I. Box Scheme
A box scheme is a form of alternative food network (AFN), formally defined by the Cambridge Dictionary as:
“An arrangement in which someone pays to have a box of vegetables, fruit, or other products delivered to their home regularly, especially ones produced in the local area.”
Like other forms of AFNs, box schemes have the potential to contribute to environmental sustainability and the well-being of producers and consumers, e.g., by shortening the food supply chain, providing fresh and nutritious food to consumers, and supporting local agriculture. It is common practice for box schemes to provide detailed information about the food supplies and the natural and social context in which they are produced (Torjusen et al., 2008). This can help consumers better understand where the food comes from and its nutritious, ecological, and socio-economic value. Increased awareness of the value of food has reportedly led to a reduction in food waste (Mattioni and Caraher, 2018).
II. Community Gardens
Community gardens are collaborative initiatives that offer individuals a shared platform for cultivating food collectively (Lawson, 2005). By providing garden participants with a fresh produce supply and enabling the sharing of harvests with their families and neighbors, community gardens enhance community food access and foster healthier diets among community members (Butterfield, 2020, Corrigan 2011, McCormack et al. 2010). Litt et al. (2011) found that community garden participants consumed more fruits and vegetables than home gardeners and nongardeners. They were also more likely to meet the national recommendations of consuming fruits and vegetables at least five times daily.
Similar to other forms of AFNs, community gardens also help reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with food supplies by connecting producers to consumers and shortening the food supply chain.
Palau-Salvador et al. (2019) studied 48 community gardens in the València region of Spain and found that they take several different organizational forms, including:
Associative community gardens: launched by neighbors’ associations, ecologist organizations, social or educational NGOs, or local committees of political parties.
Municipal community gardens: created and managed by city councils. Plots are either distributed through lotteries or allocated by economic criteria.
Rental community gardens: created as business ventures by farmers and entrepreneurs who own land. The landowners divide their plots into smaller parcels and rent them to individuals, families, or groups of friends, while also providing guidance and essential services to the tenants.
In the U.S., community gardens are found in many different forms. Ferris et al. (2001) examined community gardens in the San Francisco Bay area and found a variety of forms such as leisure gardens, child and school gardens, and entrepreneurial gardens. Some of these community gardens serve important social purposes, such as promoting social inclusion and alleviating poverty. One example, given by Ferris et al. (2001), is the Berkeley Youth Alternatives Garden, which aims to provide leisure opportunities for children and job opportunities for young people from low-income families.
To sum up, community gardens are widespread in many countries around the world, and they are an effective form of alternative food networks that promote social and environmental sustainability by encouraging a healthy diet, social engagement, and reduced reliance on the industrialized food system.
Sustainability Concerns about Community Gardens
Community gardens can contribute positively to sustainable development by promoting food security, environmental stewardship, social inclusion, and community building. However, like any human activity, community gardens can also raise sustainability concerns. Here are some of the most common sustainability concerns associated with community gardens:
- Water usage: Community gardens require water for irrigation, and in areas where water is scarce, this can be a problem. If community gardens are not designed with water conservation in mind, they can deplete local water resources and harm ecosystems.
- Soil quality: Community gardens can improve soil quality by adding organic matter, but they can also lead to soil erosion and contamination. If community gardeners use pesticides and chemical fertilizers, they can harm the soil and nearby ecosystems.
- Waste management: Community gardens generate waste, such as plant debris and food scraps. If this waste is not managed properly, it can attract pests and create unpleasant odors.
- Land use: Community gardens can contribute to urban greening, but they can also take up valuable urban space that could be used for other purposes, such as affordable housing or public parks.
- Social equity: Community gardens can be exclusive if they are not designed to be accessible to all members of the community, regardless of socioeconomic status, race, or ethnicity. This can contribute to social inequality and exacerbate food insecurity.
Overall, the sustainability concerns of community gardens can be mitigated by careful planning, sustainable practices, and community involvement. By addressing these concerns, community gardens can be a powerful tool for promoting sustainable development, building community resilience, and enhancing food security.
References:
Butterfield, K. L. (2020). Neighborhood Composition and Community Garden Locations: The Effect of Ethnicity, Income, and Education. Sociological Perspectives, 63(5), 738–763. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121420908902
Corrigan, Michelle P. (2011). Growing What You Eat: Developing Community Gardens in Baltimore, Maryland. Applied Geography 31(4), 1232–41.
Ferris, J., Norman, C., & Sempik, J. (2001). People, Land and Sustainability: Community Gardens and the Social Dimension of Sustainable Development. Social Policy & Administration, 35(5), 559. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9515.t01-1-00253
Lawson, Laura J. 2005. City Bountiful: A Century of Community Gardening in America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Litt, J. S., Soobader, M.-J., Turbin, M. S., Hale, J. W., Buchenau, M., & Marshall, J. A. (2011). The Influence of Social Involvement, Neighborhood Aesthetics, and Community Garden Participation on Fruit and Vegetable Consumption. American Journal of Public Health, 101(8), 1466–1473. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2010.300111
McCormack LA, Laska MN, Larson NI, Story M. (2010). Review of the Nutritional Implications of Farmers’ Markets and Community Gardens: A Call for Evaluation and Research Efforts. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110(3): 399–408. DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2009.11.023
Mattioni, D., & Caraher, M. (2018). Moving towards ecologically sustainable diets: Lessons from an Italian box delivery scheme. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 42(4), 430–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12437
Palau-Salvador, G., de Luis, A., Pérez, J. J., & Sanchis-Ibor, C. (2019). Greening the post crisis. Collectivity in private and public community gardens in València (Spain). Cities, 92, 292–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.04.005
Torjusen, H., Lieblein, G., & Vittersø, G. (2008). Learning, communicating and eating in local food-systems: the case of organic box schemes in Denmark and Norway. Local Environment, 13(3), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549830701669252
Like (2)