Scoping review of the impacts of urban agriculture on the determinants of health

Abstract

Background There has been an increasing interest in urban agriculture (UA) practice and research in recent years. Scholars have already reported numerous beneficial and potential adverse impacts of UA on health-related outcomes. This scoping review aims to explore these impacts and identify knowledge gaps for future UA studies. Methods A systematic search was conducted in seven electronic bibliographic databases to identify relevant peer-reviewed studies. Articles were screened and assessed for eligibility. From eligible studies, data were extracted to summarize, collate, appraise the quality and make a narrative account of the findings. Results A total of 101 articles (51 quantitative, 29 qualitative, and 21 mixed methods studies) were included in our final analysis. Among these articles, 38 and 37% reported findings from North America and Sub-Saharan Africa respectively. Quantitative studies revealed evidence of positive impacts of UA on food security, nutrition outcomes, physical and mental health outcomes, and social capital. The qualitative studies reported a wide range of perceived benefits and motivations of UA. The most frequently reported benefits include contributions to social capital, food security, health and/or wellbeing. However, the evidence must be interpreted with caution since the quality of most of the studies was assessed as weak to moderate. While no definitive conclusions can be drawn about the adverse impacts of UA on health, paying particular attention to contamination of UA soil is recommended. Conclusion More peer-reviewed studies are needed in areas where UA is practiced such as Latin America and Caribbean. The inconsistency and the lack of strong quality in the methodology of the included studies are proof that more rigorous studies are also needed in future research. Nevertheless, the substantial existing evidence from this review corroborate that UA can influence different determinants of health such as food security, social capital, health and well-being in a variety of contexts. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-6885-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Resilience characteristics of the urban agriculture system in Lansing, Michigan: Importance of support actors in local food systems

“…While we understand that arriving at a robust resilience assessment of the system would require mixed methods and longitudinal relationships (Berkes & Folke, 1998), the data presented here uses indicators to provide important insight into resilience that is both relevant for other Rust Belt urban agriculture initiatives and will facilitate the future development of participatory interventions in place to promote a more resilient urban agriculture system. We also build on the growing literature in urban agriculture motivations and barriers, which is primarily qualitative (Audate et al, 2019;Fox-Kämper et al, 2017;McVey et al, 2018;Pourias et al, 2016), by presenting a validated survey instrument for quantitative analysis of urban agriculture characteristics, and by integrating resilience indicators with motivations and barriers.…”

“…Individuals' motivations for engaging in urban agriculture often include multiple benefits, rather than a single primary reason for participation (Kirkpatrick & Davison, 2018;Pourias, Aubry, & Duchemin, 2016). Many urban agriculture benefits are particularly important for women, immigrants, lowincome households, and minorities (Audate et al, 2019;Buckingham, 2005;Clarke & Jenerette, 2015;Graham & Connell, 2006). In addition to benefits to individuals and households, researchers have cataloged benefits of urban agriculture to the environment and communities.…”

A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures

“…Currently, community garden evidence is predominantly qualitative looking at the perceived ecological, health, wellbeing and social implications of this setting whereas quantitative methods applied in the literature are inconsistent [9,40,41]. This paper describes a systematic review protocol to explore the range of indicators and impact measures currently used in the community garden literature.…”

“…Focusing on the measurement of community garden participation, this protocol recognises and builds on the work of Lovell et al [3], who previously published a search protocol focused on the health and wellbeing impacts of community gardening for adults and children. Further, recent studies like Genter et al [43], Ohly et al [44], Kunpeuk et al [45], and Audate et al [40] have reviewed such benefits identified in the literature associated with allotment gardening, gardening, and urban agriculture accordingly. The following protocol paper is unique compared to these studies in that it investigates how data has been collected to facilitate more consistent, robust and valid community gardening information being gathered in the future.…”

Bringing Fronts Back: A Research Agenda to Investigate the Health and Well-Being Impacts of Front Gardens

“…Previous research has focused on the restorative, rehabilitative, and nutritional aspects of gardening activities for many different groups, such as convalescing patients [66], children with attention deficit disorder [47], homeless women [67], older people [68,69], and adults with clinical depression [70]. Furthermore, gardening has been shown to be beneficial in a variety of settings: allotments [71,72], other communal gardening settings [73][74][75][76], hospitals [66], nursing homes [77], and schools [78,79]. A recent report by the King's Fund demonstrates how gardening interventions play an important role in the UK's National Health Service and the wider health system [58].…”