Premium
Sowing social inclusion for marginalised residents of a social housing development through a community garden
Author(s) -
Mmako Nkolika J.,
Capetola Teresa,
HendersonWilson Claire
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
health promotion journal of australia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.515
H-Index - 32
eISSN - 2201-1617
pISSN - 1036-1073
DOI - 10.1002/hpja.225
Subject(s) - focus group , mental health , inclusion (mineral) , photo elicitation , sociology , public relations , social capital , psychology , gerontology , medicine , political science , social psychology , social science , anthropology , psychotherapist
Issue addressed In addition to food, physical activity, mental health and environmental benefits, community gardens ( CG s) provide opportunities for social inclusion and increased social capital. These are particularly important to the socially isolated residents of social housing developments ( SHD s). This scoping study explored the feasibility of a CG program for tenants of SHD in inner eastern Melbourne by assessing their interest in, and requirements for, inclusively designed CG s. Methods In this phenomenological enquiry, focus group discussions, supported by photo‐elicitation, were employed. Three focus groups (N = 19) were conducted with self‐selected participants who consented to participate. Two focus groups were conducted with English‐speaking tenants while a third focus group was conducted with Mandarin‐speaking tenants. Results There was a demand for CG s by the English‐speaking participants driven by desire for networking, social connectedness and inclusion; for improved access to fresh produce, connection with nature, physical activity and mental well‐being. Participants expressed interest in a garden located near their SHD with supportive physical and social environments including disability access, plot autonomy, fencing, socio‐cultural events, training programs and management opportunities. However, the Mandarin‐speaking tenants maintained that age, language difficulty and neighbourhood insecurity posed significant barriers to their participation. Conclusion Guided by the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, social inclusion and community development theories, the study recommends that to establish socially inclusive CG s, a dynamic relationship of the design principles of a CG and the socio‐ecological determinants of health should be established to address any barriers and successfully facilitate engagement. In addition, CG programs need to be guided by community development principles. Future research could employ community‐based participatory research models in the implementation and evaluation of a CG program for socially isolated population groups.