|
About community gardens
An evaluation by Russ Grayson + Fiona Campbell - April 2000
< introduction < relevance < impact < efficiency < effectiveness < progress
< sustainability < recommendations < conclusions < full document for printing
INTRODUCTION
Nearly 20 years after the first sod of soil was turned in Sydney's
first community garden, I produced this paper to assist local
government, community workers and others make decisions about
the use of community food gardens as foci for social development,
environmental improvement and food production.
This evaluation is based solely on observations and experience
in assisting to set up community gardens, training gardeners,
advocating on behalf of community gardeners and writing about
the community gardening experience in magazines and online.
Indicators
In this document, I make use of a set of indicators developed
by the international agency Oxfam primarily for the evaluation
of overseas aid projects. I have used similar indicators for monitoring
and evaluating aid projects in the South Pacific and have found
that they bring a broader contextual overview than simply evaluating
according to a projectÕs specific objectives.
Indicators used to assess community gardening in this report
include:
relevance - to the needs or participants, to garden sponsors
and to urban environmental improvement
- impact - how the gardens have affected the people
involved
- efficiency - how well the gardens make use of limited
resources
- effectiveness - whether the gardens really do achieve
their objectives
- progress - how community gardens have evolved and the
trends that are evident
- sustainability - whether the gardens are self-sustaining
and their prospects for the future.
< top
RELEVANCE
The growth of community gardening over the past ten years indicates
that more people, community organisations and government instrumentalities
see community gardens as relevant to public needs.
The mid-to-late 1990s brought:
- an expansion in the number of community gardens in the Sydney
region (and elsewhere in Australia)
- an increase in the number of enquiries to the Australian Community
Gardens Network from people and organisations interested in
establishing community gardens
- an increase in media coverage of community gardening the entry
of government institutions into community gardening.
This trend has continued into the new century.
Social aspects
Observation and informal discussion with participants suggests
that the relevance of community gardening has as much to do with
social considerations as with food production. Community workers
have told me that their primary interest in community gardens
is not access to food or nutritional health, but as venues for
developing a sense of community.
The value of the gardens as social venues surpasses their role
in reducing family expenditure on food or providing access to
food for their families. Although these roles have been proposed
by people concerned for the wellbeing of citizens on social welfare,
the comparative abundance and cheapness of food in Australia reduces
the potential for such roles.
Social reasons for participation in community gardening disclosed
at Community Gardens Network meetings as well as informally include:
- meeting people
- forming friendships and working towards common goals
- community gardens as family-friendly places
- establishing social bonds that contribute to a sense of community.
Cultural relevance
The cultural relevance of community gardening is evident through
the participation of different ethnic groups in community gardening:
at Sydney's Waterloo Estate community gardens, Vietnamese, Russian,
Indonesian, Australian and those of other ethnic origins garden
together at Melbourne's Fitzroy Estate community gardens, Hmong
and Vietnamese garden together, while the nearby Collingwood estate
community garden is dominated by Turks the Claymore community
gardens near Ca,mpbelltown, NSW, are tended by a large group of
Tongans and formed part of a resident-led rehabilitation of the
socially and economically troubled suburb.
I addition to an ethnically-focused cultural relevance, community
gardens foster their own social culture of cooperation and shared
responsibility. This culture grows from a community gardening
experience that includes the need to share responsibility for
the management of an area of land, to solve common problems, to
start and keep the garden going.
Relevance to an improved urban environment
As functional landscapes, community gardens are relevant to urban
environmental improvement because they bring derelict land into
productive use, regreen streetscapes and increase wildlife habitat.
Native plants
While plants grown in community gardens are primarily the exotic
species we rely on for our food, some gardens incorporate a small
number of native plants, including Australian bush foods. The
potential for this, however, is limited by the small size of most
gardens.
Exotics carry out much the same environmental services as do
native plants - producing clean air, filtering water, providing
habitat and diversity in addition to providing food. In this way
they contribute to improved environmental conditions.
Relevance to biodiversity
The use of non-hybrid vegetable seeds by some community gardeners
serves a valuable role in the preservation of agricultural biodiversity.
The seed is obtained from commercial seed companies such as Eden
Seeds, Greenpatch Seeds and Diggers Seeds and from the Seed Savers
Network, a membership organisation.
Like the biodiversity of natural systems, the diversity of the
food plants we eat has been drastically reduced throughout the
twentieth century to the situation where it may be more threatened
than that of natural systems.
The Seed Savers Network, Australia's major community-based food
crop biodiversity organisation, views community gardens as potential
centres for seed saving and exchange.
At present, this is held back by:
- a low level of horticultural skills among community gardeners
- lack of opportunity to learn seed saving skills; there are
too few potential trainers and no funded training programs
- the need to focus on obtaining land for gardening,on garden
establishment and on learning basic horticultural skills among
new gardeners unawareness of the work of the Seed Savers Network
among community gardeners.
Gardeners at the UNSW Community Permaculture Garden have shown
most interest in seed saving and exchange. They collect their
own seed for replanting and are members of the Seed Savers Network.
< top
IMPACT
Community gardening in Sydney appears to have had two main impacts:
- access to fresh, nutritious food using an organic gardening
approach; this impact is limited by the productive capacity
of the small areas available to gardeners and by the skills
of gardeners
- conviviality - the social aspect; this is the focus of the growing number of professional community workers interested in community gardening.li>
Further benefits mentioned less frequently by gardeners include:
- recreation -physical activity that contributes to the
health of participants
- contact with nature - working in the open and learning
about soils, plants and the seasons.
Limitations to food production
There are two models of community gardening practised in Australian
cities: allotment gardens, in which individuals have rights to
a defined area of land shared gardens - where gardening is carried
out in common and produce is shared.
Both approaches are viable and which one is adopted appears to
be based on:
- assumptions held about the two models by would-be gardeners
- assumptions and assessments by community workers or local
government staff promoting community gardening
- the preference of gardeners determined by the way the garden
is started; for instance:
- the shared model is more frequently adopted by people
who know each other,
- perhaps through the effort of starting a community garden
the allotment model may be chosen where the garden is stimulated
by an external source such as a community worker and where
the people are not well acquainted with each other and,
therefore, where there has not been time to establish trust;
it may be no coincidence that in situations where this approach
has been used in state government housing estates (Waterloo
Estate, Sydney; Collingwood and Fitzroy estates, Melbourne)
the model adopted has been the allotment.
Many people prefer to have their own, prescribed area to garden. Many allotment gardens such as Collingwood Children's Farm in Melbourne and the Randwick Organic Community Garden before it was closed, however, have areas for shared gardening.
Randwick Organic Community Garden and Collingwood Children's
Farm provide a comparison in size of allotments and the amount
of food they can produce:
- at Collingwood, the large, fenced allotments are perhaps
three of four times the size of those at Randwick; they provid
a realistic amount of space for the production of a diversity
of vegetable and herb crops for a family
- Randwick Organic Community Garden allotments, at around eight
square metres in area, were...
- large enough for a single person or a couple with a child
with limited time for gardening
- too small for the gardener seriously planning to produce
the majority of their vegetable supply in the community
garden.
Impact on local government
Community gardening has made a slowly increasing impact on the
thinking of local government and some community workers. Evidence
for this has been the steady increase in the number of enquiries
to the Australian Community Gardens Network from local government
and other professionals.
Interest from local government comes mainly from community services
departments, parks and gardens departments (to a limited extent)
and waste services departments (whose interest focuses on the
potential of the community gardens role in waste minimisation
education).
Community garden interaction with local government has, on the
whole, been positive. In some cases, local government has provided
land for gardens and has provided financial and in-kind assistance.
For councils, assisting community gardens offers the opportunity
to build cordial relationships with the community.
Developing the potential for constructive links between community
gardens and local government presents the possibility of a win-win
relationship. So would including community gardens as an allowable
landuse in local government planning documents.
Reducing waste
Thanks to funding by NSW government waste boards and local government,
community gardens have had some impact on the reduction of household
waste through community waste education.
Recycling and reuse form part of community garden culture because:
- financial resources are lacking, encouraging the use of recycled
materials
- many gardeners have a predisposition towards recycling and
reuse
- some gardens in NSW have been used as training venues for
the Environmental Protection Authority's 'EarthWorks' community
waste education program.
Organic waste conversion
Composting, the worm-farming of organic wastes and the reuse
of discarded building materials for garden construction are demonstrated
in most community gardens.
The most appropriate composting methods for use in community
gardens are the simplest because:
- there is no guarantee that compost will be turned regularly
to encourage a fast composting process
- many gardeners have limited knowledge of the composting process
and have difficulty in diagnosing and remedying faulty composts.
The best compost the simplest
The ADAM composting method popularised through the NSW EarthWorks
program is probably the best known among community gardeners.
It has the advantage of presenting composting as a simply process
and has proven an effective and fast method when turned regularly.
Other methods haave been used, such as the rotating compost tumbler
devised for Cook Community Garden in Sydney's Waterloo Estate.
Compost tumblers have a reputation as a reliable, fast method
when properly maintained, however anecdotal evidence suggest the
Cook Garden tumblers are too heavy to conveniently turn when full.
Worm farms ineffective
Worm farms of the commercial variety are sometimes found in community
gardens. , They are used to produce vermicompost, a concentrated
fertiliser formed by worm castings.
While a large worm farm could theoretically be built to produce
a large supply of fertiliser, the common, small commercial models:
- produce too little vermicompost to become a major source of
garden fertiliser
- require a knowledge base to operate effectively and to troubleshoot
- are too costly for community gardens of limited financial
means
The funding of instructional signs in some community gardens
by Sydney Waste Boards - which show how to make compost - indicates
a positive attitude by institutions in the value of gardens as
waste minimisation demonstration centres.
Limited capability for waste education
The capacity of community gardens to educate the public in waste
reduction is influenced by:
- the limited interest of many community gardeners in community
education; many gardeners want to do nothing more than garden
- the limited time community gardeners have to allocate to
non-gardening activities
- the limited space available in many community gardens
- the fact that waste education relies on enthusiastic gardeners
with a wider concept of the role of the gardens;
Waste reduction education is certainly a worthwhile pursuit for
community gardeners and government, especially the use of community
gardens as waste education and demonstration venues, but must
be only one focus in a broader strategy of government waste education.
< top
EFFICIENCY
Efficiency in using waste materials
Community gardens are efficient in the utilisation of limited
resources. The lack of funding encourages the reuse and recycling
of materials:
- the composting of organic wastes provides a cheap but nutritious
fertiliser in most gardens; stable sweepings from racecourses
and stables and from the Mounted Police stable in Redfern are
used for mulch and compost production in several inner-urban
Sydney gardens
- the UNSW Community Permaculture Garden has sourced food wastes
from organic food retailers in the area
- the Waverley community garden has received regular deliveries
of food waste from Macro Wholefoods, a local retailer; in return
for accepting the waste, the store has provided the gardeners
with non-hybrid vegetable seed
- discarded building materials are used for garden construction;
Angel Street Permaculture Garden, in Newtown, has made use of
concrete paving broken up on site to pave garden paths.
Efficiency in food production
Community garden productivity is far below their potential food
production capacity.
This is because:
- gardening skills are generally underdeveloped
- gardener's time is limited because of the demands of other
areas of life; many gardeners attend their crops only once a
week; some several times a week if they live nearby, as did
some Randwick Community Garden members and gardeners at the
Waterloo estate gardens.
Garden productivity could be improved through:
- adoption of optimal planting patterns (plant spacing)
- increasing plant diversity (the number of different plant
types grown in an allotment) for a balanced diet
- successional plantings of a particular crop through the growing
season
- access to planting calendars showing what plants to plant
on a monthly basis a better knowledge of soil improvement
- larger allotments in which staples such as root crops (potato,
sweet potato, taro) could be produced in reasonable quantity.
Productivity is potentially enhanced where gardeners have access
to someone with horticultural knowledge. The UNSW Community Permaculture
Garden has benefited by having a trained horticulturist as a participant.
< top
EFFECTIVENESS
In agricultural terms, Sydney's community gardens have achieved
a variable effectiveness as food production systems.
At best, they make a minor contribution to family dietary needs,
some more so than others. Critical to productivity appears to
be horticultural know-how and previous gardening experience.
The comparative cheapness of foods in supermarkets and the availability
of social security income is most likely responsible for community
food production having a lower profile than urban gardening has
in some developing countries.
As previously covered, community gardens in Sydney have achieved
some effectiveness as waste minimisation training facilities,
thanks to enthusiastic gardeners who want to extend the outreach
of the gardens to fulfil a broader social role and to local government
and waste board support.
Successful social venues
As social venues, community gardens are quite effective. They
provide a valid form of healthy recreation and encourage a sense
of involvement in an area while improving the urban environment.
Educational venues
Community gardens are useful educational venues.
Community educators, such as community college courses, make
use of the gardens. For instance, Stella Maris Eco-Garden in Manly
and the Randwick and UNSW community gardens in the eastern suburbs
have been used by adult educators as well as TAFE and local government/
waste board waste minimisation classes.
< top
PROGRESS
Community gardens are informal entities and lack specific objectives
against which to measure their performance. This makes the estimation
of progress difficult.
One indicator of progress has been the growth in the number of
community gardens in Sydney and elsewhere in Australia since the
mid-1990s. In Sydney, it took perhaps a decade after the first
community garden was opened - Glovers Organic Community Garden
in Rozelle - to reach this point. The take-off is partly responsible
to: the work of the Community Gardens Network in promoting community
gardening media coverage of community gardening in television
programs and the print media the interest in community gardens
as social strategies by community workers.
Perception
Another way to estimate progress is to think of it in terms of
community gardens as a valid form of urban landuse.
Evidence that government and other institutions increasingly
view community gardens as a valid use of public open space is
provided by:
- an increasing level of local government interest
- the involvement of the Department of Housing in making land
available to housing estate residents for gardening
- SydneyÕs Royal Botanic Gardens provision of limited support
for Department of Housing gardeners
- the interest in gardens by health services such as SydneyÕs
Street Jungle initiative for people with HIV and by a womenÕs
health centre
- the establishment of the South Sydney City Council community
gardens network linking gardens in the local government area
- the creation, in 2001, of Gardens for Western Sydney by a
team of community development and community health workers.
Local government and institutional awareness of community gardening
still has far to go. It would be facilitated by including the
option for community gardens in local government landuse planning
instruments.
Resistance hinders progress
Probably because they come from the community itself, gardeners
have met little local resistance to the establishment of gardens.
Where there has been resistance - such as the for a community garden in Glebe in the late 1990s resident concern usually focuses on:p>
- the effect on parking space; this should be anticipated in
older, inner-urban areas where streets are narrow and parking
limited
- odours
- noise
- vermin
- alienation of public open space
- vandalism.
These potential objections should be anticipated in any submission
for land prepared by gardeners for local government. They are
all valid considerations, some of which have been experienced
by community gardeners:
- odour, for instance, resulted in complaints to UNSW community
gardeners from an adjoining tennis club; the smells were the
product of a poorly maintained compost; the compost was relocated
and the gardeners learned to maintain it in odour-free condition
- vermin - rats and mice - are attracted to poorly maintained
composts; improved composting procedures is the solution
- vandalism has been experienced by a number of gardens; it
usually takes the form of theft of a hose, such as happened
in the early days of Randwick Organic Community Garden, or tools;
damage to plants may be accidental or deliberate but is not
all that common and has not discouraged gardeners; gardens in
less secure locations may erect a chainlink fence if they can
obtain financial assistance as did Waverley community gardeners
from Waverley Council
- open space is in increasingly limited supply in Sydney and
communities could react negatively to proposals for community
gardens on public open space; surprisingly, this has not happened
and community gardeners are now seen as a valid use of public
land.
Indications are that community gardening should continue to
enjoy a slow progress and that progress is best measured by criteria
defined by the gardeners themselves.
< top
SUSTAINABILITY
Sustainability is the capacity to continue in a more or less
self-sustaining manner into the future.
Factors affecting sustainability
A number of factors are important to the sustainability of community
gardens:
- responsible management of the land in a way which meets the
needs of the gardeners and the landholder
- administration - the management side of community gardening
frequently eschewed by gardeners, including liaison with gardeners
and landholder, induction of new members, organisational meetings,
work on common areas (such as weeding and construction)
- training of new members; one inner-urban garden, for instance,
provides no basic training for new gardeners, a practice which
lightens the load on existing gardeners but which has alienated
some would-be gardeners because they lack an understanding of
what they should do in the garden
- the ability to raise funds to purchase public liability insurance;
this is expensive and is an area where local government can
assist
- security of tenure - gardeners require security of tenure
if they are to put effort into garden development and management,
particularly where high value crops such as fruit trees are
to be planted (these take several years to bear fruit); Randwick
Organic Community Garden underwent periods of falling participation
due to plans by the
- landholder to sell the land for development - during these
periods of low participation, site management became a problem;
the possibility of council selling the public open space occupied
by Willoughby Community Garden has had a similar impact
- the capacity to attract new gardeners to replace those leaving
- the attitude of local and state government landholders to
community gardening.
Participation rates affect sustainability
Apart from tenure difficulties noted above, perhaps the greatest
difficulty faced by community gardens has been fluctuating participation
rates - community gardens seem to swing from too few gardeners
to situations where a waiting list is set up to cater for demand.
Low levels of participation threaten the continued existence
of community gardens because it sets up a positive feedback loop
- too few participants leads to poor maintenance which discourages
potential gardeners, exacerbating low participation and an unkempt
garden.
For instance:
- during their peak period Glovers gardeners expended beyond
the chainlink fence to terrace and cultivate the slope above;
when participation in the garden fell, the terrace area was
abandoned to the kikuyu grass as gardeners retracted their activity
to a manageable area
- Randwick garden had a history of fluctuating participation;
during periods of low participation the garden became unkempt
with weeds taking over paths and invading disused allotments;
deliberate attempts to stimulate participation were needed to
save the garden.
< top
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1:
Where space permits and where the uses are compatible, community gardens should be designed as multiple-use public spaces:
- as educational venues - a number of Sydney gardens are used
by community colleges, TAFE, private course providers and, in
the case of the Randwick garden, by the local Steiner school;
Stella Maris Eco-Garden, in the grounds of a high school, is
used by the Manly Environment Centre for community environment
programs including waste education
- the use of Randwick Community Organic Garden by the Wildlife
Information & Rescue Service (WIRES) for a large cage where
injured birds were kept prior to release
- venues for passive recreation by non-gardening families, for
solitude and for social purposes such as the performance and
arts at UNSW Community Permaculture Garden
We can look to a small, community-managed, council owned park
in Fremantle, Western Australia, as an indicator of how far the
potential for multi-use can go. The park, about the size of a
local housing block, offers:
- community food growing terraces
- childrens playground
- a grassed recreation space
- a picnic shed with pergola roof and table and seats made from
reused railway sleepers
- a 'bog garden' of native wetland plants
- a 'sand dune' garden separating the park from the footpath
and planted with locally indigenous species of beachside dune
vegetation, including bush food
- a stone entrance arch decorated with ceramic tiles made by
local school children the harvesting of rainwater from the roofs
of neighbouring houses, its storage in an underground tank and
its reticulation as irrigation for the community food garden
and the lawn area.
As this park demonstrates, the critical resource when it comes
to multiple-use design is imagination.
An innovative approach to demonstrating the practicality of appropriate
local government policies in multiple-use community gardens has
been only partly explored through waste minimisation training.
There may be potential in policies such as Agenda 21 and council
conservation strategies, for instance.
Multifunctional elements also enhance community garden sustainability
because the number of stakeholders - people with a direct interest
in the wellbeing of the garden - is increased.
Recommendation 2:
Community garden trainers, government instrumentalities assisting community gardens and community gardeners adopt an approach to garden development and growth that can be summarised as:
- start small
- grow from the edges of your present development
- expand in manageable chunks
- remain compact and intensively gardened.
This strategy prevents gardens sprawling and becoming difficult
to manage because they occupy too much space for the number of
gardeners. It prevents gardens become aesthetic eyesores, overgrown
with weeds and in disrepair and it allows for more time spent
in gardening and socialising rather than cutting weeds and doing
repetitive maintenance.
Start your garden development in a single place and work out.
A compact, intensively managed garden is a productive garden.
Recommendation 3:
State and local government maximise the potential of community gardens to contribute to the nutritional health of communities and to serve as recreational, educational and social venues by funding the employment of community garden liaison officers/ coordinators. The precedent for this are the bushland and community waste education officers employed by local government.
Community garden coordinators could:
- promote and encourage local involvement in community gardens
by groups such as schools, the aged, the disabled and socially
isolated ethnic groups
- facilitate the use of community gardens for cultural activities,
including the construction and display of public art as well
as music and poetry performances
- train gardeners in basic horticulture
- implement waste recycling, reuse and community waste education
programs in the gardens
- assist in the design and establishment of new gardens
- demonstrate appropriate local government policies in the gardens.
Recommendation 4:
The Australian Community Gardens Network, in consultation with local and/or state government staff and planning professionals, develop a set of guidelines on the establishment, construction, management and use of community gardens and associated facilities for the guidance of local government staff.
The guidelines would contain information on:
- different types of community gardens (allotments/ shared)
and opinion and factual information regarding their performance
- the design of community gardens with reference to social,
environmental and land management criteria
- the types of structures, rainwater harvesting and storage
installations and other components of community gardens
- composting and waste conversion/ reuse systems applicable
to community gardens
- the management of community gardens using the above criteria
plus information on democratic decision making to facilitate
participatory processes among community gardening groups
- risk management in gardens
- opportunities for multiple-use
- practical, low-cost forms of local government assistance to
community gardens.
Recommendation 5:
Make allowances for the establishment of community gardens in state and local government landuse planning instruments.
< top
CONCLUSION
Community food gardens in Sydney are:
- on the whole, relevant to participant needs
- have had a modest but increasing impact on the urban landscape
and local/ state government thinking
- utilise resources efficiently
- with a few exceptions, could improve their food productivity
- have variable effectiveness as food production systems but
are effective as social venues
- are making progress in becoming an established landuse
- successful as community environmental educational sites, particularly
in waste reduction programs
- are, on the whole, sustainable because of their low demand
on funding and resources.
Challenges
The biggest challenges community gardens face include:
- security of tenure
- obtaining start-up funding and funding for public liability
insurance (insurance may be covered in some cases)
- obtaining, training attracting new gardeners
- maintaining cordial relations with landholders and neighbours.
Community gardening, less than 20 years young in Sydney, has
shown itself to have potential as an effective tool for civil
society... as places where people come together, grow fresh food,
improve local environments and contribute to humane, liveable
cities.
< top
PAGE UPDATED... Monday, 14 January 2002
|