Community Garden Initiatives Addressing Health and Well-Being Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Infodemiology Aspects, Outcomes, and Target Populations

Abstract

Previous research has suggested that activities such as community gardens could offer a wide range of health benefits. The aim of the article is to systematically review the available literature to analyse the magnitude of the phenomenon, the geographical distribution, and the main characteristics in terms of health outcomes and target populations. The search addresses the question whether the activity in community gardens improves health and well-being outcomes of individuals. From the total amount of 7226, 84 selected articles showed that:(1) up to 50% are published by U.S. universities or institutions; (2) up to 44% of the studies considered “community gardens” as the main activity of the research focus; (3) one-third of the studies included adults; (4) almost 25% of the studies used “general health” as the main outcome when investigating the benefits of community gardens; (5) the percentage of studies that achieved their outcomes was heterogeneous among the different health dimensions. In conclusion, while a certain degree of heterogeneity in the used definition and outcome still exist, community gardens may be a viable strategy for well-being promotion in terms of psychological, social, and physical health and may be considered as an innovative urban strategy to promote urban public health.

Acceptability and Feasibility of Community Gardening Interventions for the Prevention of Non-Communicable Diseases among Indigenous Populations: A Scoping Review

“…These reviews captured four hundred and forty-four studies in twenty-six countries which reflected a strong growing global interest in gardening as a public health intervention. The reviews targeted cardiovascular [ 44 ], chronic illnesses [ 23 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 ] and related risk factors [ 21 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 33 , 44 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 50 ]. Four reviews focused on school gardening studies [ 22 , 25 , 51 , 52 ].…”

“…Non-randomized designs and pre–post-test designs were commonly used to evaluate outcomes [ 45 ]. Qualitative evaluations were sometimes used to strengthen the interpretation of findings [ 22 , 24 , 44 , 46 , 49 , 51 , 52 ]. Within an evidence-based framework for evaluating the effectiveness of public health interventions, randomized designs are recognized to be problematic particularly in the context of implementation in community settings.…”

“…Their review of thirty-one studies explored the social benefits of gardening and concluded that community garden interventions create community engagement by facilitating more social connection, community sharing and neighborhood participation [ 49 ]. There was sparse mention of community engagement in the other fifteen reviews of non-Indigenous gardening studies [ 24 , 25 , 44 ]. Though designed for implementation studies with Indigenous communities, it is easy to see the value of the HPW framework for evaluations of gardening interventions.…”

Role of Community Gardens in Development of Housing Estates in Polish Cities

“…The introduction of urban gardening as a way to partially restore nature in urbanised areas was also an important aspect [19][20][21]. Community gardens may be a viable strategy for well-being promotion in terms of psychological, social, and physical health and may be considered as an innovative urban strategy to promote urban public health [23].…”

Encouraging planting in urban front gardens: a focus group study

“…Urban gardening interventions have typically focussed on green social prescribing in community gardens, 24 community gardens and health outcomes, 25 or fruit and vegetable growth for improved nutrition. 26,27 Few interventions have been developed to increase home gardening and planting behaviour.…”