Growing urban health: community gardening in South-East Toronto
Abstract
This article describes results from an investigation of the health impacts of community gardening, using Toronto, Ontario as a case study. According to community members and local service organizations, these gardens have a number of positive health benefits. However, few studies have explicitly focused on the health impacts of community gardens, and many of those did not ask community gardeners directly about their experiences in community gardening. This article sets out to fill this gap by describing the results of a community-based research project that collected data on the perceived health impacts of community gardening through participant observation, focus groups and in-depth interviews. Results suggest that community gardens were perceived by gardeners to provide numerous health benefits, including improved access to food, improved nutrition, increased physical activity and improved mental health. Community gardens were also seen to promote social health and community cohesion. These benefits were set against a backdrop of insecure land tenure and access, bureaucratic resistance, concerns about soil contamination and a lack of awareness and understanding by community members and decision-makers. Results also highlight the need for ongoing resources to support gardens in these many roles.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Gardens, especially allotment and community gardens, provide opportunities to interact with other members of local communities, which is likely to forge and reinforce social ties, community networks, and sense of community.
“Third, gardens, especially allotment and community gardens, provide opportunities to interact with other members of local communities, which is likely to forge and reinforce social ties, community networks, and sense of community (van den Berg et al., 2010, Wakefield et al., 2007).”
From Gardening is beneficial for health: A meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Wakefield et al., 2007
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Gardening is beneficial for health: A meta-analysis
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., & Yamaura, Y. (2017) · Preventive Medicine Reports · doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.11.007 · Cited by 688 · see citing works
“Third, gardens, especially allotment and community gardens, provide opportunities to interact with other members of local communities, which is likely to forge and reinforce social ties, community networks, and sense of community (van den Berg et al., 2010; Wakefield et al., 2007).”
BackgroundLandscape and well-being: A scoping study on the health-promoting impact of outdoor environments
Abraham, A., Sommerhalder, K., & Abel, T. (2010) · International Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1007/s00038-009-0069-z · Cited by 527 · see citing works
van den Berg, A. E., van Winsum-Westra, M., de Vries, S., & van Dillen, S. M. (2010) · Environmental Health · doi:10.1186/1476-069x-9-74 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
Harvesting more than vegetables: the potential weight control benefits of community gardening
Zick, C. D., Smith, K. R., Kowaleski-Jones, L., Uno, C., & Merrill, B. J. (2013) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2012.301009 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Community gardening: Stress, well-being, and resilience potentials
Koay, W. I., & Dillon, D. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17186740 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
The impact of urban gardens on adequate and healthy food: a systematic review
Garcia, M. T., Ribeiro, S. M., Germani, A. C. C. G., & Bógus, C. M. (2018) · Public Health Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s1368980017002944 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
The well-being of allotment gardeners: A mixed methodological study
Webber, J., Hinds, J., & Camic, P. M. (2015) · Ecopsychology · doi:10.1089/eco.2014.0058 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Roberts, S., & Shackleton, C. (2018) · Land · doi:10.3390/land7040146 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wakefield, S., Yeudall, F., Taron, C., Reynolds, J., & Skinner, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Toronto Metropolitan University (CA)
- Laidlaw Foundation (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Wakefield, Sarah
- ORCID
- Reynolds, Jennifer
- Venue
- Health Promotion International
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-02-26
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 92-101
- ISSN
- 0957-4824 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2245
- OpenAlex
- W2137316425
- Cited by
- 612
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 35 · 2012: 27
- FWCI
- 13.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Health Promotion International (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Urban Agriculture and Sustainability
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
- Keywords
- community gardening, urban health, perceived health benefits, food access, nutrition, physical activity, mental health, social health, community cohesion, land tenure, soil contamination
- MeSH terms
- Interviews as Topic, Ontario, Urban Health, Focus Groups, Organizational Case Studies, Gardening
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review