keystone bird species found in Wellington, which are tūī, kererū, korimako and hihi, due to their greater ecological impact than other bird species. This CO2BIRD framework includes research-led data-gathering approaches to understanding the ecological, cultural, climatic and legal contexts. A catalogue of strategies is prepared that compares each strategy in terms of its carbon sequestration and habitat provisioning potential and the mutual benefits they provide to humans and nature. The indicators, which consider the dynamics of carbon sequestration and habitat provisioning ecosystem services, are identified to quantify the carbon sequestration rates and habitat provisioning levels, and guide the design development and implementation. Post-occupancy monitoring and management guidelines are also suggested, introducing building occupants to a regenerative culture and adaptive management approach that emphasises the need for flexibility and openness, ensuring that the built environment is able to adapt to the impacts of climate change. The results of this research encourage leading-edge professionals and decision-makers to concurrently design for enhancing biodiversity and decarbonising buildings through integrating vegetation. The strategies defined in this research could be upscaled to apply at regional, national and global levels and could be applied to different ecological, climatic and cultural contexts. The benefits are greatest when these approaches and strategies are integrated into broader regional-level green infrastructure networks and thus avoid further biodiversity loss and mitigate the impacts of climate change on the urban built environment.</strong></p>

show abstract

Attitudes and Perceptions of Community Gardens: Making a Place for Them in Our Neighborhoods

Kordon

Miller

Bohannon

2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although community gardens provide numerous economic, environmental, and social benefits, some have been lost to other land uses due to the lack of organized and effective public support. Knowledge about people’s attitudes and perceptions towards these landscapes is important to achieve greater public support. This study used a scene rating survey to investigate attitudes and perceptions of four different groups (community gardeners, community and home gardeners, home gardeners, and non-gardeners) in Roanoke, Virginia. Content analysis, factor analysis, descriptive statistics, customized Kruskal- Wallis test (ANOVA) and content identifying method (CIM) procedures were used. All statistical analyses were completed at a 95% significance level using SPSS version 21. Results showed that there are seven dimensions important to participants’ preferences in community gardens including “Gathering and Seating”, “Plots with Boundaries”, “Focal Points”, “Plots without Boundaries”, Garden Entrance”, Untidy Space”, and “Composting Structures”. Excluding the “Gathering and Seating” dimension, a significant difference was detected between participant groups. Based on these dimensions, this study provides design recommendations for community garden projects to minimize possible opposition between gardeners and non-gardeners and to develop more successful community garden programs for the long-term survival of these landscapes in cities.

show abstract

Beyond the Community Garden

Abstract: Investigating strategies to reduce the environmental impact of urban areas in New Zealand

Cited by 3 publications

References 12 publications

People’s Reasons Not to Participate in Community Gardens in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods of Roanoke, Virginia

People’s Reasons Not to Participate in Community Gardens in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods of Roanoke, Virginia

Regenerative Architecture: Carbon Sequestration and Habitat Provisioning through Building Design

Attitudes and Perceptions of Community Gardens: Making a Place for Them in Our Neighborhoods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About