Looking Beyond the Surface: Uncovering Community Gardens’ Role in Resisting Colonial Forces
Link to the JSE May 2025 General Issue Table of Contents
Garcia JSE May 2025 General Issue PDF
Abstract: This literature review delves into the intricate relationship between community gardens and the enduring legacy of colonialism. While community gardens offer numerous benefits, such as increased food security and building community connections, there is a gap in inquiry around their historical and cultural context, especially relating to colonial legacies. This review explores postcolonial theory and decolonization frameworks through key contributors such as Edward Said, Gayatri Spivak, and Frantz Fanon, to understand the power dynamics of land access, knowledge systems, and cultural representation within community gardens. It examines the potential of community gardens to spur cultural revitalization, ecological sustainability, and decolonization while considering and discussing the challenges and necessary considerations for achieving these goals. This inquiry is timely, along with other broader decolonization movements, and it discusses the importance of centering Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge (ITEK). After reviewing the existing literature, gaps were identified for further inquiry to be proposed. That contributes to the ongoing conversation of decolonization as a method to address social change and environmental concerns within community gardens.
Keywords: postcolonial theory, decolonization, community gardens, Indigenous knowledge, power imbalances, land access
Historical Context of Community Gardens
Community gardens often evoke a picture of social cohesion and collaboration, but their history is more complex, intertwined with both social progress and the legacies of colonialism. While the concept of community gardens has roots extending back centuries, with allotment gardens flourishing in Europe as early as the 18th century, this review will focus on the trajectory of community gardens in the U.S. It is important to acknowledge, however, that these early gardens established in a colonial context raise important concerns over their connection to colonial practices.
Allotments are plots for agricultural use, often leased through a contract by an affiliation managing a garden space, dating back to Anglo-Saxon times (Kwartnik-Pruc and Droj, 2023; NSALG, 2024). The European influence on U.S. community gardens reveals how European gardening techniques and crops on colonized lands connect to control of resources and knowledge systems, disregarding Indigenous agricultural practices that have been well-adapted to the local climate. Gardening practices were standard among the Indigenous people in North America. However, during colonial times, allotment-style gardening became more common in the United States in the early 1600s through 1865 (Smithsonian Gardens, 2024). This may be viewed as a practice reflecting colonialism and land dispossession through the overlooking or displacing of existing agricultural practices and determining who can or cannot access land for community gardening, while also appropriating knowledge from Indigenous tribes. Throughout that period, Pilgrims grew an abundance of crops following traditions of the local Indigenous people, the Wampanoag, to prepare crops (Smithsonian Gardens, 2024), and various botanical gardens were established.
Many civilizations have existed throughout human history where communal land ownership and labor were used in agriculture to sustain themselves and flourish. Evidence of shared agricultural practices can be traced back over 10,500 years to the Neolithic Period. However, as understood today, the modern community garden movement in the U.S. began in response to the specific challenges of the 19th and 20th centuries, shaped by urbanization and industrialization. Unlike the allotment gardens in Europe, which emerged as a need “in rapidly growing industrial cities to enable people with low incomes to cultivate their food and also to improve the living conditions in unhygienic and polluted cities” (Poniży et al., 2021, p. 1) in the 19th century and were meant to act as permanent compensation for low wages, community gardens in the United States were often conceived as temporary opportunities until financial or social conditions improved (Birky, 2009).
The late 19th and 20th centuries experienced the rise in settlement houses, philanthropic institutions aimed at improving the lives of urban poor, “where settlement workers provided services for neighbors and sought to remedy poverty” (Wade, 2004, p. 1). These settlement houses often incorporated gardens as a means of providing fresh produce, education, and a sense of community. The first of these was opened in Detroit, where it was an “extensive municipally sponsored urban gardening program using vacant lots in the city” (Smithsonian Gardens, 2024, p. 1).
The World Wars marked a crucial and pivotal point for community gardens in the U.S. The need for food production in this era surged, and led to the widespread action of citizens in “victory gardens.” These efforts showed the power of collective action and the potential for urban agriculture to support national resilience. While the immediate impetus was food production, the victory gardens also promoted a sense of community and civic engagement. Although food security was a driver, it was “more focused on encouraging recreation, community involvement, and morale than they were on actually providing food or financial relief” (Birky, 2009, p. 20).
There was a decline in community gardening during the post-war era as suburbanization and rising supermarkets transformed habits associated with food consumption. However, the movement did not come to a complete stop. The movements of the 1970s, with an emphasis on self-sufficiency and environmentalism (Aurora University, 2019; Blum et al., 2017), sparked interest in urban agriculture in tandem with the creation of organizations such as the American Community Garden Association and the Green Guerillas (ACGA, 2024; Green Guerillas, 2024). This period also saw community gardens emerge as a tool for social justice and environmental justice, addressing issues of food insecurity and environmental degradation (Aurora University, 2019; Blum et al., 2017). These gardens transformed into symbols of resistance against urban neglect and became spaces for community building and food production.
In the 1980s, community gardening took a more formal approach after the establishment of non-profit organizations or government initiatives to support these efforts. These initiatives included the Comprehensive Education and Training Act (CETA), a grant that funded the creation of many community gardens in 1975 (Birky, 2009), and the USDA Urban Garden Project. These grants were crucial in offering resources, assistance, and advocacy for community gardens.
Into the 21st century, the movement expanded its primary focus beyond food production and heavily included social justice, environmental education, and cultural enrichment. The challenges of globalization, food insecurity, and climate change have renewed interest in local food production and community resilience. Some community gardens have even responded to these challenges by incorporating goals such as promoting biodiversity, addressing food deserts, and encouraging intergenerational connections. The evolution of community gardens from their utilitarian beginnings to becoming multifaceted spaces reflects the changing social and economic conditions of the past century in the U.S. As time passes, community gardens may play an even more critical role in challenging urbanization, climate change, and social inequality.
Today, community gardens are often characterized by sustainability and ecological practices. In 2024, it is said by mostpolicyintiative.org, using data from Trust for Public Lands, that there are approximately 29,000 community gardens in city parks across the country (Smith, 2024). They may incorporate practices such as composting, rainwater collection, and biodiversity conservation through native planting, which can turn these garden spaces into living laboratories for sustainable living. They offer educational opportunities for all ages, creating a deeper understanding of ecology, food systems, and environmental stewardship. The intersection of community, health, and food is a theme in many contemporary community garden initiatives. Gardens may offer education programs, cooking classes where they cook with produce from the garden, or health workshops to promote healthy eating habits and well-being. They may also serve as spaces for intergenerational interaction and where connections between different age groups grow, and there is knowledge and skill sharing. As urbanization continues, community gardens are likely to have an increasingly important role in molding future cities and communities’ connection with the natural world.
While community gardens offer numerous benefits, there is a lack of inquiry exploring their historical and cultural context regarding colonial legacies. These contexts can offer a deeper knowledge of the hidden power dynamics within community gardens and how they can become spaces that actively challenge colonial legacies and promote social transformation. This gap in knowledge is to be explored through postcolonial theory and decolonization frameworks to examine how they may inform the understanding of practices within community gardens.
Postcolonial Theory and Decolonization in Community Gardens
Colonialism legacies continue to influence current social, political, and environmental landscapes. An area often overlooked through this lens in the environmental landscape is community gardens. Community gardens have existed alongside humans in some form for centuries, and while these green spaces that have gained traction over the last decades promote food security and environmental benefits, a critical understanding of their relationship to colonial pasts is absent. This literature review explores postcolonial theory and decolonization frameworks and how they inform the knowledge and practices of community gardens. This review highlights opportunities for creating a more culturally relevant and inclusive space by analyzing the power dynamics of land access, knowledge systems, and representation of diverse cultures in community gardens. This inquiry explores key postcolonial scholars and their work, such as Edward Said (1978), Gayatri Spivak (1985), and Frantz Fanon (1963), and an additional inquiry on the historical context of community gardens and their possible connections to colonial practices. Furthermore, this review contributes to the ongoing conversation of decolonization as a method of addressing social and environmental justice practices, with community gardens positioned as a place for action.
Introduction to Postcolonial Theory
Postcolonial theory analyzes the legacies of colonialism, particularly by European powers, and its ongoing impact on various aspects of society, including power dynamics, identity, and knowledge systems. Key to this theory is examining how Eurocentric narratives have often erased the experiences and perspectives of colonized peoples, presenting Western modernity as the standard. This is important to the context of the literature review because it provides a framework for analyzing how colonial legacies affect community gardens in the United States.
Key figures in postcolonial theory include Frantz Fanon, Edward Said, and Gayatri Spivak. Frantz Fanon, in The Wretched of the Earth (1963), examined the psychological impacts of colonialism and the importance of resistance and reclaiming agency. Fanon’s work can help us understand the importance of community gardens as spaces where marginalized communities can reclaim their connection to land and agency in food systems. Edward Said’s work, particularly his book Orientalism (1978), explored how Western perspectives have created and perpetuated power imbalances. This is relevant to community gardens in the U.S. because it helps us examine how certain groups might be marginalized in terms of land access and decision-making power in these spaces. Gayatri Spivak’s essay “Can the Subaltern Speak?” (1988) critiqued the tendency for Western scholars to speak for marginalized groups, emphasizing the importance of centering the voices of those who have been historically silenced. In the context of community gardens, this highlights the need to ensure that marginalized community members have a platform in shaping garden practices and policies.
Power, Land, and Dispossession
Postcolonial theory critically evaluates the extent of power dynamics during colonialism concerning land dispossession and resource extraction. Postcolonial scholars have exposed the Doctrine of Discovery as a powerful tool in land dispossession that paved the way for resource extraction and colonial settlement. The Doctrine of Discovery set the foundation that allowed for the European stealing of Indigenous land (Davis, 2023), allowing others to believe that the land was “terra nullius,” or nobody’s land. The dispossession of land from the Indigenous people was the first step in colonizing them.
The land is often central to the cultural identity of Indigenous people, holding sacred sites, resources for Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge (ITEK), food production, and medicine, which, if taken, could signify the undermining of the foundation of Indigenous cultures and societies. Colonial powers viewed the lands as areas to be exploited for resources and to control the dissemination of knowledge. These powers had no regard for Indigenous knowledge or practices, leaving them with environmental degradation and limited or no control over their resources. The Doctrine of Discovery has had lasting consequences in the U.S., influencing legal frameworks that have dispossessed Indigenous communities of their land, the same land where some community gardens are currently located.
Settler Colonialism
Settler colonialism is a brutal and long-lasting oppressive system motivated by imperialism and cultural hegemony that seeks to erase Indigenous Peoples, languages, cultures, and ways of knowing (Glenn, 2015; Kauanui, 2016; Cox, 2017). At the core of this idea and practice is that Indigenous populations should be eliminated through various means, including genocide, which led to forced removal of Indigenous peoples and confinement to reservations, or assimilation (Glenn, 2015). It aims to create a blank slate or “tabula rasa,” in which a settler society can build a new society. Such practices were done with justifications from settler colonial powers, such as “terra nullius,” to conveniently ignore pre-existing inhabitants “in lands that are figuratively empty due to the normatively inappropriate occupation of those already there” (Allard-Tremblay & Coburn, 2023, p. 364) and their connections to the land.
Many strategies were employed to dispossess Indigenous populations of their land and resources. A common tactic was to sign treaties through coercion, false promises, or little compensation in exchange for large amounts of land (Wolfe, 2006; Pardini & Spinola-Arredondo, 2021). Forceful relocation to reservations on marginal lands was also used. This disrupted Indigenous societies and further interrupted their connection to the land. Violence and massacres were also tactics that were used to intimidate and limit resistance. And cultural assimilation aimed to remove practice and knowledge of ITEK (Wolfe, 2006; Dartmouth Libraries, 2024). The concept of terra nullius has historically erased Indigenous land rights in the U.S., contributing to a system where access to land for community gardens is often unequally distributed.
As mentioned, land dispossession is not the sole reason guiding settler colonialism. Land resources were exploited to maximize settlers’ economic returns (Dominguez & Luoma, 2020), leaving a legacy of devastating environmental consequences. New agricultural practices and the suppression of traditional land management techniques further deepened the ecological crisis (Whyte, 2018). The exploitation of land under settler colonialism has led to environmental degradation in many urban areas, creating challenges for community gardens in terms of soil quality and access to resources. The consequences of settler colonialism are far-reaching and are present today. The dispossession of the Indigenous community’s ancestral lands severs cultural and spiritual connections, and the marginalization and social exclusion often make a character of their place in the settler society (Dominguez & Luoma, 2020). Additionally, health disparities, loss of cultural identity, and poverty are common consequences of this battle (Whyte, 2018; Dominguez & Luoma, 2020). The destruction of sacred sites and the imposition of new cultural markers by settler colonialism have left a stain on the physical landscape.
Settler colonialism has been challenged for centuries, sometimes through cultural revitalization efforts and land rematriation as a method toward decolonization (Allard-Tremblay & Coburn, 2023; Whyte, 2018; Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W., 2012). However, the term decolonization must not be used as a metaphor because when viewed as a metaphor, it recenters whiteness and entertains a settler future. (Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W., 2012). However, as the term decolonization is defined in Garcia’s A Decolonized Community Garden Framework (2025), as a continuous effort to return sovereignty to Indigenous people of their land, cultures, politics, and economic systems (Belfi & Sandiford, 2021). Understandably, decolonization work must not be averted from Indigenous peoples worldwide, but when attempting to discuss other marginalized groups of people, such as Latino, Black, or Asian peoples, what term is used? This literature review largely focused on Indigenous peoples, but there is an undertone of wanting the same work to be done for other groups of marginalized peoples. The use of decolonization will not be another metaphorical use that is performative, but rather it is used to hope for the same work to be done for a wider group of people, until another term is used to encapsulate all people who have been colonized.
Decolonization: An Ongoing Process
Within the postcolonial framework, decolonization goes beyond achieving political independence; it continuously aims to dismantle power imbalances, challenge colonial representations, and reclaim knowledge production. Although political independence is a key initiative, it will not remove colonialism’s entangled legacies in the education system, institutions, and cultural narratives. It was well said in The Wretched of the Earth (1963) that decolonization is a program that is disorderly and seeks to change the way the world was. (Fanon, 1963). It requires concepts such as cultural resistance, examining counter-narratives, and recognizing diverse epistemologies of colonized societies.
A critical examination and dismantling of these structures are needed for decolonization. It requires challenging Western knowledge as the only source of legitimacy, including amplifying cultural resistance movements that defy colonial narratives. Through their storytelling, music, and art, these movements offer counter-narratives, re-centering the experiences of the colonized and reclaiming agency. Dismantling power structures could occur through the various areas of work at hand, but only when done correctly. Dr. Ijeoma Opara (2021) explains that decolonization uncovers the histories of the colonized and brings their stories into mainstream awareness.
Work must be done, such as reclaiming knowledge production. This helps to recognize the valuable knowledge systems of Indigenous communities by challenging the dominant historical narratives to elevate the voices of those who are marginalized and silenced. Acknowledging the diverse epistemologies that are deeply connected to the land and community of colonized peoples provides validity to different ways of knowing, such as ITEK, developed by formerly colonized and Indigenous societies, rather than relying on Western Knowledge systems as the standard for areas such as agriculture, medicine, and environmental management. Decolonizing knowledge production involves incorporating different ways of knowing into academic discourse, which could create a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of the world. This process comes with many challenges, but that does not mean it is impossible. The external and internalized effects of colonialism must be dismantled and evaluated. Respecting diverse epistemologies and encouraging critical reflection could pave the way for a more just and equitable future.
Power Dynamics in Community Gardens
Despite the numerous benefits of community gardens, including fresh produce and a sense of community, it is crucial to examine the inherent power dynamics within these spaces.
These dynamics influence the distribution of resources, the inclusivity of decision-making processes, and overall community participation. Furthermore they shape the current narratives and knowledge systems that inform gardening practices. This section will examine these power dynamics, specifically focusing on access to land and resources, participation in decision-making, and the representation of diverse cultural knowledge in planting practices. This exploration is crucial for creating community gardens that are genuinely inclusive, equitable, and culturally sensitive for all members.
Land, Resources, and Participation
Despite the potential of community gardens to promote community engagement and sharing of resources, there are hidden inequality issues. Colonial legacies of power imbalances for land access, resource allocation, and control issues in colonial-time allotments can be explored to understand their evolution to modern-day community gardens. Issues related to securing land, such as redlining, “a longstanding banking practice that blocked people of color from getting mortgages” (Lathan, 2023), can significantly impact where green spaces, such as community gardens, are allocated. This may be seen as less of a problem in wealthier, predominantly white neighborhoods or established organizations with access to desirable locations and resources for a garden (Elshiwick, 2022; Lathan, 2023; Nardone et al., 2021). However, in areas where there are more racial and ethnic minorities or lower socioeconomic individuals, there may be less access to green space compared to that of a neighborhood with fewer minorities (Lathan, 2023; Casey et al., 2017; Nardone et al., 2021; Elshiwick, 2022). This is a disparity in who may benefit from these spaces. In urban areas, especially, land access could be an issue because “urbanization is considered the main enemy of agriculture, as agricultural land is lost to the expansion of cities and the development of technical and urban infrastructure” (Kwartnik-Pruc & Droj, 2023, p. 16). For example, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1996, there were over 500 community gardens, but over the decades, there has been a significant decrease of roughly one-third in the number of gardens (Bacha, 2024; Greene-Berry et al., 2023). Further, in communities with community gardens experiencing gentrification, property values can increase, and those who once had access may no longer be able to access the gardens if they must move (Voicu & Been, 2007; Elshiwick, 2022).
Beyond the burdens of land access are burdens related to resources and participation. The plots are typically associated with an annual fee well above $70, in addition to a set-up fee, and others for resources such as transportation, time, seeds, soil, tools, etc. (East Anaheim Community Garden, 2024; Huntington Beach Community Garden, 2024, Cottage Industries Community Garden, 2024). These hidden costs can be a deterring factor for many BIPOC marginalized groups (Montoya, 2020). These barriers to participation can be seen as a lingering impact of colonial practices that systematically exclude marginalized communities from accessing land and resources. Efforts toward decolonization in community gardens should prioritize equitable access for all, regardless of socioeconomic status. Beyond access to tangible resources are issues of access to a diverse and equitable decision-making process (Webb, 2023; Doyle, 2022). When meetings are conducted with managers or board members, they should include feedback from all participants, especially those from different backgrounds, to ensure that diverse needs are met or accommodated. For example, for those who prefer to communicate in another language, it would be best to have members in leadership who are capable of communicating with different members comfortably and making decisions. Working toward decolonizing the community garden would require the decision-making process to incorporate diverse leadership and language accessibility and prioritize the voices of the marginalized (Doyle, 2022; Ochoa et al., 2019).
Recognizing and addressing these inequalities can guide community gardens towards becoming more inclusive spaces. The inequalities in land access, resources, and participation in community gardens discussed reflect the lasting impacts of colonial practices that have been systemically marginalizing Indigenous groups and other historically discriminated against groups. Decolonization in this context can start with recognizing the inequalities and actively working to dismantle them. This may appear as seeking land in marginalized communities, ensuring equitable access to resources, volunteer opportunities, or a sliding scale membership based on monthly income rather than set prices. It may also include communications being offered in multiple languages, primarily spoken in the region, and incorporating a diverse leadership style that can create a more participatory environment.
Representation of Culture and Knowledge in Planting Practices
Colonization has systemically disrupted and suppressed Indigenous knowledge systems, such as intricate ecological relationships, sustainable farming practices, and culturally significant plants (Werdel et al., 2024; Turvey et al., 2018). This erasure had profound consequences for Indigenous communities and led to the dominance of Western agricultural practices (Turvey et al., 2018; Texidor-Toneu et al., 2023). The historical suppression of Indigenous knowledge resonates in community gardens today. In many community gardens, Western gardening practices and aesthetics are prioritized to beautify the local area, while ITEK, alternative planting practices, or certain plants are often marginalized or excluded (Aptekar & Myers, 2020). Reclaiming and incorporating Indigenous knowledge systems and diverse cultural practices in community gardens is essential for decolonization (Leonard, 2024). By valuing and celebrating a variety of planting traditions, these spaces can become spaces of cultural revitalization and contribute to a more just and sustainable food system.
Community gardens promote a sense of collective cultivation, in which they try to balance the representation of cultural knowledge and planting practices (Twiss et al., 2003). Through diversity in gardening, these spaces can significantly contribute to biodiversity by supporting a wide variety of plant and animal life in urban spaces (Miguez et al., 2025; Egerer et al., 2024; Potter et al., 2023; Jha et al., 2023; Delahay et al., 2023). Companion planting, crop rotation according to local climates, and use of native plants might be overlooked in favor of Western methods (Werdel et al., 2024). This goes beyond erasing Indigenous wisdom, but it may also reduce the potential of a more biodiverse and resilient food system.
For example, seed saving, the practice of growing parts or all of your crop to “go to seed” so that they can be collected for future cultivation, can be complex, but it is rewarding and allows for knowledge of plants to be passed down through generations (The Cultural Conservancy, 2024). This practice can encourage self-sufficiency and increase the garden’s resource base, as well as pass down traditional knowledge of foods grown with specific ecosystems to preserve biodiversity and cultural heritage (Conroe, 2022; Teixidor-Toneu et al., 2023; The Cultural Conservancy, 2024). By encouraging a wider variety of plants in the garden, including heirloom and native varieties, community gardens can become more ecologically sound. Seed saving can challenge colonial legacies by prioritizing the cultivation of open-pollinated seeds and encouraging knowledge exchange between gardens to promote a more democratic and sustainable approach to food production (Conroe, 2022; Teixidor-Toneu et al., 2023; The Cultural Conservancy, 2024; Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, 2024). Challenging the dominance of Western agricultural practices and embracing ITEK is needed to encourage resistance against colonial legacies and contribute to a more just and equitable food system that honors diverse cultural traditions and ecological knowledge.
Contributions of This Literature to The Field
The current literature on decolonized community gardens offers valuable insights and possibilities for transforming these spaces from plots of land to places of cultural revitalization, social justice, and ecological sustainability, such as at the Faith CDC in Gary, Indiana (Faith CDC, 2025). This can be seen by centering Indigenous knowledge, challenging colonial narratives, reimagining food systems, encouraging seed sovereignty, building inclusive spaces, and empowering marginalized communities. The literature related to Indigenous knowledge systems contributes significantly to these spaces when attention is placed on them. These knowledge systems have been historically marginalized, and by documenting and advocating for their integration in areas such as agricultural practices, seed-saving techniques, and the growing of culturally significant plants, the dominance of Western agricultural models is challenged and helps to reclaim knowledge and foodways. Additionally, emphasis is placed on the colonial legacy seen in community gardens, especially regarding land access and resource distribution. It criticizes how these spaces often fail to recognize the historical dispossession of Indigenous Peoples from their lands and their knowledge of land management.
The literature on decolonized community gardens also explains the importance of seed saving in the practice of resistance and self-determination. Promoting open-pollinated, culturally relevant seeds, seed libraries, the culture of seed exchange, and education further challenges the dominance of corporate seed organization and their control of the food system, and it empowers communities and preserves biodiversity. This focus on seed sovereignty shows the benefits of a decolonized garden. It opens the discussion of employing Indigenous communities’ agricultural practices to work towards an ecologically balanced garden that respects the local environment and creates a more resilient food system that benefits both humans and Mother Nature.
The literature consistently emphasizes the need for inclusive community gardens that actively dismantle barriers to participation. Some community gardens may fail to address the needs of marginalized communities, especially related to language barriers, cultural sensitivities, and financial accessibility. Strategies that can be employed for future success include creating welcoming spaces that offer financial assistance programs, multilingual signage, and culturally appropriate tools and resources. Participatory decision-making processes that are inclusive and accessible can increase a sense of ownership and shared responsibility among participants, especially if the voices of marginalized communities are heard and help shape the garden experience.
The literature does not provide a model for these spaces to become decolonized, but rather, it acknowledges the cultural, historical, and ecological contexts that may shape each garden’s development. My approach provides the foundation for a decolonized community garden framework, which will be discussed further in subsequent articles to encourage conversations, adapt practices to fit people’s specific needs, and collaborate with Indigenous and marginalized communities. The literature also establishes an understanding that further dialogue and reflection are needed. There are the challenges of balancing diverse interests, navigating cultural differences, and ensuring respectful communication within these spaces. Highlighting these challenges, this scholarship encourages dialogue and collaborative problem-solving to create a more equitable and inclusive community gardening experience for all.
What Are Some of The Gaps?
While the exploration of decolonized gardens has created a strong vision, it is also important to address what may be missing from this discussion. Although valuable, the focus on the garden itself represents only one aspect of a more significant decolonial movement. Further inquiry is needed to examine the differences between co-creation and co-management models in community gardens that have existing partnerships with Indigenous communities. More inquiry can provide insights into how to cultivate respect and mutually beneficial relationships between gardens and Indigenous communities, with an emphasis on recognizing Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination.
Identifying obstacles to incorporating decolonized practices is crucial for understanding the challenges that community gardens may face. Additional inquiry can involve reviewing factors such as resistance from the established power structures, lack of awareness or understanding of decolonized principles, and limited access to resources or funding. By understanding these obstacles, strategies to overcome them can be developed and create a more supportive environment for decolonization efforts in community gardens.
Filling gaps in knowledge related to decolonized community gardens is crucial for creating a more comprehensive understanding of their potential and impact. Further inquiry can involve conducting longitudinal studies to record the long-term effects of decolonized gardens on social cohesion, cultural preservation, and empowerment of Indigenous communities, perhaps at gardens already incorporating practices that may increase social cohesion in the garden, such as at Alice’s Garden Urban Farm in Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Alice’s Garden Urban Farm, 2025). Inquiry can explore the economic viability of decolonized gardens and identify financial models that can encourage sustainability and equitable access to resources. A final gap that can be addressed is that more inquiry is needed to understand the possible challenges of navigating cultural differences in community garden spaces. That can entail exploring conflict-resolution strategies, communication practices, and decision-making models that promote respectful dialogue and partnerships among diverse cultural groups. It can also mean trying to figure out how to balance diverse interests and ensure that the voices of marginalized communities are heard and respected. Addressing these challenges is necessary for creating community gardens that are actively working to remain inclusive and welcoming to people from all cultural backgrounds.
Next Steps
Exploring decolonized community gardens encourages engagement with a vision of their potential for creating inclusive spaces, cultural revitalization, and promoting sustainable food systems, but further inquiry is required to identify additional opportunities where gardens are succeeding in decolonization efforts, discover further obstacles to incorporating decolonized practices, and fill gaps in knowledge. Existing partnerships between community gardens, Indigenous, and other historically marginalized communities are a strength that can be further explored to understand the differences between co-creation and co-management models between gardens. This inquiry is not presuming that Indigenous Peoples want increased participation in or access to community gardens, but rather that taking a decolonized approach in creating and managing these spaces can benefit all.
A notable weakness is the lack of awareness of decolonized practices in the community garden movement. More inquiry can address this by creating educational materials and hosting workshops highlighting community gardens’ historical context and the value of incorporating Indigenous knowledge. Replicability across diverse contexts can be challenging since every region has different factors to consider. Additional inquiry can explore how decolonization principles may be changed for different settings to consider factors such as participants’ cultural backgrounds, land ownership, and already-existing community garden structures.
A significant gap exists in understanding the long-term impact of decolonized gardens. By conducting longitudinal studies that track the effects of these gardens on social cohesion, empowerment of Indigenous communities, and cultural preservation, there can be clarification on their viability. Additionally, the economic viability of decolonized gardens requires more exploration to analyze different financial models that encourage sustainability and ensure equitable access to resources for garden members. Lastly, there needs to be more knowledge of the potential challenges of navigating the cultural differences in these garden spaces, and inquiring about this can help find conflict resolution strategies and best practices for creating respectful dialogue and partnerships among diverse cultural groups of community gardens.
Community gardens are more than just plots of land for growing food and blooming flowers; they are living ecosystems created with threads of growth, connection, resilience, passion, and hope. These vibrant spaces are stimulants for deep transformation, extending well past the cultivation of food. They are sanctuaries for mental health, providing solace and a physical and spiritual connection to nature amid urban chaos. Community gardens symbolize decolonization by reclaiming knowledge systems and land that have been historically marginalized. They are the pulse of sustainable degrowth movements, challenging consumerist habits and encouraging self-sufficiency. These gardens act as time capsules, preserving ITEK, ancestral wisdom, and a deep connection to the land. They are catalysts for developing social capital, empowering the community, and establishing a sense of belonging. In a world entangled with climate change, community gardens can be our frontline defenders, building resilience through a localized food system and supporting crucial pollinator systems. They are not simply spaces for growing plants; they are powerful spaces for cultivating community, nurturing human potential, and reimagining our relationship with our local ecosystems and planet.
Conclusion
This literature review explored the intricate relationship between the enduring legacies of colonialism and community gardens. Examining the historical and contemporary power dynamics within community gardens has shown the potential for these spaces to perpetuate colonial legacies. Simultaneously, it emphasized the transformative potential of decolonized community gardens to become spaces that promote cultural diversity, ecological sustainability, and social justice. This review addressed the gap in inquiry by exploring the historical and cultural context of community gardens in relation to colonial legacies.
It highlighted the need for further inquiry to examine the long-term impact of decolonized gardens and identify best practices for incorporating ITEK and diverse cultural practices into these spaces. The findings from the review contribute to the broader decolonization movements through the examination of the importance of challenging dominant power structures, reclaiming ITEK, and creating spaces that celebrate cultural diversity. Decolonized community gardens can become examples of creating more equitable and inclusive urban spaces that promote cultural revitalization, ecological sustainability, and social transformation. By incorporating these decolonized practices, these spaces can become powerful tools for challenging colonial legacies and building more sustainable and just futures for all.
References
ACGA. (2024). About ACGA. American Community Garden Association. https://www.communitygarden.org/about
Allard-Tremblay, Y., & Coburn, E. (2021, April 28). The Flying Heads of Settler Colonialism; or the Ideological Erasures of Indigenous Peoples in Political Theorizing. Sage Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/16094069231205789
Alice’s mission. Alice’s Garden Urban Farm. (2025). https://www.alicesgardenmke.com/alice-meade-taylor
Aptekar, S., & Myers, J. S. (2011, January 2). The tale of two community gardens: Green Aesthetics versus Food Justice in the Big Apple. CUNY Academic Works. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/slu_pubs/2/
Aurora University. (2019, October 14). History of urban agriculture and urban farming policies. AU Online. https://online.aurora.edu/history-of-urban-agriculture/
Bacha, A. (2024, December 10). City council members held a hearing in October to understand the challenges of acquiring vacant lots through the Philadelphia Land Bank. One Kensington community garden shares its struggles of operating without land ownership. Greenphl. https://greenphl.com/philly/community-gardens-build-neighborhood-connections-so-why-are-philly-gardens-at-risk/
Belfi, E. & Sandiford, N. (2021). Decolonization Series Part 1: Exploring Decolonization. In S. Brandauer and E. Hartman (Eds.). Interdependence: Global Solidarity and Local Actions. The Community-based Global Learning Collaborative. Retrieved from: https://www.cbglcollab.org/what-is-decolonization-why-is-it-important
Birky, J. (2009, January 30). The Modern Community Garden Movement in the United States: Its Roots, its Current Condition, and its Prospects for the Future. University of South Florida. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2859&context=etd
Blum, J., Clark, M., Hampton, A., Littlefield, M., Montag, J., Reynolds, T., Thoms, H., White, K., Lassiter, M., Nofziger, C., & Parker, G. (2017). “Environmental Crisis” in the Late 1960s. University of Michigan. https://michiganintheworld.history.lsa.umich.edu/environmentalism/about
CA Legislative Information. (2004, September 30). Bill Text – SB-18 Traditional tribal cultural places. California Legislative Information. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=200320040SB18
Casey, J. A., James, P., Cushing, L., Jesdale, B. M., & Morello-Frosch, R. (2017, December 10). Race, ethnicity, income concentration and 10-year change in urban greenness in the United States. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5750964/
Castillo, J. (2018, October). The Evolution of the Tongva Tribal Name. gabrielenoindians. http://gabrielenoindians.net/ewExternalFiles/EvolutionoftheTongvatribalname.pdf
CDFA. (2024a). CDFA Racial Equity Action Plan. California Department of Food and Agriculture. https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/farmequity/Racial_Equity_Action_Plan.html#:~:text=Introduction:,disproportionately%20impacted%20by%20climate%20change.
CDFA. (2024b). Farm equity homepage. California Department of Food and Agriculture. https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/farmequity/#:~:text=Embedding%20Equity%20in%20Grant%20Programs&text=Technical%20assistance%20in%20CDFA%20programs,organizations%20to%20provide%20technical%20assistance.
Conroe, A. (2022, April 19). How saving seeds could save the planet. GlobalGiving. https://www.globalgiving.org/learn/indigenous-seed-saving
Cottage Industries Community Garden. (2024). Cottage Industries Community Garden. Cottage Industries. https://www.thecottageindustries.com/communitygarden
Cox, A. (2017, July 26). Settler colonialism. Oxford Bibliographies. https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780190221911/obo-9780190221911-0029.xml
The Cultural Conservancy. (2024). Native foodways. https://www.nativeland.org/native-foodways
Dartmouth Libraries. (2024). Indigenous People & Settler colonialism. https://www.library.dartmouth.edu/slavery-project/indigenous-people-settler-colonialism
Davis, J. (2023, July 11). Doctrine of discovery, until otherwise. The Library of Congress. https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2023/07/doctrine-of-discovery-until-otherwise/
Delahay, R. J., Sherman, D., Soyalan, B., & Gaston, K. J. (2023, August 19). Biodiversity in residential gardens: A review of the evidence base – biodiversity and conservation. SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10531-023-02694-9
Doyle, G. (2022, April 13). In the garden: capacities that contribute to community groups establishing community gardens. Taylor & Francis Online. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463138.2022.2045997
Domínguez & Luoma (2020, February 25). Decolonising conservation policy: How colonial land and conservation ideologies persist and perpetuate indigenous injustices at the expense of the environment. MDPI. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/3/65
East Anaheim Community Garden. (2024). Membership application. https://eacg12.com/membership/
Elshiwick, R. (2022, May 19). Community Gardens & Food Justice in Los Angeles. ArcGIS StoryMaps. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/e6d18b525b5b419f9eb42d04fd250f83
Fannon, F. (1963). The Wretched of the Earth. Monoskop. https://monoskop.org/images/6/6b/Fanon_Frantz_The_Wretched_of_the_Earth_1963.pdf
Glenn, E. N. (2015). Settler colonialism as structure: A framework for comparative studies of US race and gender formation. Sage Journals. https://www.asanet.org/wp-content/uploads/attach/journals/jan15srefeature.pdf
Green Guerillas. (2024). Green Guerillas. https://www.greenguerillas.org/
Greene-Berry, I., Hopkins, A., Lorenzo, S., & Stewart, I. (2023, May 31). Community gardens can help combat rising food insecurity in Philadelphia, but their future is uncertain. Billy Penn at WHYY. https://billypenn.com/2023/05/31/community-gardens-philadelphia-development-food-insecurity/
Herrmann, M. M. (2015, September 14). The modern day “victory garden.” Procedia Engineering. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877705815021530?ref=pdf_download&fr=RR-2&rr=85ff50b9ae9c1029
Huntington Beach Community Garden. (2024). HBCG: Become a member. https://www.hbcommunitygarden.org/become-a-member
Jha, S., Egerer, M., Bichier, P., Cohen, H., Liere, H. & Lin, B. et al. (2023) Multiple ecosystem service synergies and landscape mediation of biodiversity within urban agroecosystems. Ecology Letters, 26, 369–383. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.14146
Lathan, N. (2023, September 20). 50 years after being outlawed, redlining still drives neighborhood health inequities. Berkeley Public Health. https://publichealth.berkeley.edu/news-media/research-highlights/50-years-after-being-outlawed-redlining-still-drives-neighborhood-health-inequities
Leonard, K. (2024, November 26). Decolonizing Botanical gardens. Qualitative Research Journal. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/qrj-04-2024-0086/full/html
Kauanui, K. (2016). A Structure, Not an Event. JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/
Kwartnik-Pruc, A., & Droj, G. (2023, January 25). The role of allotments and community gardens and the challenges facing their development in urban environments-A literature review. MDPI. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/2/325
Maweu, J. M. (2011, December). Indigenous Ecological Knowledge and Modern Western Ecological Knowledge: Complementary, not Contradictory. African Journals Online. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/tp/index
Montoya, J. (2020, December). The economic and health impacts of Community Gardens on Refugee Populations: Cric Garden Case Study. DigitalCommons@USU. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/gradreports/1507
Nardone, A., Rudolph, K. E., Morello-Frosch, R., & Casey, J. A. (2021, January). Redlines and greenspace: The relationship between historical redlining and 2010 greenspace across the United States. Environmental health perspectives. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7839347/
NSALG. (2024). Brief history of allotments. The National Allotment Society. https://www.nsalg.org.uk/allotment-info/brief-history-of-allotments/
Ochoa, J., Sanyé-Mengual, E., Specht, K., Fernández, J. A., Bañón, S., Orsini, F., Magrefi, F., Bazzocchi, G., Halder, S., Martens, D., Kappel, N., & Gianquinto, G. (2019, July 23). Sustainable Community Gardens require social engagement and training: A users’ needs analysis in Europe. MDPI. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3978
Opara, I. (2021, July 29). It’s time to decolonize the Decolonization Movement. Speaking of Medicine and Health. https://speakingofmedicine.plos.org/2021/07/29/its-time-to-decolonize-the-decolonization-movement/
Pardini, C., & Spinola-Arredondo, A. (2021, January 6). Violence, coercion, and settler colonialism. Sage Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951629820984850
Poniży, L., Latkowska, M. J., Breuste, J., Hursthouse, A., Joimel, S., Külvik, M., Leitão, T. E., Mizgajski, A., Voigt, A., Kacprzak, E., Maćkiewicz, B., & Szczepańska, M. (2021, October 7). The rich diversity of Urban Allotment Gardens in Europe: Contemporary trends in the context of historical, socio-economic and legal conditions. MDPI. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/19/11076#:~:text=Initially%2C%20allotment%20gardens%20were%20established,own%20food%2C%20and%20also%20to
Pothemont, J. (2024). Green Guerillas History. Green Guerillas. https://www.greenguerillas.org/history
Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. New York, Pantheon Books.
Smith, L. (2023, March 28). Community Gardens in city parks. MOST Policy Initiative. https://mostpolicyinitiative.org/community-science-no/community-gardens-in-city-parks/#:~:text=One%20survey%20of%20Canadian%20and,in%20city%20parks%20(NRPA).
Smithsonian Gardens. (2024). Introduction: Grown from the past: A short history of community gardening in the United States. Community of Gardens. https://communityofgardens.si.edu/exhibits/show/historycommunitygardens/intro
Sogorea Te’ Land Trust . (2023, April 19). Sogorea Te’ Land Trust. https://sogoreate-landtrust.org/
Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak?. Abahlali.org. https://abahlali.org/files/Can_the_subaltern_speak.pdf
Texidor-Toneu, I., Westenger, O., Ulian, T., McMillion, A., Lorimer, M., Grace, O., Caillon, S., Shrestha, P., & Kool, A. (2023, December). Co-conserving Indigenous and local knowledge systems with seeds. Trends in Plant Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2023.06.020
Trust for Public Land. (2018, July 10). Here’s the dirt on Park Trends: Community Gardens are growing. Trust for Public Land. https://www.tpl.org/blog/heres-dirt-park-trends-community-gardens-are-growing
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society. https://clas.osu.edu/sites/clas.osu.edu/files/Tuck and Yang 2012 Decolonization is not a metaphor.pdf
Turvey, S., Bryant, J., & McClune, K. (2018, June 13). Differential loss of components of traditional ecological knowledge following a primate extinction event. Royal Society. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.172352
Twiss, J., Dickinson, J., Duma, S., Kleinman, T., Paulsen, H., & Rilveria, L. (2003, September). Community gardens: Lessons learned from California Healthy Cities and communities. American journal of public health. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1447988/
Voicu, I., & Been, V. (2007, June). The effect of community gardens on neighboring property. Furman Center. https://furmancenter.org/files/publications/The_Effect_of_Community_Gardens_combined.pdf
Wade, L. C. (2004). Settlement Houses. Encyclopedia of Chicago. http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1135.html
Webb, S. (2023, August 4). Inclusive Spaces: Promoting diversity and inclusion in community gardens. Medium. https://medium.com/@stephen-webb/inclusive-spaces-promoting-diversity-and-inclusion-in-community-gardens-7816a5781849
Werdel, T., Matarrita-Cascante, D., & Lucero, J. (2024, March 19). State of traditional ecological knowledge in the wildlife management profession. The Wildlife Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22579
Whyte, K. P. (2018, September). Settler colonialism, ecology, and environmental injustice. Research Gate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327455189_Settler_Colonialism_Ecology_and_Environmental_Injustice
Wilson, C. (2008, June 2). Guerrillas of green. Brooklyn Botanic Garden. https://www.bbg.org/article/guerrillas_of_green
Wolfe, P. (2006, December 21). Settler colonialism and the elimination of the Native. Taylor & Francis. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14623520601056240
