Exploring community gardens in a health disparate population

Findings from a mixed methods pilot study

Jamie Zoellner, Ashley Zanko, Bryan Price, Jennifer Bonner, Jennie L Hill

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Despite recommendations, there have been few efforts to apply the community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach in the development, implementation, and evaluation of community gardens. Objectives: As guided by the CBPR approach and grounded in a social-ecological model and behavioral theory, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to understand opinions and interests in developing and implementing a community garden and to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Methods: Community and academic members collaborated to develop and execute this study. The qualitative phase-targeting regional key informants-was designed to elicit perceived benefits and challenges of community gardens at the environmental, community, and individual levels. The quantitative phase targeted low resourced youth and parents and included a variety of validated theory-based questionnaires to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Results: Major benefits of community gardens that emerged from the 10 qualitative interviews included increasing community cohesion and improving nutrition and physical activity factors. The quantitative phase included 87 youth and 67 parents. Across 16 items for fruits and vegetables, the average willingness to try was 1.32 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.40) on a 2-point scale. The majority of youth indicated they would work in a garden (n = 59; 68%) and eat food grown in their garden (n = 71; 82%). Among parents, gardening attitude, belief, and self-efficacy scores were all above average; however, gardening intentions were neutral. Conclusion: This research illustrates the successful partnering a community-academic team and has provided the partnership with a clearer lens to conceptualize and launch future regional community garden efforts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)153-165
Number of pages13
JournalProgress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action
Volume6
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2012

Fingerprint

Gardening
Health
health
Population
community
Community-Based Participatory Research
Vegetables
Fruit
vegetables
Parents
parents
research approach
Gardens
Self Efficacy
Lenses
qualitative interview
group cohesion
nutrition
self-efficacy
Interviews

Keywords

  • Community-based participatory research
  • Environment and public health
  • Gardening
  • Research pilot projects

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health(social science)
  • Education
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Exploring community gardens in a health disparate population : Findings from a mixed methods pilot study. / Zoellner, Jamie; Zanko, Ashley; Price, Bryan; Bonner, Jennifer; Hill, Jennie L.

In: Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, Vol. 6, No. 2, 01.12.2012, p. 153-165.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d54ff1b35efe411082534ee3bdb1e024,
title = "Exploring community gardens in a health disparate population: Findings from a mixed methods pilot study",
abstract = "Background: Despite recommendations, there have been few efforts to apply the community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach in the development, implementation, and evaluation of community gardens. Objectives: As guided by the CBPR approach and grounded in a social-ecological model and behavioral theory, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to understand opinions and interests in developing and implementing a community garden and to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Methods: Community and academic members collaborated to develop and execute this study. The qualitative phase-targeting regional key informants-was designed to elicit perceived benefits and challenges of community gardens at the environmental, community, and individual levels. The quantitative phase targeted low resourced youth and parents and included a variety of validated theory-based questionnaires to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Results: Major benefits of community gardens that emerged from the 10 qualitative interviews included increasing community cohesion and improving nutrition and physical activity factors. The quantitative phase included 87 youth and 67 parents. Across 16 items for fruits and vegetables, the average willingness to try was 1.32 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.40) on a 2-point scale. The majority of youth indicated they would work in a garden (n = 59; 68{\%}) and eat food grown in their garden (n = 71; 82{\%}). Among parents, gardening attitude, belief, and self-efficacy scores were all above average; however, gardening intentions were neutral. Conclusion: This research illustrates the successful partnering a community-academic team and has provided the partnership with a clearer lens to conceptualize and launch future regional community garden efforts.",
keywords = "Community-based participatory research, Environment and public health, Gardening, Research pilot projects",
author = "Jamie Zoellner and Ashley Zanko and Bryan Price and Jennifer Bonner and Hill, {Jennie L}",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1353/cpr.2012.0014",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "153--165",
journal = "Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action",
issn = "1557-0541",
publisher = "Johns Hopkins University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Exploring community gardens in a health disparate population

T2 - Findings from a mixed methods pilot study

AU - Zoellner, Jamie

AU - Zanko, Ashley

AU - Price, Bryan

AU - Bonner, Jennifer

AU - Hill, Jennie L

PY - 2012/12/1

Y1 - 2012/12/1

N2 - Background: Despite recommendations, there have been few efforts to apply the community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach in the development, implementation, and evaluation of community gardens. Objectives: As guided by the CBPR approach and grounded in a social-ecological model and behavioral theory, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to understand opinions and interests in developing and implementing a community garden and to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Methods: Community and academic members collaborated to develop and execute this study. The qualitative phase-targeting regional key informants-was designed to elicit perceived benefits and challenges of community gardens at the environmental, community, and individual levels. The quantitative phase targeted low resourced youth and parents and included a variety of validated theory-based questionnaires to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Results: Major benefits of community gardens that emerged from the 10 qualitative interviews included increasing community cohesion and improving nutrition and physical activity factors. The quantitative phase included 87 youth and 67 parents. Across 16 items for fruits and vegetables, the average willingness to try was 1.32 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.40) on a 2-point scale. The majority of youth indicated they would work in a garden (n = 59; 68%) and eat food grown in their garden (n = 71; 82%). Among parents, gardening attitude, belief, and self-efficacy scores were all above average; however, gardening intentions were neutral. Conclusion: This research illustrates the successful partnering a community-academic team and has provided the partnership with a clearer lens to conceptualize and launch future regional community garden efforts.

AB - Background: Despite recommendations, there have been few efforts to apply the community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach in the development, implementation, and evaluation of community gardens. Objectives: As guided by the CBPR approach and grounded in a social-ecological model and behavioral theory, the purpose of this mixed methods study was to understand opinions and interests in developing and implementing a community garden and to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Methods: Community and academic members collaborated to develop and execute this study. The qualitative phase-targeting regional key informants-was designed to elicit perceived benefits and challenges of community gardens at the environmental, community, and individual levels. The quantitative phase targeted low resourced youth and parents and included a variety of validated theory-based questionnaires to understand factors impacting fruit, vegetable, and gardening behaviors. Results: Major benefits of community gardens that emerged from the 10 qualitative interviews included increasing community cohesion and improving nutrition and physical activity factors. The quantitative phase included 87 youth and 67 parents. Across 16 items for fruits and vegetables, the average willingness to try was 1.32 (standard deviation [SD] = 0.40) on a 2-point scale. The majority of youth indicated they would work in a garden (n = 59; 68%) and eat food grown in their garden (n = 71; 82%). Among parents, gardening attitude, belief, and self-efficacy scores were all above average; however, gardening intentions were neutral. Conclusion: This research illustrates the successful partnering a community-academic team and has provided the partnership with a clearer lens to conceptualize and launch future regional community garden efforts.

KW - Community-based participatory research

KW - Environment and public health

KW - Gardening

KW - Research pilot projects

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84873046602&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84873046602&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1353/cpr.2012.0014

DO - 10.1353/cpr.2012.0014

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 153

EP - 165

JO - Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action

JF - Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action

SN - 1557-0541

IS - 2

ER -