Although UA leaders desired to engage more community members, there were restrictions on who could enter UA sites. Most UA sites were only open to a specific population or established hours of operation and procedures for visitors. Gardens and farms had several security measures, such as locked fences, remote-controlled gates, and surveillance cameras. UA leaders expressed unease that these existing security measures were not enough to deter unauthorized people and animals from entering sites. There was also a notable tension between those involved in UA and the Long Beach’s unhoused population. One garden specified that any guests or volunteers without aplot-tenant agreement on file must be authorized by staff before visiting. However, unhoused individuals would frequently “jump the fence” to use their garden’s greenhouse for shelter. Another garden was intended for residents of a housing community, so it required entering a main gate with a security guard. Yet even with these precautions, gardeners encountered loiterers and unhoused people living in the garden shed, pipp racking which led to perceived safety concerns. In one instance, a gardener and her boyfriend were “pepper sprayed by a homeless person.”
These anecdotes highlight the growing social issue of homelessness in Long Beach, and bring into question whether physical barriers and policies effectively protect UA sites, or simply exclude community members. UA leaders also struggled with language barriers, which unintentionally excluded or created misunderstandings between community members who were not fluent in English. Some UA leaders had to rely on gardeners’ English-speaking children to act as interpreters. While volunteering at a community garden, I witnessed how language differences made it difficult to communicate important policies. While working with gardeners to weed a pathway, we discovered that the “weeds” were vegetables intentionally planted by a Korean gardener, who appeared very upset. Due to the language barrier, we could not identify the seedlings, nor was the gardener aware of the policy that common areas should not be used for planting. In the end, we replanted the dug-up vegetables, and the gardener shared a plate of fried perilla leaves with us .This section expands on Chapter 3, which partially addressed my research questions on how communities create, maintain, and engage in UA. To further answer questions regarding how UA fosters skills and knowledge and addresses health inequities, I specifically analyzed my findings in the context of the CCW model and SDOH domains.The six forms of capital from Yosso’s CCW model were represented in several aspects of UA. Aspirational capital allowed community members to envision the possibility of converting vacant lots into gardens and farms.
Resistant, navigational, and social capital was integral for actualizing these possibilities into reality. Through resistant capital, UA leaders and community members worked to actively change their neighborhoods despite challenges. LBO’s Zaferia Junction Community Garden is an example of this, as it was constructed on land previously used by the Pacific Electric Railway, demolished during the Termino Avenue Drain Project, then rebuilt again . Through navigational capital, UA leaders acquired permits from the city and obtained permission from private landowners to create UA sites. Community members leveraged social capital to build and maintain these sites collectively. In turn, UA sites boosted social capital by creating communal spaces for people to gather and host events. Familial capital was also important for preserving agricultural skills and knowledge through generations of family. UA leaders recognized the linguistic capital of others involved in UA , but it was the least represented form of capital in this study.UA sites increased social and community support by creating a space for community members to connect, through the experience of growing food, exchanging food at crop swaps and potlucks, and engaging in educational opportunities. In addition to the educational lessons provided by Ground Education’s school gardens, community gardens and urban farms offered educational workshops for children, adolescents, and adults. UA also provided informal opportunities for families and community members to share knowledge and skills.
Supporting economic stability, UA sites created paid positions for community members. Though most sites could only afford to hire one person or a small team of staff, UA yielded career development opportunities for volunteers and interns to gain experience. According to interviewees, UA did not directly increase access to health care services or health insurance. However, UA sites were healthy environments for community members to grow fruits and vegetables, increase their physical activity, and cope with stress. These findings support the use of UA for addressing SDOH, to promote health and potentially prevent disease. The following chapter will summarize the main takeaways of this research and provide recommendations for organizations, researchers, and policymakers.In summary, this dissertation provided an overview of urban agriculture sites in Long Beach and described how communities create, maintain, and engage in UA. Furthermore, this research examined how UA relates to community cultural wealth and the social determinants of health . These findings supported previous research on the social and environmental benefits of gardening , and uniquely focused on multiple types of UA sites, including community gardens, school gardens, and urban farms. According to interviews and field observations, UA increased access to healthy food and green spaces, particularly for Long Beach’s communities of color, which are disproportionately impacted by health inequities . This research supports emerging evidence that UA contributes significant value to public health and social systems . UA provided communities with fresh produce, improved mental health, promoted outdoor activity, enhanced neighborhoods, and created educational opportunities. Interestingly, Long Beach UA sites often began as the vision of one person or a small group of community members. Individuals combined their skills and knowledge by forming volunteer groups, organizations, and businesses. However, as I discovered while researching nonoperational gardens and farms, landowners held the most control over the longevity of UA sites. Public policies that encourage agricultural land use are critical for the long-term success of UA, particularly to protect UA land from being sold. To summarize study findings, I designed Figure 32 based on Lee et al.’s socioecological model of agricultural safety and health interventions.The UA sites in this study relied heavily on partnerships between community organizations, volunteers, the City of Long Beach, and private landowners. Most community gardens and school gardens were managed by Long Beach Organic and Ground Education respectively, which are both nonprofit organizations. Long Beach Community Garden , the largest community garden, cannabis commercial was managed by the Long Beach Community Garden Association, a not-for-profit organization. Nonprofits qualify as tax exempt in exchange for providing a public benefit . In contrast, not-for-profits can solely operate for the goals of their members, not the public . Both nonprofit and not-for-profit organizations must use their funding for their mission and operations, rather than the profit of an owner. Regardless of the type of organization, this research found that it was important for community members to organize formally. Organized groups could mobilize their skills and social capital to advocate for the creation of UA sites, secure funding, hire workers, and coordinate volunteers. Interviewees emphasized that volunteers from the community or organizations were essential for constructing and maintaining UA sites. In particular, UA sites repeatedly described volunteer efforts from the Conservation Corps of Long Beach, Boy Scouts of America, and UC Master Gardener Program. UA sites can also collaborate with partners to develop programming. Long Beach gardeners and farmers created social events, developed educational workshops, and shared their harvest with family, neighbors, and the community.
UA leaders advanced food justice, accomplishing Heynen et al.’s recommendation of using UA to connect food sovereignty and food security. Long Beach UA sites empowered communities to grow food, exchange knowledge, and gain agricultural skills. UA sites increased access to fruits and vegetables for those interested in growing and purchasing food. Additionally, UA sites served local community members and under served populations through food donation programs. For example, the Peace Garden distributed produce at monthly events as part of their outreach program. Peace Garden staff members grew food around the perimeter of the garden, which is also open for community members to harvest on weekdays. Similarly, LBCG and LBO gardens designated areas to grow food for local pantries and organizations. Since 2020, LBO has donated 160,000 pounds of organic produce to California State Long Beach University’s student pantry UA leaders should consider designing sites to be accessible and inclusive. Many of Long Beach’s UA sites accommodated different populations, such as those with disabilities, seniors, and veterans. LBCG was built with paved roads, which allows gardeners with mobility aids to access their plot more easily. LBO designed their gardens with pathways large enough to accommodate wheelchairs, based on standards issued by the Americans with Disabilities Act . The Veterans Affairs Patient Garden, which serves veterans staying long-term at the VA Hospital, was accessible to those with wheelchairs and walkers. The Magic Garden was originally founded by veterans. This garden has raised beds, enabling elderly gardeners and gardeners with disabilities to tend their crops without crouching or bending over. In addition to considering the physical accessibility of gardens, UA leaders were interested in increasing language accessibility. For example, the Peace Garden translated informational materials on how to register for garden plots into English, Spanish and Khmer. The Peace Garden was managed by Long Beach’s health department. Their staff worked with a public affairs team to distribute outreach materials at community resource fairs and online via social media. By offering outreach materials in multiple languages, UA sites can attract more diverse community members.While recruiting research participants, I found that many UA leaders did not immediately respond to emails and phone calls to schedule an interview. In some cases, even UA leaders who I had met in person and verbally expressed interest in participating, did not respond. This may be explained by a lack of capacity, as UA leaders were typically responsible for multiple duties at their site. Most UA sites were managed by a single person, with occasional assistance from board members, volunteers, and/or interns. Therefore, it was important for me to visit sites, participate in events, and volunteer. Volunteering as part of fieldwork is a participatory research practice that can allow researchers to contribute to a community, instead of passively observing . Through volunteer work, I earned the trust of UA leaders and was able to work alongside community members. For future research on UA sites, there is a need for interdisciplinary collaboration between social and environmental scientists, as well as medical professionals who can analyze biometric data. Longitudinal studies could investigate the quantitative impacts of UA on food security and disease risk. Further exploration is needed to understand the relationships between UA participation and obesity, diabetes, asthma, and mental health disorders. Additionally, researchers should study UA’s potential to improve air quality by reducing greenhouse gases and producing oxygen . UA may also reduce flooding in urban areas, as permeable soil can retain and absorb rainwater .Industrial agriculture has accelerated the loss of soil organic carbon, an indicator of soil health and a key part of climate regulation . Scholars should consider implementing the traditional ecological knowledge of indigenous people, such as the Tongva. Practices linked to TEK, such as the preservation of oak groves, can be applied today to promote biodiversity, prevent droughts, decrease carbon emissions, and ensure biodiversity . When designing future studies, researchers should include more diverse perspectives of UA participants and beneficiaries, such as family members and neighbors. A limitation of this research is that study participants did not reflect the demographics of the community at large. Out of 19 interviewees, 68% identified as White, yet over two-thirds of Long Beach’s population are people of color . This may be an indication that more Whites held UA leadership roles, compared to the diversity of gardeners, volunteers, and other participants. The discrepancy in participant demographics could also be explained by distrust, resulting from researchers’ historical exploitation of people of color. Examples of this include the Tuskegee study, which led to the preventable deaths of African American men, and a genetic research study of Havasupai tribe members, who donated blood samples for a diabetes study. The tribe members never received results of the study, yet researchers continued to use the blood samples for research .