Civic greening and environmental learning in public-access community gardens in Berlin

Bendt, Pim; Barthel, Stephan; Colding, Johan

doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.003

Cited by 214 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

156

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This definition particularly applies in Europe. Compared to community gardens, allotments are tended individually by plot holders and their families (Gröning 1996;van den Berg et al 2010;Bendt et al 2013). They are in most cases formally organised as associations with hierarchical structures, and are legally fixed in zoning plans.…”

Section: Ua and Pua Formsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sample gardens and farms in cities are described as micro and small scale, with an area of less than 2000 square feet (0.0186 ha) up to 12.85 acres (5.2 ha) (Allen 2007;Dekking et al 2007;Rosol 2011;Meenar and Hoover 2012;Bendt et al 2013;Martin et al 2014). In some cases, size results from the farming concept, such as in the case of small-plot intensive (SPIN) farms, where the suitable maximum size is defined as one acre (0.4 ha) (Christensen 2007).…”

Section: Scale Of Production Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Exceptions can be found in cities like Chicago (Cohen 2012) or Vancouver (Broadway and Broadway 2011), where UA is regulated as land use with certain restrictions (such as those applied to compost household waste, or other unique restrictions related to certain boroughs). Further exceptions can be found in the case of the European allotment gardens, which are regulated on various levels (Gröning 1996;Bendt et al 2013).…”

Section: Land Use Categorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Christensen 2007; Grün 2012). Instead, informal learning processes driven by experimentation, experience (Holland 2004;Bendt et al 2013) and learningby-doing approaches are common in UA (Müller 2011). While traditional agricultural knowledge is often missing, urban producers may have knowledge that is important for innovation and adaptation to urban conditions, such as local knowledge about socio-economic dynamics and access to alternative resources (Prain and De Zeeuw 2007).…”

Section: Professionalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Networks are often described in terms of their internal learning processes (Barthel et al 2010;Travaline and Hunold 2010;Bendt et al 2013). They thus contribute to generating social capital (Alaimo et al 2010;Firth et al 2011) and can be a decisive success factor for a project itself (Buttery et al 2008;Corrigan 2011;Meenar and Hoover 2012).…”

Section: Network Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Contributing to food security in urban areas: differences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the Global North

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

show abstract

Section: Ua and Pua Formsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Scale Of Production Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Land Use Categorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Professionalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Network Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Contributing to food security in urban areas: differences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the Global North

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Resilience

Barthel¹

2014

A Companion to Urban Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citizen participation in the governance of nature‐based solutions

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The last half‐a‐century has seen a marked demand for authentic citizen participation in public policy‐and decision‐making, not least in the field of sustainability. The depth and forms of citizen engagement in nature‐based solutions (NBS), for example, and how such participation shapes their trajectories is gaining increasing attention. In this paper, we analyze current forms and implications of citizen participation in 58 NBS case studies conducted in 21 cities in the light of supporting wider sustainability goals. Our results show that while tokenistic forms dominate citizen participation across a variety of NBS contexts, collaborative multi‐stakeholder forms of engagement do not automatically lead to enhanced ecological functions. Deeper forms of engagement, however, strengthen and diversify both expected and unexpected social outcomes, including social learning, enhanced sense of belonging, environmental stewardship, and inclusiveness and equity, in general. Driven by neoliberal austerity logic governments often cede power to NBS promoters whose interests predefine an intervention's vision of nature. Deeper levels of participation are hence limited by inherent institutional structures, neoliberal regimes and the lack of trust among actors involved. These limitations can be partially bridged by strengthening relational and reflexive capacities of public institutions. Focusing on the process of citizen engagement and creating multiple arenas for discussion could bring out new voices and narratives and also transform the culture of participation.

show abstract

Civic greening and environmental learning in public-access community gardens in Berlin

Cited by 214 publications

References 50 publications

Contributing to food security in urban areas: differences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the Global North

Contributing to food security in urban areas: differences between urban agriculture and peri-urban agriculture in the Global North

Resilience

Citizen participation in the governance of nature‐based solutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About