









































Pa
ge

 
1



Pa
ge

 
94

American Journal of  
Environmental Economics (AJEE) 

Promoting Community Gardening Among Small-scale Ethnic Minority Producers: A 
Case of  Maryland

Dipendra Gurung1*, Lila B. Karki1, Prem B. Bhandari1, Sahil Ojha1

Volume 4 Issue 1, Year 2025
ISSN: 2833-7905 (Online)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajee.v4i1.4232
https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Article Information ABSTRACT

Received: December 14, 2024

Accepted: January 18, 2025

Published: May 07, 2025

Food insecurity disproportionately affects minority populations, and addressing it has become 
a daunting challenge amidst a rapidly growing population and changing climate. Community 
gardening has emerged as an effective tool to combat food insecurity and ensure a sustainable 
agrifood system. However, the participation of  ethnic minority populations in community 
gardening is low due to several factors, including lack of  knowledge, skills, awareness, 
technical support, and motivation. This study evaluated the impact of  an Extension project 
on the knowledge, skills, perception, and practices of  36 small-scale ethnic minority producers 
involved in community gardening in Maryland. The results showed improvements in gardening 
knowledge and skills and increased awareness of  the benefits of  community gardening. Most 
participants expressed willingness to continue gardening, participate in community-building 
activities, and share their knowledge among friends and relatives, indicating an increased 
awareness of  the need to adopt the need for the adoption of  sustainable food production 
strategies. These findings underscore the importance of  tailoring extension programs to meet 
the participant’s specific needs, enhance knowledge, and promote the broader adoption of  
community gardening.

Keywords

Adoption, Capacity-Building, 
Extension Program, Food 
Security, Knowledge Gain

1 University of  Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne, MD 21853, USA
* Corresponding author’s e-mail: dgurung@umes.edu

INTRODUCTION
Community gardens are open spaces managed and 
operated by local community members who cultivate 
food or flowers for their use or donation (Holland, 
2004). Community gardens provide an opportunity for 
individuals and families living in urban and semi-urban 
areas with limited access to land to grow their food. 
Community gardens in the modern United States (U.S.) 
date back to World War I, when citizens were often 
required to grow their food. The purpose of  a community 
garden often varies depending on its location and size. 
For example, in low-income communities, a community 
garden may serve primarily to improve food security for 
the residents. Conversely, in higher-income communities, 
it might be designed specifically as a green space and 
a place for physical activity. Several studies report the 
benefits of  community gardening, such as – good health, 
better access to healthy food, and enhanced nutrition 
(Malberg Dyg et al., 2020; Twiss et al., 2003; Wakefield et al., 
2007). Other benefits include increased physical exercise 
(Armstrong, 2000; Wakefield et al., 2007), sound mental 
health (Armstrong, 2000), increased social interactions 
and social capital (Doyle & Krasny, 2003), as well as 
income generation, employment opportunities (Reuther 
& Dewar, 2006), and environmental benefits (Okvat & 
Zautra, 2011).
According to the United Nations Department of  
Economic and Social Affairs [UN DESA] (2024), the 
world population is expected to reach 10.3 billion in the 
mid-2080s. Given the limited resources, there will be 
significant pressure to feed the growing population (Mc 
Carthy et al., 2018). Furthermore, the reduction of  arable 
land around the globe due to rapid urbanization makes the 

issue of  food security more pressing than ever (Guitart et 
al., 2012). At the same time, the rapidly changing climate 
negatively affects agriculture, further worsening food 
security issues (Mahato, 2014). In 2021, 10.2% (13.5 
million) of  U.S. households were food insecure and 
had difficulty providing enough food for all their family 
members (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2022), meaning that one 
in every ten Americans did not have enough food at some 
point during that year.
Of  all the populations that lack access to healthy food, 
poor and racial minorities are most affected. Low-
income households spend a significant portion of  their 
income on nutritious food (Golan et al., 2008). Amidst 
the daunting challenge of  food insecurity due to rapid 
population growth, urbanization, and climate change, it is 
urgent that we adopt alternative and sustainable strategies 
to increase food production, such as community or home 
gardens (Evers & Hodgson, 2011; Gregory et al., 2016).   
Community gardens provide poor and vulnerable 
populations access to inexpensive fresh fruits and 
vegetables (Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996). Lee (2001) 
mentioned that community gardens allow immigrant 
populations to grow traditional and ethnic crops, 
fostering a connection to their homeland. Community 
gardening provides a place for social gatherings where 
disadvantaged communities can empower themselves 
through democratic participation (Armstrong, 2000) and 
build community capacity by increasing their knowledge 
and skills (Holland, 2004).
Despite several benefits of  community gardening, small-
scale ethnic minority producers face many barriers, 
including lack of  knowledge and skills, insufficient 
financial support, rigid regulations, time constraints, 



Pa
ge

 
95

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

family obligations, and cultural discrepancies, all of  which 
hinder their participation in community gardening (Karki 
& Bhandari, 2023; Schrup, 2018). These challenges 
highlight the need to address these barriers and actively 
promote the adoption of  community gardening among 
small-scale and minority producers. 
Although community gardening has a long history, it is 
surprising that relatively few studies focus on farmers’ 
experiences, knowledge, skills, and perceptions of  
community gardening, most studies being based on 
anecdotal evidence. Marshall (2012) highlighted the 
importance of  identifying farmers’ specific needs and 
evaluating how well they utilize Extension services to 
ensure that the programs are tailored and delivered 
effectively, particularly to support minority farmers. 
However, there is a dearth of  research examining 
the role of  institutional and financial support in the 
adoption of  community gardening among small-scale 
and minority producers in the U.S. Thus, to address 
these gaps in research, this study examined observations 
from two community gardens in Baltimore County, and 
Baltimore City, Maryland, established with the technical 
and managerial support of  the University of  Maryland 
Eastern Shore Extension.

Objectives
The general objective of  the study was to engage small-
scale ethnic minority producers in community gardening 
to produce fresh food for their households. The specific 
objectives of  the study were to (i) assess changes in 
knowledge and skills after project interventions, (ii) 
evaluate participants’ perceptions regarding the benefits 
of  community gardening, and (iii) raise awareness of  the 
importance of  community gardening in household food 
security and greenhouse gas emissions.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Present Trends, Food Security Issues, and 
Community Gardening
The global population is rising at an alarming rate. The 
world’s population reached 8 billion on November 15, 
2022, and is projected to reach 9.7 billion in 2050 and 
10.4 billion in 2100 (UN DESA, 2022). Similarly, as 
the world economy progresses, the world is seeing an 
unprecedented trend in urbanization. In 2018, 55% (4.2 
billion people) of  the world’s population lived in cities, 
with North America being the most urbanized region 
(82.3%) (UN DESA, 2019). Urbanization significantly 
reduces arable land for agriculture in cities and often 
accelerates environmental and ecological degradation 
(Gregory et al., 2016). The food demand has increased 
with a growing population. A large migration to urban 
environments from rural areas and a rapid increase in 
world population has led to growing concerns about 
food quality, price, and food security. Between 8.9% and 
10.5% of  the world population—between 702 and 828 
million people—faced hunger in 2021, with the highest 
prevalence in Africa (20.2%), followed by Asia (9.1%) 

(FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP & WHO, 2022). The 
report shows that an estimated 2.3 billion people (29.3% 
of  the world population) were moderately or severely 
food insecure in 2021. Tilman et al. (2011) predicted that 
global crop production should double by 2050 to meet 
the increasing food demands and avoid world hunger. 
However, a significant gap in current crop yield trends 
makes it challenging to meet this target (Ray et al., 2013).
The present agriculture and food market is heavily 
dominated by conventional or corporate food systems, 
characterized by highly specialized and standardized 
commodity-growing practices that prioritize market 
dominance and profit maximization. These systems 
have resulted in global food monopolies in seeds, crop 
commodities, and retail foods while relying heavily on 
imports and exports, which results in food traveling 
long distances to reach consumers (Campbell, 2004). 
The conventional food system addresses short-term 
hunger relief  but is unable to address broader issues 
such as household income, nutritional quality, and food 
access (Joseph, 1999). Additionally, the reliance of  this 
system on chemicals has proven to negatively impact the 
health of  farm workers and pose environmental hazards 
(Greider, 2000). The IPCC 2019 report indicates that up 
to 37% of  greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to 
changing climate, originate from total food systems.
These challenges necessitate identifying alternative and 
sustainable agri-food production systems, such as urban 
and community gardening. According to Algert et al. 
(2014), gardening is a promising and effective tool to 
combat the issues of  food security and increase access to 
locally produced nutritious foods. Community and home 
gardening can help gardeners and local residents meet 
their daily fresh vegetable and fruit needs, significantly 
contributing to improved nutrition and health (Malberg 
Dyg et al., 2020). Urban agriculture can contribute to food 
security in several ways. At the household level, urban and 
community gardening can serve as a source of  regular 
income and healthy food, which can maintain stability in 
food access and affordability, even against seasonality and 
other temporary shortages (Maxwell, 2002). On a broader 
level, urban and community gardening can contribute to 
a significant share of  healthy and locally produced foods 
(especially vegetables and fruits) for the community 
(Nugent, 2000). Some studies have illustrated the role 
of  the community gardening in food security through 
donations of  surplus produce to people experiencing 
homelessness, elderly adults, and low-income families 
(Poulsen et al., 2014; Saldivar-Tanaka & Krasny, 2004). 
Thus, community gardening can play a substantial role 
in the food security of  households of  all income levels 
by improving access to fresh and nutritious produce 
(Flanigan & Varma, 2006; McCullum et al., 2005).

Benefits of  Community Gardening
Community gardening has several benefits in addition to 
its role in food security. Inadequate access to nutritious 
food is often linked to increased risks of  heart disease, 



Pa
ge

 
96

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

diabetes, obesity, and chronic health conditions. However, 
improved access to fresh and high-quality foods and 
exercise opportunities through community gardening 
has been shown to improve individual health (Aubry et 
al., 2012; Poulsen et al., 2014). Studies have shown that 
individuals who participated in community gardening 
consumed more fresh fruits and vegetables than those 
who did not (Alaimo et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2021). 
Promoting community gardening through the Women, 
Infants, and Children Program has been shown to 
improve nutrition among participants from low-income 
urban households, as these gardeners consumed more 
fresh vegetables (Flanigan & Varma, 2006). Poulsen 
et al. (2014) likewise stated that community gardening 
contributes to an individual’s psychological well-being 
through the pleasure of  sharing food and their increased 
connections to nature.
Community gardens are found to preserve open green 
spaces, especially in the urban setting (Drake & Lawson, 
2015). Some studies also associate gardens with a climate 
change mitigation approach, as the gardens remove 
carbon from the atmosphere (carbon sequestration) and 
promote locally produced food (Meadows, 2000; Okvat 
& Zautra, 2011). Locally grown food also minimizes the 
energy demand and carbon emissions during packaging, 
refrigeration, and transportation (Okvat & Zautra, 2011). 
Community gardens also contribute to economic benefits, 
including income and job opportunities (Okvat & Zautra, 
2011). According to a study in San Jose, CA, community 
gardeners saved $435 per plot during a season (Algert et 
al., 2014). Wakefield et al. (2007) found that low-income 
communities involved in community gardening increased 
their fresh consumption and saved money on groceries. 
Community gardens also attract a range of  economic 
benefits to the community, including the transformation 
of  vacant lots and improved property values (Guitart et 
al., 2012; Okvat & Zautra, 2011; Santo et al., 2016). 
Other literature also discusses the role of  community 
gardening in building human capital. Community gardens 
enhance knowledge and skills in gardening as well as 
facilitate entrepreneurship, especially among youth and 
individuals belonging to disadvantaged communities 
(Armstrong, 2000; Blair, 2009). Blair (2009) also expressed 
that community gardens contribute to community 
resilience by providing a space for communication, sharing 
information, and co-learning. Community gardens bring 
together individuals from different social and cultural 
backgrounds, nurturing interactions and friendships and 
offering a broader approach to community involvement 
and development, social skill development, and hands-on 
learning (Doyle & Krasny, 2003; McCormack et al., 2010; 
Saldivar-Tanaka & Krasny, 2004).
Amidst the challenges of  land shortage, food insecurity, 
and degrading environment, community gardening 
emerges as a viable solution to ensure food security and 
promote a sustainable environment. By emphasizing 
local production, it addresses the shortcomings of  the 
mainstream agricultural and food systems, providing 

fresh, high-quality foods while mitigating the threats posed 
to food security and the environment by conventional 
practices. In summary, community gardens promote the 
well-being and resilience of  individuals, communities, and 
the environment (Okvat & Zautra, 2011).

Community Gardening, Ethnic Minority Producers, 
and the Role of  Extension
Community gardening offers opportunities for individuals, 
especially youth and disadvantaged communities, to 
gain hands-on knowledge and skills in food production, 
nutrition, environment, and entrepreneurship 
(Armstrong, 2000; Blair, 2009; Draper & Freedman, 
2010; Krasny & Tidball, 2009; Santo et al., 2016). A study 
of  community gardeners from a high-poverty area in 
Toronto revealed that they increased their fresh vegetable 
intake while saving money on groceries (Wakefield et al., 
2007). These gardeners also reported that they were able 
to grow ethnic crops that were otherwise expensive or 
hard to find in stores. Additionally, community gardening 
promotes empowerment, builds social connections, 
and enhances the overall well-being of  disadvantaged 
communities by providing access to land and resources 
(Okvat & Zautra, 2011). However, while urban and 
community gardening initiatives are associated with food 
security and justice, they are often dominated by white, 
well-off, and educated individuals who disproportionately 
benefit (Okvat & Zautra, 2011). 
Several barriers to community gardening for minority 
and low-income individuals, such as community garden 
policies related to membership fees, fencing, and the use 
of  digital communication methods, often discourage 
them from participating (Glover et al., 2005; Meenar & 
Hoover, 2012). Additionally, people of  color, particularly 
African Americans, demonstrated a lack of  interest, 
accounting for their low participation. This lack of  
interest among minority communities stems from a lack 
of  gardening knowledge, experience, and awareness of  
the benefits of  community gardening (Haynes-Maslow 
et al., 2015; Jettner, 2017; Loopstra & Tarasuk, 2013). 
Moreover, lower-income and ethnic minority gardeners 
often have less access to support and facilities and lack 
connections with those in power compared to white and 
well-educated gardeners (Cohen et al., 2012). 
Extension services could create an outreach initiative 
to bridge these gaps and make a real difference for 
disadvantaged communities. Marshall (2012) pointed out 
the necessity of  understanding farmers’ specific needs 
and their accessibility to Extension services to tailor 
support services for low-income and minority producers. 
A study by Hargrove & Jones (2004) also indicated that 
extension programs should be personalized and farmer-
specific to ensure sustainability. These personalized 
programs can minimize gaps in knowledge and provide 
minority producers with easy access to extension services. 
Marshall (2012) further emphasized the need to regularly 
evaluate the program results and collect feedback from 
clientele farmers to further improve Extension services.



Pa
ge

 
97

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Logical Framework
Figure 1 illustrates the program’s logical framework based 
on the cited literature discussed previously in this paper. 
The project took the initiative to establish community 
gardens and provided gardeners with essential inputs for 
gardening. The program also offered tailored support 
programs through education, training, workshops, and 
one-on-one consultation based on the specific needs of  
the participants. 
These interventions aimed to achieve three key learning 
outcomes: enhanced awareness, increased knowledge, 
and improved skills and techniques. The gardeners were 

expected to apply their improved knowledge and skills in 
gardening to achieve immediate and long-term outcomes. 
The expected immediate outcomes included access to 
fresh and healthy food, improved nutrition, reduction 
in grocery expenses, and opportunities to sell surplus 
produce. In the long term, the gardeners were expected 
to improve their health through the consumption of  fresh 
and healthy food, enhance household food security from 
increased vegetable production, and increase household 
income from the sale of  surplus produce. Additionally, 
sustainable gardening practices were expected to bring 
long-term environmental benefits.

Figure 1: Logical framework of  the community gardening program: Adapted from Tembo & Louw (2013)

Implementation
The University of  Maryland Eastern Shore Extension, 
with the financial support of  the National Institute of  
Food and Agriculture (NIFA)/1890 Extension Funding, 
successfully established two community gardens in Glen 
Arm and Rosedale, Maryland. The program’s primary 
purpose was to promote community gardening among 
small-scale and minority producers in Maryland. To 
achieve this objective and encourage them to start and/
or continue gardening, the program provided participants 
with technical and token material support.
The project initially recruited 20 small-scale ethnic minority 
producers. With time, through the snowball effect, the 
number of  project participants grew to 36, including 
producers from Baltimore County and Baltimore City. An 
initial baseline survey was administered at the beginning 
of  the project to assess participants’ needs. Intervention 
and support activities were subsequently tailored based 
on the survey findings.
First, the project provided participants with some 
production inputs to incentivize active participation 
and address the financial barriers experienced by many 
participants who could not independently afford resources 
such as farmyard manure, garden soil, fertilizers, seeds, 
seedlings, weed-suppressing ground fabrics, and garden 
tools. Second, through needs-based training, workshops, 

mentor/specialist consultation, peer-to-peer interaction, 
and interactive meetings, the program facilitated capacity-
building programs on vegetable production, disease and 
pest management, compost making, farm production 
planning and budgeting, risk management, data recording, 
and produce marketing. Furthermore, the project assisted 
participants in identifying local vendors, farmers’ markets, 
restaurants, and other potential outlets to explore 
marketing opportunities to sell surplus produce.
The community gardening program was initiated in 
February 2023. Two community garden locations were 
selected based on land availability and proximity to 
participants. Once the locations and participants were 
finalized between February and March, a community 
garden was established in Glen Arm, Baltimore County, 
and another in Goodnow, Baltimore City, from April 2023 
through September 2023. Input support distribution and 
capacity-building programs were conducted several times 
between February and September.

Data Collection and Analysis
A semi-structured survey was administered to 36 project 
participants in September 2023 to assess the outcomes 
of  the project interventions. The survey included 
the demography of  the participating farmers, socio-
economic benefits, perceived health benefits, and capacity 



Pa
ge

 
98

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

improvements as experienced by the participants. The 
survey was conducted through in-person interviews, 
phone calls, and focus group discussions. The information 
produced was triangulated through field visits, phone 
calls, and group meetings. 
Given that the case study was exploratory in nature, the 
results primarily focused on descriptive statistics. The 
project’s usefulness in fostering capacity building among 
its participants was measured on a 5-point Likert Scale 
(extremely useful with a weight of  5 and least useful 
with a weight of  1), and the mean score was classified 
following Pimentel (2010). Excel and SPSS were used to 
analyze the data obtained from the survey.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Demographic Characteristics
Among the total respondents who participated in the 
study (n = 36), 52.8% were female. All respondents 
resided in Baltimore County and Baltimore City and 
belonged to ethnic minority disadvantaged populations: 
Bhutanese American (38.9%) and Nepalese American 
(61.1%).

Knowledge and Skills about Gardening
Out of  all survey participants (n = 36), 41.7% reported that 
they did not have knowledge about community gardening 
prior to joining the project (Figure 2). When asked if  their 
overall knowledge about community gardening and its 
benefits increased after the project intervention, a large 
majority (91.7%) of  the respondents agreed, with 63.9% 
in strong agreement and 27.8% agreeing.

Figure 2: Increase in overall knowledge after participating 
in the project

Table 1 displays the frequency of  the respondents who 
reported an increase in knowledge and skills in specific 
areas of  community gardening due to participation 
in the project. The findings indicate that most project 
participants enhanced their understanding of  vegetables 
and fruit production. Specifically, 100% of  the 
respondents reported an increase in knowledge about 
different vegetable types, the importance of  healthy 
soil, and water requirements for gardening following 
their engagement in the project. More than 91% of  
the respondents realized an increase in knowledge 
about fertilizer requirements and raised bed gardening 
techniques. Other areas the respondents reported notable 

improvements in their understanding were organic 
production (88.9%), garden establishment (88.9%), 
bed preparation (86.1%), seedling production (77.8%), 
soil health enhancement (75%), and the importance of  
weeding (75%).  Increased knowledge and skills were also 
reported for growth nutrient application (63.9%), plant 
disease identification and control (61.1%), insect and 
pest control (58.3%), application of  mulching (58.3%), 
and marketing of  fresh produce (30.6%). These results 
highlight the project’s effectiveness in educating the 
participants about various gardening practices.

Table 1: Increase in knowledge and skills in various 
aspects of  gardening
Knowledge/Skill Number of  

responses
Percent(%)

Different vegetable types 36 100.0
Soil health for healthy 
production

36 100.0

Fertilizer requirement for 
plant growth

33 91.7

Watering requirements 36 100.0
Raised bed vegetable 
gardening

33 91.7

Importance of  weeding 27 75.0
Application of  mulching 21 58.3
Application of  growth 
nutrients

23 63.9

Garden insect and pest 
management

21 58.3

Plant disease 
identification and control

22 61.1

Bed preparation for 
gardening

31 86.1

Organic production 32 88.9
Enhancing soil health 27 75.0
Establishing a garden 32 88.9
Seedling production 28 77.8
Marketing of  fresh 
produce

11 30.6

Source: Field Survey (2023)

Perceived Benefits of  Community Gardening
Respondents were asked about the benefits of  community 
gardening that were realized after engaging in the project 
and receiving educational and technical assistance from the 
University of  Maryland Eastern Shore Extension. These 
benefits included the socio-economic, environmental, 
and health benefits of  community gardening. All 
respondents (100%) agreed that they realized its vital role 
in producing fresh produce for maintaining good health 
(Table 2). Equally, respondents realized the benefits of  
community gardening as a means of  engaging in physical 
activity. Based on their experience in the project, 97.2% 



Pa
ge

 
99

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

of  respondents perceived that community gardening 
minimizes grocery expenses due to the production of  
vegetables and fruits. Similarly, 97.2% of  respondents 
agreed that community gardening can contribute to their 

Table 2: Benefits of  community gardening
Perceived benefits Number of  

responses
Percent(%)

Access to fresh produce 
for good health 

36 100.0

Good means of  physical 
activity

36 100.0

Reduces grocery 
expenses

35 97.2

Household food security 35 97.2
Reduces greenhouse gas 
emission

22 61.1

Source: Field Survey (2023)

Table 4: Motivation to continue community gardening
Motivation to continue Number of  

responses
Percent(%)

Learn more about 
community gardening

35 97.2

Share knowledge/skills 35 97.2
Establish a kitchen 
garden at home

32 88.9

Participate in future 
capacity-building 
activities

28 77.8

Source: Field Survey (2023)

Table 3: Usefulness of  the community gardening program in fostering capacity-building
Indicators Level of  usefulness (%) Mean 

score
Description

Least
useful

Slightly
useful

Moderately
useful

Very
Useful

Extremely 
useful

Cost reduction 13.9 5.6 13.9 36.1 30.6 3.64 Very useful
Farm planning and 
budgeting

25.0 8.3 13.9 33.3 19.4 3.14 Moderately useful

Income/Production 
maximization

13.9 5.6 19.4 52.8 8.3 3.36 Moderately useful

Production risk 
management

30.6 5.6 27.8 30.6 5.6 2.75 Moderately useful 

Entrepreneurship
development

25.0 13.9 22.2 30.6 8.3 2.83 Moderately useful 

Record keeping 27.8 8.3 25.0 30.6 8.3 2.83 Moderately useful
Resource management 16.7 2.8 16.7 47.2 16.7 3.44 Very useful
Peer-to-peer
networking

13.9 2.8 5.6 33.3 44.4 3.92 Very useful

Note: According to Pimentel (2010), Least useful (1.00 – 1.79), Slightly useful (1.80 – 2.59), Moderately useful (2.60 – 3.39), Very 
useful (3.40 – 4.19), Extremely useful (4.20 – 5.00) 
Source: Field Survey (2023)

household food security. Among the 36 respondents, 
61.1% reported that they realized that gardening reduces 
greenhouse gas emissions by producing food locally, 
thereby decreasing food miles.

Program’s Usefulness in Fostering Capacity-
Building
The mean scores, ranging from 1 (least useful) to 5 
(extremely useful), presented in Table 3, determined 
the project’s usefulness in fostering gardeners’ capacity 
building. The responses revealed that the project was very 
useful in enhancing peer-to-peer networking, reducing 
the cost of  production, and managing locally available 
resources, such as composting, with the highest mean 
score for peer-to-peer networking (3.92). The other areas 
in which the respondents found the project moderately 
useful were income/production maximization (3.36), 
farm planning and budgeting (3.14), entrepreneurship 
development (2.83), record keeping (2.83), and production 
risk management (2.75).

Motivation to Continue Community Gardening
A large majority (97.2%) of  respondents indicated they 
were willing to continue gardening and share the acquired 
knowledge and skills with family, friends, relatives, and 
neighbors (Table 4). Similarly, realizing the benefits of  
community gardening, 88.9% of  the survey participants 
reported that they wanted to set up their own kitchen 
garden at home. To further strengthen their capacity, 
77.8% of  respondents stated a willingness to participate 
in future capacity-building activities conducted by the 
University of  Maryland Eastern Shore Extension.



Pa
ge

 
10

0

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

Discussion
This study assessed various outcomes of  promoting 
community gardening among small-scale ethnic minority 
producers through the extension approach. A brief  
discussion is presented below based on the findings.
In the logical framework, we expected that the 
introduction of  community gardening to the participants 
would result in positive learning outcomes, such as 
improved awareness, increased knowledge, and enhanced 
skills. Furthermore, the participants were expected to 
utilize their newly acquired knowledge and skills to 
achieve both immediate and long-term benefits from 
community gardening. 
The findings indicated a slightly higher proportion of  
female participants (52.8%) in the project. Nearly forty-
two percent of  the participants did not have knowledge 
of  community gardening prior to joining the project, 
indicating that many were unaware of  the functions 
and benefits of  participating in a community gardening 
program. Following their participation, the majority of  
participants reported an overall increase in knowledge 
about community gardening and its benefits, indicating 
that promotion efforts, supported by technical and 
material support, can effectively encourage participation 
and enhance participants’ knowledge and understanding 
of  community gardening. The increase in knowledge 
among participants is consistent with the findings of  
previous studies (Armstrong, 2000; Blair, 2009; Draper 
& Freedman, 2010; Krasny & Tidball, 2009; Santo et al., 
2016).
The program’s hands-on approach proved very effective, 
as many participants reported enhancement in knowledge, 
skills, and awareness related to gardening practices. This 
included increased knowledge about different vegetable 
types, water, fertilizer, growth nutrient needs, and soil 
health requirements for a healthy garden. Improvements 
in skills were reported in specific areas, such as fertilizer 
and water use, insect/pest and disease management, raised 
bed preparation, seedling production, and marketing of  
produce. The increased understanding and improved 
skills allowed participants to experience firsthand the 
benefits of  community gardening, such as increased 
consumption of  fresh produce leading to good health, 
improved household food security, reduced grocery 
expenses, increased physical activity leading to a healthy 
lifestyle, and a healthier environment due to reduced 
greenhouse gas emission activities. These benefits of  
community gardening are also reported in many prior 
studies (Flanigan & Varma, 2006; Okvat & Zautra, 2011; 
Poulsen et al., 2014; Wakefield et al., 2007).
The participants’ responses highlighted the Extension 
program’s usefulness in contributing to individual 
capacity-building by fostering peer-to-peer networking, 
cost minimization, and resource management. However, 
some areas, including farm planning and budgeting, 
income maximization, risk management, record keeping, 
and entrepreneurship development, were deemed only 
moderately useful. This indicates a need for future 

interventions by Extension to focus on these aspects 
in order to promote participants’ capacity building. The 
primary impact of  the program is reflected positively, 
as most participants expressed a willingness to continue 
gardening, establish a home garden, participate in 
capacity-building activities, and share their acquired 
knowledge and skills with family, friends, relatives, and 
neighbors. 
Overall, the study achieved the desired outcomes in 
promoting community gardening among small-scale 
ethnic minority producers. The results demonstrated 
the potential for the long-term impact of  community 
gardening on increasing household food security. 
However, the study has some limitations. First, the sample 
size was small, and all ethnic participants were of  Asian 
origin, limiting the study’s broader generalization. Second, 
the benefits of  community gardening were qualitatively 
assessed based on self-reporting by the producers, which 
may introduce bias. Thus, these limitations should be 
considered in future studies to support and generate 
more robust and conclusive evidence.

CONCLUSION
The study highlights the perceived benefits of  community 
gardening reported by the participants, including access 
to fresh food, increased physical activity, reduced grocery 
expenses, improved household food security, and reduced 
greenhouse gas emissions. These results demonstrate the 
benefits community gardening offers to an individual, 
community, and environment. The findings reveal that 
extension programs combined with adequate support 
can promote the adoption of  community gardening and 
enhance knowledge, skills, and overall understanding 
among small-scale ethnic minority producers. The study 
also underscores that a tailored extension project can 
significantly improve the capacity of  small-scale ethnic 
minority producers in community gardening and motivate 
them to continue gardening and share acquired gardening 
knowledge and skills. Overall, the study indicates that with 
broader outreach, the extension’s community gardening 
initiatives can be an effective tool for development at 
both household and community levels.
 
REFERENCES
Alaimo, K., Packnett, E., Miles, R. A., & Kruger, D. J. 

(2008). Fruit and vegetable intake among urban 
community gardeners. Journal of  Nutrition Education and 
Behavior, 40(2), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jneb.2006.12.003 

Algert, S. J., Baameur, A., & Renvall, M. J. (2014). 
Vegetable output and cost savings of  community 
gardens in San Jose, California. Journal of  the Academy 
of  Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(7), 1072–1076. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.02.030 

Armstrong, D. (2000). A survey of  community gardens 
in upstate New York: Implications for health 
promotion and community development. Health and 
Place, 6(4), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1353-



Pa
ge

 
10

1

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

8292(00)00013-7 
Aubry, C., Ramamonjisoa, J., Dabat, M. H., Rakotoarisoa, 

J., Rakotondraibe, J., & Rabeharisoa, L. (2012). Urban 
agriculture and land use in cities: An approach with 
the multi-functionality and sustainability concepts 
in the case of  Antananarivo (Madagascar). Land Use 
Policy, 29(2), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landusepol.2011.08.009 

Blair, D. (2009). The child in the garden: An evaluative 
review of  the benefits of  school gardening. Journal 
of  Environmental Education, 40(2), 15–38. https://doi.
org/10.3200/JOEE.40.2.15-38 

Campbell, M. C. (2004). Building a common table: The 
role for planning in community food systems. Journal 
of  Planning Education and Research, 23(4), 341–355. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X04264916 

Cohen, N., Chou, J., & Stephenson, R. (2012). Five Borough 
Farm: Seeding the future of  urban agriculture in New York 
City. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.2236.0806 

Coleman-Jensen, A., Rabbitt, M. P., Gregory, C. A., & 
Singh, A. (2022). Household food security in the 
United States. Economic Research Report, 155.

Doyle, R., & Krasny, M. (2003). Participatory rural 
appraisal as an approach to environmental education 
in urban community gardens. Environmental 
Education Research, 9(1), 91–115. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13504620303464 

Drake, L., & Lawson, L. J. (2015). Results of  a US and 
Canada community garden survey: Shared challenges 
in garden management amid diverse geographical and 
organizational contexts. Agriculture and Human Values, 
32(2), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-
014-9558-7 

Draper, C., & Freedman, D. (2010). Review and analysis 
of  the benefits, purposes, and motivations associated 
with community gardening in the United States. 
Journal of  Community Practice, 18(4), 458–492. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10705422.2010.519682 

Evers, A., & Hodgson, N. L. (2011). Food choices and 
local food access among Perth’s community gardeners. 
Local Environment, 16(6), 585–602. https://doi.org/10
.1080/13549839.2011.575354 

FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. (2022). The state 
of  food security and nutrition in the world 2022: Repurposing 
food and agricultural policies to make healthy diets more 
affordable. FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. 
https://doi.org/10.4060/cc0639en 

Flanigan, S., & Varma, R. (2006). Promoting community 
gardening to low-income urban participants in the 
women, infants and children programme (WIC) in 
New Mexico. Community, Work and Family, 9(1), 69–74. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800500420806 

Glover, T. D., Parry, D. C., & Shinew, K. J. (2005). Building 
relationships, accessing resources: Mobilizing social 
capital in community garden contexts. Journal of  
Leisure Research, 37(4), 450–474. https://doi.org/10.1
080/00222216.2005.11950062 

Golan, E. H., Stewart, H., Kuchler, F., & Dong, D. (2008). 

Can low-income Americans afford a healthy diet? Amber 
Waves: The Economics of  Food, Farming, Natural 
Resources, and Rural America.

Gottlieb, R., & Fisher, A. (1996). Community food 
security and environmental justice: Searching for a 
common discourse. Agriculture and Human Values, 
13(3), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01538224 

Gregory, M. M., Leslie, T. W., & Drinkwater, L. E. (2016). 
Agroecological and social characteristics of  New 
York City community gardens: contributions to urban 
food security, ecosystem services, and environmental 
education. Urban Ecosystems, 19(2), 763–794. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11252-015-0505-1 

Greider, W. (2000). The Last Farm Crisis. Nation, 271(16), 
11–16.

Guitart, D., Pickering, C., & Byrne, J. (2012). Past results 
and future directions in urban community gardens 
research. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 11(4), 364–
373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.06.007 

Hargrove, T. M., & Jones, B. L. (2004). A qualitative case 
study analysis of  the small farmers outreach training 
and technical assistance (2501) program from 1994-
2001: Implications for African American Farmers. 
Journal of  Agricultural Education, 45(2), 72–82. https://
doi.org/10.5032/jae.2004.02072 

Haynes-Maslow, L., Auvergne, L., Mark, B., Ammerman, 
A., & Weiner, B. J. (2015). Low-income individuals’ 
perceptions about fruit and vegetable access 
programs: A qualitative study. Journal of  Nutrition 
Education and Behavior, 47(4), 317-324.e1. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jneb.2015.03.005 

Holland, L. (2004). Diversity and connections in 
community gardens: A contribution to local 
sustainability. Local Environment, 9(3), 285–305. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/1354983042000219388 

Jettner, J. F. (2017). Community gardens: Exploring 
race, racial diversity and social capital in urban food 
deserts. Virginia Commonwealth University. https://
scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/4784 

Joseph, H. (1999). Re-defining community food security. 
Community Food Security News, 3, 12–13.

Karki, L. B., & Bhandari, P. B. (2023). The significance of  
urban gardening on the household economy: A case 
of  minority urban gardeners. Professional Agricultural 
Workers Journal, 9(2), 9–25. https://tuspubs.tuskegee.
edu/pawj 

Krasny, M. E., & Tidball, K. G. (2009). Applying a 
resilience systems framework to urban environmental 
education. Environmental Education Research, 15(4), 465–
482. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620903003290 

Lee, S. H. (2001). Community gardening benefits as perceived 
among American-born and immigrant gardeners in San Jose, 
California [Unpublished manuscript]. http://nature.
berkeley.edu/classes/es196/projects/2002final/
Lee.S.pdf  

Loopstra, R., & Tarasuk, V. (2013). Perspectives on 
community gardens, community kitchens and the 
good food box program in a community-based sample 



Pa
ge

 
10

2

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

of  low-income families. Canadian Journal of  Public 
Health, 104(1), e55–e59. https://doi.org/10.1007/
bf03405655 

Mahato, A. (2014). Climate change and its impact on 
agriculture. International Journal of  Scientific and Research 
Publications, 4(4), 1–6.

Malberg Dyg, P., Christensen, S., & Peterson, C. J. 
(2020). Community gardens and wellbeing amongst 
vulnerable populations: A thematic review. Health 
Promotion International, 35(4), 790–803. https://doi.
org/10.1093/heapro/daz067 

Marshall, R. W. (2012). The impact of  the extension service 
on minority-owned small farm operations. Journal 
of  Extension, 50(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.34068/
joe.50.01.11 

Maxwell, D. (2002). The importance of  urban agriculture 
in food and nutrition. Etc-Ruaf, 5. http://www.ruaf.
org/sites/default/files/food_security_nutrition.pdf  

Mc Carthy, U., Uysal, I., Badia-Melis, R., Mercier, S., 
O’Donnell, C., & Ktenioudaki, A. (2018). Global 
food security – Issues, challenges and technological 
solutions. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 77, 11–
20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.05.002 

McCormack, L. A., Laska, M. N., Larson, N. I., & 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. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jada.2009.11.023 

McCullum, C., Desjardins, E., Kraak, V. I., Ladipo, P., 
& Costello, H. (2005). Evidence-based strategies to 
build community food security. Journal of  the American 
Dietetic Association, 105(2), 278–283. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jada.2004.12.015 

Meadows, D. (2000, November 06). Two brothers talk carbon 
sequestration. Grist. https://grist.org/article/how/

Meenar, M., & Hoover, B. (2012). Community Food 
Security via Urban Agriculture: Understanding 
People, Place, Economy, and Accessibility from a 
Food Justice Perspective. Journal of  Agriculture, Food 
Systems, and Community Development, 143–160. https://
doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2012.031.013 

Nugent, R. (2000). The impact of  urban agriculture on 
the household and local economies. Growing Cities, 
Growing Food: Urban Agriculture on the …, 67–97. 
http://wentfishing.net/farmlit/Theme3.pdf  

Okvat, H. A., & Zautra, A. J. (2011). Community 
Gardening: A Parsimonious Path to Individual, 
Community, and Environmental Resilience. American 
Journal of  Community Psychology, 47(3–4), 374–387. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-010-9404-z 

Pimentel, J. L. (2010). A note on the usage of  Likert 
Scaling for research data analysis. USM R&D Journal, 
18(2), 109–112.

Poulsen, M. N., Hulland, K. R. S., Gulas, C. A., Pham, 
H., Dalglish, S. L., Wilkinson, R. K., & Winch, P. J. 
(2014). Growing an urban oasis: A qualitative study 
of  the perceived benefits of  community gardening 

in Baltimore, Maryland. Culture, Agriculture, Food and 
Environment, 36(2), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/
cuag.12035

Ray, D. K., Mueller, N. D., West, P. C., & Foley, J. A. (2013). 
Yield Trends Are Insufficient to Double Global Crop 
Production by 2050. PLOS ONE, 8(6), e66428-. 
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066428 

Reuther, S., & Dewar, N. (2006). Competition for the use 
of  public open space in low-income urban areas: The 
economic potential of  urban gardening in Khayelitsha, 
Cape Town. Development Southern Africa, 23(1), 97–122. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/03768350600556273 

Saldivar-Tanaka, L., & Krasny, M. E. (2004). Culturing 
community development, neighborhood open space, 
and civic agriculture: The case of  Latino community 
gardens in New York City. Agriculture and Human 
Values, 21(4), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10460-003-1248-9 

Santo, R., Palmer, A., & Kim, B. (2016). Vacant lots 
to vibrant plots: A review of  the benefits and limitations 
of  urban agriculture. https://doi.org/10.13140/
RG.2.2.25283.91682 

Schrup, J. (2018). Barriers to community gardening in Portland, 
OR. [University Honors Theses, Portland State 
University]. https://doi.org/10.15760/honors.786 

Tembo, R., & Louw, J. (2013). Conceptualising and 
implementing two community gardening projects 
on the Cape Flats, Cape Town. Development Southern 
Africa, 30(2), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/037
6835X.2013.797220 

Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J., & Befort, B. L. (2011). Global 
food demand and the sustainable intensification 
of  agriculture. Proceedings of  the National Academy of  
Sciences, 108(50), 20260–20264.

Twiss, J., Dickinson, J., Duma, S., Kleinman, T., 
Paulsen, H., & Rilveria, L. (2003). Community 
gardens: Lessons learned from California healthy 
cities and communities. American Journal of  Public 
Health, 93(9), 1435–1438. https://doi.org/10.2105/
AJPH.93.9.1435 

United Nations Department of  Economic and Social 
Affairs. (2024). World population prospects 2024: 
Summary of  results. UN DESA/POP/2024/TR/
NO. 9. New York: United Nations. https://www.
un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.
development.desa.pd/files/files/documents/2024/
Jul/wpp2024_summary_of_results_final_web.pdf  

United Nations Department of  Economic and Social 
Affairs. (2019). World urbanization prospects 2018: 
Highlights. ST/ESA/SER.A/421. New York: United 
Nations. https://doi.org/10.18356/6255ead2-en 

United Nations Department of  Economic and Social 
Affairs. (2022). World population prospects 2022: 
Summary of  results. UN DESA/POP/2022/TR/
NO. 3. New York: United Nations. https://www.
un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.
development.desa.pd/files/wpp2022_summary_of_
results.pdf  



Pa
ge

 
10

3

https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajee

Am. J. Environ Econ. 4(1) 94-103, 2025

Wakefield, S., Yeudall, F., Taron, C., Reynolds, J., & 
Skinner, A. (2007). Growing urban health: Community 
gardening in South-East Toronto. Health Promotion 
International, 22(2), 92–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/
heapro/dam001 

Zhang, X., Zhang, Y., & Zhai, J. (2021). Home garden 

with eco-healing functions benefiting mental health 
and biodiversity during and after the COVID-19 
pandemic: A scoping review. Frontiers in Public 
Health, 9, 740187. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpubh.2021.740187 


