Cargando…

A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures

Existing community gardening research has tended to be exploratory and descriptive, utilising qualitative or mixed methodologies to explore and understand community garden participation. While research on community gardening attracts growing interest, the empirical rigour of measurement scales and e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kingsley, Jonathan, Bailey, Aisling, Torabi, Nooshin, Zardo, Pauline, Mavoa, Suzanne, Gray, Tonia, Tracey, Danielle, Pettitt, Philip, Zajac, Nicholas, Foenander, Emily
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6765939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31527436
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16183430
_version_ 1783454601284943872
author Kingsley, Jonathan
Bailey, Aisling
Torabi, Nooshin
Zardo, Pauline
Mavoa, Suzanne
Gray, Tonia
Tracey, Danielle
Pettitt, Philip
Zajac, Nicholas
Foenander, Emily
author_facet Kingsley, Jonathan
Bailey, Aisling
Torabi, Nooshin
Zardo, Pauline
Mavoa, Suzanne
Gray, Tonia
Tracey, Danielle
Pettitt, Philip
Zajac, Nicholas
Foenander, Emily
author_sort Kingsley, Jonathan
collection PubMed
description Existing community gardening research has tended to be exploratory and descriptive, utilising qualitative or mixed methodologies to explore and understand community garden participation. While research on community gardening attracts growing interest, the empirical rigour of measurement scales and embedded indicators has received comparatively less attention. Despite the extensive body of community gardening literature, a coherent narrative on valid, high quality approaches to the measurement of outcomes and impact across different cultural contexts is lacking and yet to be comprehensively examined. This is essential as cities are becoming hubs for cultural diversity. Systematic literature reviews that explore the multiple benefits of community gardening and other urban agriculture activities have been undertaken, however, a systematic review of the impact measures of community gardening is yet to be completed. This search protocol aims to address the following questions: (1) How are the health, wellbeing, social and environmental outcomes and impacts of community gardening measured? (2) What cultural diversity considerations have existing community garden measures taken into account? Demographic data will be collected along with clear domains/constructs of experiences, impacts and outcomes captured from previous literature to explore if evidence considers culturally heterogeneous and diverse populations. This will offer an understanding as to whether community gardening research is appropriately measuring this cross-cultural activity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6765939
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67659392019-09-30 A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures Kingsley, Jonathan Bailey, Aisling Torabi, Nooshin Zardo, Pauline Mavoa, Suzanne Gray, Tonia Tracey, Danielle Pettitt, Philip Zajac, Nicholas Foenander, Emily Int J Environ Res Public Health Protocol Existing community gardening research has tended to be exploratory and descriptive, utilising qualitative or mixed methodologies to explore and understand community garden participation. While research on community gardening attracts growing interest, the empirical rigour of measurement scales and embedded indicators has received comparatively less attention. Despite the extensive body of community gardening literature, a coherent narrative on valid, high quality approaches to the measurement of outcomes and impact across different cultural contexts is lacking and yet to be comprehensively examined. This is essential as cities are becoming hubs for cultural diversity. Systematic literature reviews that explore the multiple benefits of community gardening and other urban agriculture activities have been undertaken, however, a systematic review of the impact measures of community gardening is yet to be completed. This search protocol aims to address the following questions: (1) How are the health, wellbeing, social and environmental outcomes and impacts of community gardening measured? (2) What cultural diversity considerations have existing community garden measures taken into account? Demographic data will be collected along with clear domains/constructs of experiences, impacts and outcomes captured from previous literature to explore if evidence considers culturally heterogeneous and diverse populations. This will offer an understanding as to whether community gardening research is appropriately measuring this cross-cultural activity. MDPI 2019-09-16 2019-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6765939/ /pubmed/31527436 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16183430 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Protocol
Kingsley, Jonathan
Bailey, Aisling
Torabi, Nooshin
Zardo, Pauline
Mavoa, Suzanne
Gray, Tonia
Tracey, Danielle
Pettitt, Philip
Zajac, Nicholas
Foenander, Emily
A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures
title A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures
title_full A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures
title_fullStr A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures
title_full_unstemmed A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures
title_short A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures
title_sort systematic review protocol investigating community gardening impact measures
topic Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6765939/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31527436
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16183430
work_keys_str_mv AT kingsleyjonathan asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT baileyaisling asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT torabinooshin asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT zardopauline asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT mavoasuzanne asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT graytonia asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT traceydanielle asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT pettittphilip asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT zajacnicholas asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT foenanderemily asystematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT kingsleyjonathan systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT baileyaisling systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT torabinooshin systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT zardopauline systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT mavoasuzanne systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT graytonia systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT traceydanielle systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT pettittphilip systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT zajacnicholas systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures
AT foenanderemily systematicreviewprotocolinvestigatingcommunitygardeningimpactmeasures