Exploring the impact of community gardens and community kitchens on mental health: a scoping review

IF 2.4 Q2 GEOGRAPHY
Rade Zinaic , Tania Correa , Egbe Etowa , Raliat Owolabi , Yamini Bhatt , Josephine Pui-Hing Wong
{"title":"Exploring the impact of community gardens and community kitchens on mental health: a scoping review","authors":"Rade Zinaic ,&nbsp;Tania Correa ,&nbsp;Egbe Etowa ,&nbsp;Raliat Owolabi ,&nbsp;Yamini Bhatt ,&nbsp;Josephine Pui-Hing Wong","doi":"10.1016/j.wss.2025.100263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Participants engaged in community gardens (CGs) processes experience many positive outcomes, from social networking to intimacy with nature. Yet there exists a gap in the literature on CGs between their co-creative and co-participative practices and the impact of such collaborative social practices on mental health, especially as it relates to structurally marginalized populations. To this end, our scoping review explores what is known about the relationship between CGs and mental health benefits. Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review method was used and supplemented by Levac, Colquhoun, and O’Brien’s emphasis on research and policy practice implications. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and they were conducted in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Portugal, Japan, and Singapore. Most of the studies used qualitative or mixed methods. The CGs in this review were situated in prisons, university campuses, a church, a shelter, urban rooftops, and urban and rural neighbourhoods. These CGs engaged diverse populations, including immigrants, refugees, newcomers, Indigenous peoples, women, seniors, students, youth, racialized peoples, and persons with disabilities and mental health issues. Our results reveal that the mental health of CG participants is inseparable from engagement processes like collaborative place-making labour that engender social connectedness, collaborative learning, empowerment, and a connection to nature. We gesture to the affinities between this co-creative and co-participative process and similar land and/or place-based practices with an eye to the potential for civic participation and/or awareness of human rights to advance mental health equity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":52616,"journal":{"name":"Wellbeing Space and Society","volume":"8 ","pages":"Article 100263"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wellbeing Space and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666558125000296","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Participants engaged in community gardens (CGs) processes experience many positive outcomes, from social networking to intimacy with nature. Yet there exists a gap in the literature on CGs between their co-creative and co-participative practices and the impact of such collaborative social practices on mental health, especially as it relates to structurally marginalized populations. To this end, our scoping review explores what is known about the relationship between CGs and mental health benefits. Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review method was used and supplemented by Levac, Colquhoun, and O’Brien’s emphasis on research and policy practice implications. Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and they were conducted in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Portugal, Japan, and Singapore. Most of the studies used qualitative or mixed methods. The CGs in this review were situated in prisons, university campuses, a church, a shelter, urban rooftops, and urban and rural neighbourhoods. These CGs engaged diverse populations, including immigrants, refugees, newcomers, Indigenous peoples, women, seniors, students, youth, racialized peoples, and persons with disabilities and mental health issues. Our results reveal that the mental health of CG participants is inseparable from engagement processes like collaborative place-making labour that engender social connectedness, collaborative learning, empowerment, and a connection to nature. We gesture to the affinities between this co-creative and co-participative process and similar land and/or place-based practices with an eye to the potential for civic participation and/or awareness of human rights to advance mental health equity.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Wellbeing Space and Society
Wellbeing Space and Society Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
审稿时长
124 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信