IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i10p1889-d1255690.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on Evaluation System and Optimization Strategy of Community Garden Based on IPA Method: A Case Study in Wuhan, China

Author

Listed:
  • Yilan Sun

    (Key Laboratory of Urban Agriculture in Central China, The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Wuhan 430070, China
    Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Horticulture Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Yiyuan Sun

    (Key Laboratory of Urban Agriculture in Central China, The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Wuhan 430070, China
    Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Horticulture Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Bin Zhang

    (Key Laboratory of Urban Agriculture in Central China, The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, Wuhan 430070, China
    Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Horticulture Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China)

Abstract

The intrinsic attributes and service functions of community gardens (CGs) are closely related to the stage of national development and social needs. With the gradual implementation of China’s urban micro-renewal policy, many CGs have been gradually developed, but they still face problems such as poor operation and low participation, which urgently require us to carry out site-based research under China’s actual national conditions. Constructing a human’s perception value-oriented evaluation system and summarizing the optimization strategies according to the evaluation results can provide more systematic and targeted practical guidance for the construction of CGs in China. We developed a set of evaluation metrics for CGs based network text analysis, literature analysis, and expert opinions and collected 245 questionnaires from 20 existing CGs in Wuhan as a study sample. Using the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) method, we conducted statistical analysis of data for each type of CG. The results show that “Mosquito impact”, “Facility maintenance”, and “Social experience” are essential parts of residential-type community gardens (Resi-CGs) that are easily overlooked; that the users of commercial-type community gardens (Comm-CGs) consider that “Mosquito impact” is a serious deficiency; that campus-type community gardens (Camp-CGs) need to be optimized with regard to the aspects of “Crop stewardship” and “Leisure facilities”; and finally that there is no significant trend in the key improvement indicators of company-type community gardens (Comp-CGs) and the indicators like “Fitness and recreation experience”, “Crop diversity”, and “Aesthetics” need to be improved. According to the above results, we put forward specific optimization strategies to provide development guidelines and practical guidance for the future construction of CGs.

Suggested Citation

  • Yilan Sun & Yiyuan Sun & Bin Zhang, 2023. "Research on Evaluation System and Optimization Strategy of Community Garden Based on IPA Method: A Case Study in Wuhan, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-24, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1889-:d:1255690
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1889/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/10/1889/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hua Zheng & Min Guo & Qian Wang & Qinghai Zhang & Noriko Akita, 2023. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Current Knowledge Structure and Research Progress Related to Urban Community Garden Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-34, January.
    2. Xin Mai & Yueli Xu & Yungang Liu, 2023. "Cultivating an Alternative Subjectivity Beyond Neoliberalism: Community Gardens in Urban China," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(6), pages 1348-1364, July.
    3. Ioan Voicu & Vicki Been, 2008. "The Effect of Community Gardens on Neighboring Property Values," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 241-283, June.
    4. Camps-Calvet, Marta & Langemeyer, Johannes & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2016. "Ecosystem services provided by urban gardens in Barcelona, Spain: Insights for policy and planning," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 14-23.
    5. Xiaoying Ding & Yukun Zhang & Jie Zheng & Xiaopeng Yue, 2020. "Design and Social Factors Affecting the Formation of Social Capital in Chinese Community Garden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-25, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michal Shur‐Ofry & Ofer Malcai, 2021. "Collective action and social contagion: Community gardens as a case study," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 63-81, January.
    2. Stefano Cellini & Francisco Nobre, 2023. "Business Improvement Districts and Housing Markets: Evidence from Neighborhoods in London," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0523, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
    3. Mário Santos & Helena Moreira & João Alexandre Cabral & Ronaldo Gabriel & Andreia Teixeira & Rita Bastos & Alfredo Aires, 2022. "Contribution of Home Gardens to Sustainable Development: Perspectives from A Supported Opinion Essay," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-26, October.
    4. Antoni F. Tulla & Ana Vera, 2019. "Could Social Farming Be a Strategy to Support Food Sovereignty in Europe?," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-24, April.
    5. Qureshi, Salman & Tarashkar, Mahsa & Matloobi, Mansour & Wang, Zhifang & Rahimi, Akbar, 2022. "Understanding the dynamics of urban horticulture by socially-oriented practices and populace perception: Seeking future outlook through a comprehensive review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    6. Yun-chien Chang, 2010. "An Empirical Study of Compensation Paid in Eminent Domain Settlements: New York City, 1990-2002," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 201-244, January.
    7. Paola Clerino & Agnès Fargue-Lelièvre, 2020. "Formalizing Objectives and Criteria for Urban Agriculture Sustainability with a Participatory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    8. Anita Kwartnik-Pruc & Gabriela Droj, 2023. "The Role of Allotments and Community Gardens and the Challenges Facing Their Development in Urban Environments—A Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-26, January.
    9. Noelia Fernandez-Salido & Alfonso Gallego-Valadés & Carlos Serra-Castells & Jorge Garcés-Ferrer, 2025. "Cultivating Bonds: On Urban Allotment Gardens and Their Relationship with Social Capital," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-32, May.
    10. Charlotte Glennie, 2020. "Growing Together: Community Coalescence and the Social Dimensions of Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-25, November.
    11. Maria Beatrice Andreucci & Alessio Russo & Agnieszka Olszewska-Guizzo, 2019. "Designing Urban Green Blue Infrastructure for Mental Health and Elderly Wellbeing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Miguel Amado & Evelina Rodrigues & Francesca Poggi & Manuel Duarte Pinheiro & António Ribeiro Amado & Helder José, 2020. "Using Different Levels of Information in Planning Green Infrastructure in Luanda, Angola," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-26, April.
    13. Calderón-Contreras, Rafael & Quiroz-Rosas, Laura Elisa, 2017. "Analysing scale, quality and diversity of green infrastructure and the provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: A case from Mexico City," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 127-137.
    14. Brunes, Fredrik & Hermansson, Cecilia & Song, Han-Suck & Wilhelmsson, Mats, 2016. "NIMBYs for the rich and YIMBYs for the poor: Analyzing the property price effects of infill development," Working Paper Series 16/2, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Real Estate and Construction Management & Banking and Finance.
    15. Franco, Sofia F. & Macdonald, Jacob L., 2018. "Measurement and valuation of urban greenness: Remote sensing and hedonic applications to Lisbon, Portugal," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 156-180.
    16. Linrun Qiu & Yuxiang Dong & Hai Liu, 2022. "Integrating Ecosystem Services into Planning Practice: Situation, Challenges and Inspirations," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
    17. Evans, D.L. & Falagán, N. & Hardman, C.A. & Kourmpetli, S. & Liu, L. & Mead, B.R. & Davies, J.A.C., 2022. "Ecosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure – a systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    18. Daniela Soleri, 2018. "Civic seeds: new institutions for seed systems and communities—a 2016 survey of California seed libraries," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 331-347, June.
    19. Rita Mendonça & Peter Roebeling & Teresa Fidélis & Miguel Saraiva, 2021. "Policy Instruments to Encourage the Adoption of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Landscapes," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    20. Viniece Jennings & Lincoln Larson & Jessica Yun, 2016. "Advancing Sustainability through Urban Green Space: Cultural Ecosystem Services, Equity, and Social Determinants of Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:10:p:1889-:d:1255690. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.