Download Significance of Community Gardens in Urban Environments: A Narrative Review and more Essays (university) Urban planning in PDF only on Docsity!
Contemporary Urban Affairs
2018 , Volume 2 , Number 2 , pages 78 – 89
The Socio-cultural and ecological perspectives on
landscape and gardening in Urban Environment:
A narrative review
* Ph.D. Candidate PATRICK CHUKWUEMEKE UWAJEH^1 and Ph.D. Candidate IKENNA STEPHEN EZENNIA^2
(^1) Department of Architecture, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus via Mersin10, Turkey (^2) Department of Architecture, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, PMB 5025, Anambra State, Nigeria E mail: uwajehpatrick@gmail.com, E mail: Is.ezennia@unizik.edu.ng
A B S T R A C T
This review offers a perspective on the role landscape and gardening play in urban
settings from a socio-cultural, and ecological dimension. The practice of cultivating
in gardens, parks and vacant lots, creates community spaces, and are increasingly
becoming important to peoples’ experience of social and cultural wellbeing. In recent
times, this has become a major focus of research in ecology, agriculture, urban
design, landscape architecture, human geography, and sociology. Community
gardening is one of the avenues toward revitalizing urban environments, and it
provides a way of addressing multi-faceted urban problems ranging from limited food
access to safety and community cohesion. That being said, it is necessary to
continually evaluate the roles which society, ecology, and culture play in cities and
landscape planning due to the dynamic nature of culture. This article aims to bring
to the fore, the various factors of landscape and gardening practices in cities and the
dynamics of cultural and ecological effects they have in building communities,
reclaiming communities or engendering a personal place to thrive. A narrative review
of the literature on peer-reviewed articles within the scope of the study was adopted
as the research method.
CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS (201 8 ) 2 ( 2 ), 78 - 89.
https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2018. www.ijcua.com Copyright © 2017 Contemporary Urban Affairs. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction As the world becomes more urbanized, the practice of cultivating in gardens, parks and in vacant lots, creates community spaces, and are becoming increasingly important to peoples’ experience of social and cultural wellbeing. This increase in world population continues to reveal, the fact that our ecosystems and landscapes will be more domesticated and designed to suit human needs. In 1939, Carl Troll, a renowned German physical geographer coined the term ‘landscape ecology,’ while studying the Miombo savanna in southeastern Africa, discovered a repeated patchwork or pattern composed of grassland, termite mounds, shrubs, and tree * Corresponding Author: Department of Architecture, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus via Mersin10, Turkey
E-mail address: uwajehpatrick@gmail.com
A R T I C L E I N F O:
Article history: Received 29 December 2017 Accepted 6 January 2018 Available online 15 January 2018 Keywords: Culture; Biodiversity; City; Ecology; Landscape; Gardens This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivs 4.0. "CC-BY-NC-ND"
groups, which he called landscapes (Haber, 2004). The term landscape was combined with ecology by Troll due to his understanding of the interrelationship between landscape and environmental science introduced by Ernst Haeckel in 1866. Although, Several authors have classified it as follows: (i) landscape as regional visual designation of the environment, and an industrial or urban landscape; (ii) landscape as evidence of history and cultural achievements, to be cherished, preserved, and recognized as a national identity; (iii) landscape as gestalt or picture, as object of art and design, as symbol conveying wellbeing and comfort, (iv) landscape as part of everyday life, as a fabric of social, economic or political activities, and medium of advert (Haber, 2004; Meier, 2001; Winiwarter, 2001). Ample scientific evidence suggests that landscape assessment have extended various fields and theories and techniques such as internet survey technique (Roth, 2006), Fuzzy set theory (Steinhardt, 1998 ), landscape ecological assessment (Mörtberg, et al., 2007 ), and psychophysical landscape assessment approach (Daniel, 2001 ). Furthermore, local stakeholders now take into consideration, the benefits of evaluating visual and non-visual aspects of different landscape settings (Soliva & Hunziker 2009 ). A growing body of evidence has documented the huge interest, shown by City dwellers, civil-society organizations, and policymakers in food- producing community gardens for their potential to improve nutrition and public health, enhance urban environmental quality, and provide opportunities for urban residents to experience the natural world (Alaimo, et al., 2008; Drake & Lawson 20 15; Gregory, et al., 2016). Community gardens, also regarded as urban agriculture, are public spaces managed by member-volunteers who grow food crops and or flowers, shrubs, and trees in individual plots and communal growing spaces (Cohen, et al., 2012). Community gardens can transform under-utilized land into vibrant, productive public space, engender a sense of security in neighborhoods, and a strong connection with the larger community (Poulsen, et al., 2014). Home gardens are an under-researched part of the agricultural stocks of smallholders in many parts of the world. Until recently, urban home gardens have not received much attention despite their critical importance to urban livelihoods. Home gardens offer a perspective on understanding rural-urban linkages since they are frequently a landscape feature in both settings and the exchanges of their products link the two (WinklerPrins, 2002). Similarly, home gardens help the preservation of tangible cultural heritage such as food – traditional cuisine, enhance cultural sustainability, conservation and cultural vitality (Mazumdar, & Mazumdar, 2012). More recently, community gardens, have become a very important urban planning tool to provide green space in urban environments, improve access to healthy foods, (Gregory, et al., 2016; Poulsen, et al., 2014 ) and encourage local food production and distribution (Pottinger, 2013). There have been concerns on the aspect of biodiversity in landscape research, due to the global influx of diverse ornamental and non-native plant species in landscape practice (van Kleunen, et al., 2015), as well as how wild and cultivated biodiversity in all forms is related to healthy diets and nutrition (Powell et al., 2015). Consequently, major challenges are arising in landscape design in countries where the fastest global urbanization is predicted for future decades, such as: India, China, and South America (Elmqvist et al. 2013). Therefore, the combination of native biodiversity and regional native plant material, into new and existing parks and landscape designs can engender a holistic approach to creating sustainable green infrastructure, preserving and supporting native biodiversity, and preventing further plant invasions (Müller, & Sukopp, 2016). Developing and maintaining sustainable landscapes remains a challenging and vital task for scientists and numerous stakeholders. Thus, landscape architecture and landscape ecology must be fully involved in the crucial processes employed towards accomplishing this task. However, landscape architecture or landscape ecology may not achieve its expected goal without strategic intra and interdisciplinary collaborations with other disciplines as well as the art and science of studying the relationship
equated to physical environment or “nature.” (Lindström, 2010 ). Thus, viewing landscape employs a rhythmic movement of the eyes, which is also a code to reconstitute oneself, such that, a person who beholds a landscape does not leave it as the same person. 1.2.2 Gardens A garden is a planned space, typically outdoors, set aside for the display, cultivation, and enjoyment of plants which also serves as a supplementary food production system that is managed and controlled by household members. The most common form today is known as home garden, which include both natural and man- made materials. Nevertheless, the term garden has traditionally been more generalized to include those used to display wild animals in simulated natural habitats, called zoological gardens. (Klindienst, 2006; Turner, 2005 ). A household garden can be consumption-or market-oriented, but at least some of the produce will be consumed by the household. As a supplementary production system, the household garden is secondary to both the primary source of household food, whether from field production or purchase and to household income, whether from sales of field produce, wage labour or other sources. (Soleri, et al., 1991 ). Gardening can sometimes be misconceived as farming. That being said, studies posit that there is no standard definition for ‘a home garden’, and summarize the shared perception by referring to it as ‘an intimate, multi- story combinations of various trees and crops, sometimes in association with domestic animals, around homesteads', as well as for the partially cultivation of vegetables, fruits, and herbs chiefly for domestic consumption (Galhena, et al., 2013; Kumar & Nair, 2004). Therefore, home gardens can be characterized by the following factors; (1) it's close proximity to the residence; (2) high plant diversity; (3) food production is supplementary rather than a main source of family consumption and income; (4) it occupies a small area; and (5) it is a production system that can be practiced by the impoverished minority; (Galhena, et al., 2013; Brownrigg, 1985; Marsh, 1998). Gardens for food producing purpose, can be distinguished from farming, mainly by scale and intent. Gardening is done on a smaller scale, chiefly for the production of goods for the gardener's own family or community and sometimes pleasure. While farming takes place on a larger scale, with a major motivation to produce goods for profit. The overlap between these terms, is due to the fact that some moderate-sized farms, often called market gardening, can fit in either category. Therefore, the main distinctions between gardening and farming are as follows:
- Scale.
- Gardening can be a hobby or an income supplement, but farming is generally understood as a full-time or commercial activity, usually involving more land and quite different practices.
- Gardening is labor-intensive and requires little infrastructural capital, sometimes no more than a few tools, while farming is large-scale, often involves irrigation systems, chemical fertilizers and machines. However, this distinction is becoming blurred with the increasing use of power tools even in small gardens. 2. Socio-cultural Perspectives on landscape and Gardening Studies have shown that the use of historical, archaeological, ethnographic, and geophysical methods to document the cultural landscapes of cities can discover the complex social meanings of the built environments (Nassaney, et al., 2001). Humans build their cultural environments and organized space in ways that helped declare their identities, whether wealthy or impoverished, native and immigrant, (Nassaney, et al., 2001; Yamin, & Metheny, 1996; Paynter et al., 1994). The reciprocal relationship of Culture, its social aspects and its connection with landscape ecology, flesh several important principles in landscape ecosystems. Expanding on this dynamic, it can be argued that culture is embedded in landscape as such can change a landscape, and are both encompassed by landscape ecology. Four broad cultural principles, proposed by Nassauer, (1995), which can serve as a principle for landscape ecology include:
- Human landscape perception, cognition, and values directly affect the landscape and are affected by the landscape.
- Cultural concepts of nature are different from scientific concepts of ecological function.
- The appearance of landscapes communicates cultural values.
- Cultural conventions powerfully influence landscape pattern in both inhabited and apparently natural landscapes. Immense urban development, extreme competition for metropolitan space, modernization, changing institutions and laws, and the global industrialization of food has threatened several pockets of gardens within cities with extinction. With the emergence of the environmental movements and the availability of open space as a result of unsuccessful urban renewal, community gardens have resurged in many American cities (Schmelzkopf 1995 ). Many of the gardens are in low-income areas and have been known as safe havens that provide residents with a sense of nature, community (Schmelzkopf, 1995 ). Conversely, Paul Kaldian elucidates further on garden extinctions with his study on Istanbul’s bostans (market gardens). In his comments, he emphasized from a historical perspective, the contribution of bostans in the cities landscape and garden practice, the value attached to them by the people and their contribution to the food and employment needs of Istanbul (Kaldjian, 2004). As such, there is a relationship between urban design, food systems, and the ways in which the new ‘‘food-related’’ developments can contribute to changing perceptions of the city (Pourias, et al., 2016; Irvine, 2012). Several studies have documented the cultural influence of plant species in garden practice and layouts (Davoren, et al., 2016; Nemudzudzanyi et al. 2010; Graham & Connell 2006; Head et al. 2004 ). A study in Southern Africa revealed that domestic gardens are influenced by culture, consisting of indigenous knowledge structured systems and processes, used in managing of plant species with similar uses or functions (Nemudzudzanyi et al. 2010). Similarly, immigrants in Southern California designed their backyard gardens to create distinctive cultural spaces, while their front yard mostly mirrored typical Southern Californian garden landscapes (Mazumdar & Mazumdar 2012 ). However, Chinese migrants settling in Melbourne, Australia prefer to maintain the existing Australian garden as is to better fit in with societal preferences (Levin, 2012). 3. Biodiversity in home Gardening Biodiversity has been a hot topic for research in garden ecology. Home gardens have been recognized as sources of agricultural biodiversity’s, maintained and enriched by farmers’ practices, particularly for their plant and seed exchange across the world (Aguilar-Støen, et al., 2009; Clarke, et al., 2014 ). Also, home gardens are complex multi-layer systems of trees, shrubs, and annual vegetation around homesteads (Kumar & Nair 2004; Mitchell, & Hanstad, 2004), designated as universal landscapes across the world, with an estimated 15–36 % of residential land in the UK, India, Africa, and China occupied by home gardens (Huai, et al., 2011; Jaganmohan, et al., 2012; Cilliers, et al., 2012). The variations in garden biodiversity can be high, within a single urbanized region, due to the socioeconomic or cultural status of residents (Clarke, et al., 2014; Lubbe et al. 2011; Cilliers et al. 2012; Jaganmohan et al. 2012). As such, these ecosystems are gradually becoming a key research focus in human-natural systems (Kirkpatrick, et al., 2007 ), with an increased scientific mandate for the classification of home garden plant species abundance, plant diversity in community, and ecosystem factors such as functioning, and services (Huai, & Hamilton, 2009). This is consistent with findings in home garden research which focus on plant species composition and diversity (Coomes, & Ban, 2004), socioeconomic importance and contribution to income generation (Méndez, et al., 2001), plant uses and their role in subsistence economy and natural resource management as in the case of Mexico (Blanckaert, et al., 2004; Del Angel-Pérez, & Mendoza, 2004), household food supply (Wezel and Bender 2003), sustainability of food systems and the natural environment (Powell et al., 2015) as well as increased demand for food abundance and biodiversity (Clarke, & Jenerette, 2015 ). By integrating ecological and cultural factors related to garden biodiversity, Beumer, & Martens, (2015) proposed a framework that aims to engage
Table 1. Summary of the literature review and findings from selected studies on the socio-cultural and ecological perspectives in landscape and gardens. Socio-Cultural perspectives in landscape and Gardens Author country Findings Kaldjian, (2004). Istanbul. Market gardeners and the locals in Istanbul’s landscape and garden practice, attached great value to the bostans and their contribution to the food and employment needs of Istanbul. The bostans are part of Istanbul’s identity. Different neighborhoods were famous for the unique crops grown in their gardens. The bostans in Istanbul face serious treats of extinction due to urbanisation, and mordenisation. Pourias, et al., (2016). France.^ Source of food is the most significant function of the gardens in Paris and Montreal. Davoren, et al., (2016). North South Africa. Two types of gardens typologies were predominant in Batswana home gardens – the tshimo and colonial gardens. Batswana tshimo gardens are models of indigenous knowledge systems, while colonial gardens are of European origin reflecting esthetic preferences. Socioeconomic status of residents in Batswana, increases the garden design changes from tshimo to colonial. WinklerPrins, (2002). Brazil. Garden products help sustain critical social networks that subsidize urban life and are important for household subsistence, and product exchanges between rural and urban kin households. Gardens are a link between urban and rural settings as people are urban and rural at the same time which demonstrates that households can be multi-local. Saldivar- Tanaka, & Krasny, (2004). New York City. Latino community gardens in New York, offers a place for social interactions in neighborhoods devoid of social gathering places. Community gardens provide leadership, landscape design, and organizing experience for community members–experiences that sometimes spill over into other aspects of civic life. Ecological perspectives in landscape and Gardens Author country Findings Xu, et al., (2009). China. Ideal landscape in the Mount Lushan National Park was the product of the interaction between human and nature. The park inherits the essence of Chinese traditional culture with a history of more than 1000 years. It adopts certain western culture, as well as the exchanges between nature and humanities together with the conflict and adaptation among different cultures. Natural landscape can be gratified with the survival demand and cultural taste of humans through ecological planning. Chen, & Wu, (2009) China. Landscape architecture plays a unique role in developing and maintaining sustainability on local, regional, and global scales. Landscape theories and practice are significantly influenced by the philosophies of human relationship between themselves and nature. The unity of man with nature and its derivative design ideals can help facilitate the development of a sustainable landscape architecture. Müller, & Sukopp, (2016) Central Europe. There is a correlation between the frequency of plant invasions and changes in landscape-design styles. Plant invasions through horticulture and landscape design on native biodiversity, is significantly lower in Central Europe than in other parts of the world. Lindström, (2010) Japan. Perceptual landscape markers such as ephemera, human everyday rhythms, cosmological and seasonal rhythms, perceptual stimuli can be considered as a secondary code leading to auto communication in the person who encounters the landscape. Viewing landscape employs a rhythmic movements of the eyes which is also a code to reconstitute oneself. Musacchio, (2013) USA. Cultivating deep care can potentially become one of the key concepts used to advance certain aspects of landscape ecological research from the cultural dimension of ecosystem services. Seburanga, & Zhang, (2013). Rwanda. Proper placement of trees around buildings played a decorative role and also served as windbreaks, and shade providers. Trees in the neighborhood had more substantial role, especially for the majority of the population living in cluster villages away from the immediate environs of forested lands. Sayers, (2003) USA. The Antebellum landscape in agrarian Michigan, United States has a complex dialectic interdependencies between gender, class, progressive philosophies, and the nucleated and alienating farmscape. A model of agrarian transition was developed, compared and contrasted with primary documentary, landscape, and archaeological data, which serves as a tool for locating historic agrarian sites.
5. Conclusion It is important to further develop Landscape ecology, enough to be well integrated into other disciplines, as cities increasingly become the primary habitat for humans, and landscapes become more designed to suit human needs. Therefore, the investigations into Landscape ecology can broaden and consolidate its transdisciplinary basis. Despite the strong public interest in urban community gardens as sources of healthy food, diverse ornamental plant species, and sites for environmental stewardship, there is minimal research on the ecological characteristics affecting food production in these gardens and gardeners planting and management practices, especially in developing countries. Gardens can help to reintroduce nature into the city and participation in urban gardening experiences can allow urban dwellers to reconnect emotionally, spiritually and psychologically with plants, and soil. Asides the potentials community gardens have, to breathe life into vacant urban lots, and the provision of healthy local food, they can also transform the community itself through ecological, educational, social, and economic opportunities. Thus, community gardens contribute to a biologically diverse urban ecosystem and provide valued ecosystem services in food insecure regions. A bridge from ecosystem research will serve as suitable starting point for landscape research, to human ecology and the humanities in general, by approximation of selected facts and findings. Due to years of adaption by plant species to landscapes, altering their features, a biocultural approach is probably best suited to understand and manage most of the biodiversity today existing at the landscape level. Furthermore, it is imperative that garden planning and placement by local government authorities should favor ethnic food production for impoverished minority communities. Finally, it is very important to continually evaluate the roles which society, ecology, and culture play in cities and landscape planning due to the dynamic nature of culture. 6. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Prof. Dr. Naciye Doratli for her kind assistance during the preparation of this manuscript as part of a PhD course taken under her and the insightful comments that contributed significantly to the article. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or non-for-profit sectors. References Aguilar-Støen, M., Moe, S. R., & Camargo-Ricalde, S. L. (2009). Home gardens sustain crop diversity and improve farm resilience in Candelaria Loxicha, Oaxaca, Mexico. Human Ecology, 37 (1), 55-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745- 008 - 9197 - y 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. Beumer, C., & Martens, P. (2015). Biodiversity in my (back) yard: towards a framework for citizen engagement in exploring biodiversity and ecosystem services in residential gardens. Sustainability Science , 10 (1), 87 - 100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625- 014 - 0270 - 8 Blanckaert, I., Swennen, R. L., Flores, M. P., López, R. R., & Saade, R. L. (2004). Floristic composition, plant uses and management practices in home gardens of San Rafael Coxcatlán, Valley of Tehuacán-Cuicatlán, Mexico. Journal of Arid Environments , 57 (2), 179 - 202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-1963(03)00100- 9 Brownrigg, L. A. (1985). Home gardening in international development: what the literature shows, including an annotated bibliography, and inventories of international organizations involved in home gardening and their projects. http://agris.fao.org/agris- search/search.do?recordID=US Chen, X., & Wu, J. (2009). Sustainable landscape architecture: implications of the Chinese philosophy of “unity of man with nature” and beyond. Landscape Ecology , 24 (8), 1015 - 1026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980- 009 - 9350 - z Cilliers, S. S. (2010). Social aspects of urban biodiversity–an overview. In N. Müller, P. Werner & J. Kelcey, Urban biodiversity and design— implementing the convention on biological diversity in towns and cities (pp. 81 - 100). https://bit.ly/2rU8m0l
gardens: contributions to urban food security, ecosystem services, and environmental education. Urban Ecosystems , 1 - 32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252- 015 - 0505 - 1 Haber, W. (2004). Landscape ecology as a bridge from ecosystems to human ecology. Ecological research, 19 (1), 99 - 106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1703.2003.00615.x Head, L., Muir, P., & Hampel, E. (2004). Australian backyard gardens and the journey of migration. Geographical Review, 94 (3), 326 - 347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1931- 0846.2004.tb00176.x Hope, D., Gries, C., Zhu, W., Fagan, W. F., Redman, C. L., Grimm, N. B., Nelson, A. L., Martin, C., & Kinzig, A. (2003). Socioeconomics drive urban plant diversity. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 100 (15), 8788 - 8792. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. Huai, H., & Hamilton, A. (2009). Characteristics and functions of traditional home gardens: a review. Frontiers of Biology in China , 4 (2), 151-
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11515- 008 - 0103 - 1 Huai, H., Xu, W., Wen, G., & Bai, W. (2011). Comparison of the Homegardens of Eight Cultural Groups in Jinping County, Southwest China1. Economic Botany , 65 (4), 345 - 355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231- 011 - 9172 - 1 Irvine, S. (2012). Carrot City: Creating Places for Urban Agriculture. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2012. Jaganmohan, M., Vailshery, L. S., Gopal, D., & Nagendra, H. (2012). Plant diversity and distribution in urban domestic gardens and apartments in Bangalore, India. Urban Ecosystems , 15 (4), 911 - 925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252- 012 - 0244 - 5 Jim, C. Y., & Liu, H. T. (2001). Patterns and dynamics of urban forests in relation to land use and development history in Guangzhou City, China. The Geographical Journal, 167 (4), 358 - 375. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4959. Kaldjian, P. J. (2004). Istanbul's bostans: a millennium of market gardens. Geographical Review , 94 (3), 284 - 304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1931- 0846.2004.tb00174.x Kareiva, P., Watts, S., McDonald, R., & Boucher, T. (2007). Domesticated nature: shaping landscapes and ecosystems for human welfare. Science , 316 (5833), 1866 - 1869. DOI: 10.1126/science.1140170. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/316/ 33/1866.full Kendal, D., Williams, N. S., & Williams, K. J. (2012). A cultivated environment: exploring the global distribution of plants in gardens, parks and streetscapes. Urban Ecosystems, 15 (3), 637-652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252- 011 - 0215 - 2 Kirkpatrick, J. B., Daniels, G. D., & Zagorski, T. (2007). Explaining variation in front gardens between suburbs of Hobart, Tasmania, Australia. Landscape and Urban Planning , 79 (3), 314 - 322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.03. 6 Klindienst, P. (2006). The earth knows my name: Food, culture, and sustainability in the gardens of ethnic Americans. Beacon Press. https://www.amazon.com/Earth-Knows-Name- Sustainability-Americans/dp/ Kumar, B. M., & Nair, P. R. (2004). The enigma of tropical homegardens. In New vistas in agroforestry (pp. 135-152). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 94 - 017 - 2424 - 1_ Larson, N. I., Story, M. T., & Nelson, M. C. (2009). Neighborhood environments: disparities in access to healthy foods in the US. American journal of preventive medicine, 36 (1), 74 - 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.09. Levin, I. (2012). Chinese migrants in Melbourne and their house choices. Australian Geographer , 43 (3), 303 - 320. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2012. Lindström, K. (2010). Autocommunication and perceptual markers in landscape: Japanese examples. Biosemiotics, 3 (3), 359 - 373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304- 010 - 9082 - 0 Lovell, S. T. (2010). Multifunctional urban agriculture for sustainable land use planning in the United States. Sustainability, 2 (8), 2499 - 2522. https://doi.org/10.3390/su Lubbe, C. S., Siebert, S. J., & Cilliers, S. S. (2010). Political legacy of South Africa affects the plant diversity patterns of urban domestic gardens along a socio-economic gradient. Scientific Research and Essays, 5 (19), 2900 - 2910. https://academicjournals.org/journal/SRE/articl e-abstract/403ABC
Luz de la Maza, C., Hernández, J., Bown, H., Rodríguez, M., & Escobedo, F. (2002). Vegetation diversity in the Santiago de Chile urban ecosystem. Arboricultural journal, 26 (4), 347-357. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2002. Marsh, R. (1998). Building on traditional gardening to improve household food security. Food nutrition and agriculture , 4 - 14. http://agris.fao.org/agris- search/search.do?recordID=XF Martin, C. A., Warren, P. S., & Kinzig, A. P. (2004). Neighborhood socioeconomic status is a useful predictor of perennial landscape vegetation in residential neighborhoods and embedded small parks of Phoenix, AZ. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69 (4), 355 - 368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10. 4 Mazumdar, S., & Mazumdar, S. (2012). Immigrant home gardens: Places of religion, culture, ecology, and family. Landscape and Urban Planning, 105(3), 258 - 265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.12. 0 Meier, V. (2001). Landscape from the perspective of a geographer. In Alpine Research Landscape and Habitat from a Cultural Studies Perspective (Workshop in Thun, 3( 4 ), 11. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10015261806/ Méndez, V. E., Lok, R., & Somarriba, E. (2001). Interdisciplinary analysis of homegardens in Nicaragua: micro-zonation, plant use and socioeconomic importance. Agroforestry systems , 51 (2), 85 - 96. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: Miller, J. R. (2005). Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of experience. Trends in ecology & evolution, 20 (8), 430 - 434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2005.05. Mitchell, R., & Hanstad, T. (2004). Small homegarden plots and sustainable livelihoods for the poor. FAO LSP WP , 11. http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/j2545e/j2545e 0.htm Mörtberg, U. M., Balfors, B., & Knol, W. C. (2007). Landscape ecological assessment: A tool for integrating biodiversity issues in strategic environmental assessment and planning. Journal of Environmental Management , 82 (4), 457 - 470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.01. Müller, N., & Kelcey, J. G. (Eds.). (2010). Urban biodiversity and design (pp. 3 - 33). Hoboken, New Jersey, US: Wiley-Blackwell. https://www.amazon.com/Urban-Biodiversity- Design-Norbert-Muller/dp/ Müller, N., & Sukopp, H. (2016). Influence of different landscape design styles on plant invasions in Central Europe. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 12 (1), 151 - 169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355- 015 - 0288 - 9 Musacchio, L. R. (2013). Cultivating deep care: integrating landscape ecological research into the cultural dimension of ecosystem services. Landscape ecology, 28 (6), 1025 - 1038. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980- 013 - 9907 - 8 Nassaney, M. S., Rotman, D. L., Sayers, D. O., & Nickolai, C. A. (2001). The Southwest Michigan Historic Landscape Project: Exploring class, gender, and ethnicity from the ground up. International Journal of Historical Archaeology , 5 (3), 219 - 261. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: Nassauer, J. I. (1995). Culture and changing landscape structure. Landscape ecology, 10 (4), 229 - 237. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF Nassauer, J. I., & Opdam, P. (2008). Design in science: extending the landscape ecology paradigm. Landscape ecology , 23 (6), 633 - 644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980- 008 - 9226 - 7 Naveh, Z. (2000). What is holistic landscape ecology? A conceptual introduction. Landscape and urban planning , 50 (1), 7 - 26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(00)00077- 3 Nemudzudzanyi, A. O., Siebert, S. J., Zobolo, A. M., & Molebatsi, L. Y. (2010). The Zulu Muzi: A home garden system of useful plants with a particular layout and function. Indilinga African Journal of Indigenous Knowledge Systems , 9 (1), 57 - 72. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/indilinga/articl e/view/ Paynter, R., Hautaniemi, S., and Muller, N. (1994). The landscapes of the W. E. B. DuBois boyhood homesite: An agenda for an archaeology of the color line. In Gregory, S., and Sanjek, R. (eds.), Race , Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJ, pp. 285–318. https://bit.ly/2LA6YZZ
urban. Urban ecosystems , 6 (1-2), 43 - 65. https://doi.org/10.1023/A: Wu, J. (2006). Landscape ecology, cross- disciplinarity, and sustainability science. Landscape Ecology , 21 (1), 1 - 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980- 006 - 7195 - 2 Wu, J. J. (2008). Making the case for landscape ecology an effective approach to urban sustainability. Landscape journal , 27 (1), 41 - 50. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ Xu, C. R., Hu, H. S., Wu, Z. W., Zheng, Y. P., & Zhong, L. S. (2009). The ideal landscape and its ecological planning approach in Mount Lushan National Park, China. Journal of Forestry Research , 20 (3), 279 - 284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676- 009 - 0049 - 4 Yamin, R., and K. B. Metheny (eds.). (1996). Landscape Archaeology , University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. https://www.worldcat.org/title/landscape- archaeology-reading-and-interpreting-the- american-historical- landscape/oclc/32969521/viewport
