Evaluation of Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative

Evaluation of Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative

EVALUATION REPORT December 2014

Stuart Auckland Sandra Murray Quynh Lê Hoang Boi Nguyen

Evaluation of Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative Evaluation Report By

Stuart Auckland Sandra Murray Quynh Lê Hoang Boi Nguyen

December 2014 University of Tasmania

Copyright notice This work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 no part may be reproduced without the consent of the authors.

Suggested citation Auckland, S., Murray, S., Le, Q., Nguyen, H.B. 2014. Evaluation of Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative. University of Tasmania.

Acknowledgements The evaluation team would like to thank the residents of Ravenswood and adjacent suburbs who, through their involvement in the Growing Together Initiative project, generously gave their time to share their thoughts about project. Without their contribution it would not have been possible to successfully complete the evaluation. The report authors would also like to acknowledge the support and assistance provided to the research team by the management, staff and volunteers at the Ravenswood Neighbourhood House (RNH). Their assistance in accessing and recruiting participants for the evaluation was pivotal to procuring valuable information about the Growing Together project. Acknowledgement must also go to the Tasmanian Food Security Council for providing funding to the RNH under the Food for All Tasmanians Grants Program (Department of Premier and Cabinet) to undertake the Ravenswood Growing Together Project.

Contact information For further information please contact the evaluation team members and report authors: Stuart Auckland Coordinator, Community Health Development Centre for Rural Health School of Health Sciences University of Tasmania Locked Bag 1372 LAUNCESTON TAS 7250 Email: [email protected]

Sandra Murray Lecture in Food, Nutrition & Public Health, School of Health Sciences University of Tasmania Locked Bag 1322 LAUNCESTON TAS 7250 Email: [email protected]

Dr Quynh Lê Senior Lecturer Centre for Rural Health School of Health Sciences University of Tasmania Locked Bag 1372 LAUNCESTON TAS 7250 Email:[email protected]

Dr Hoang Boi Nguyen Research Assistant Centre for Rural Health School of Health Sciences University of Tasmania Locked Bag 1372 LAUNCESTON TAS 7250 Email: [email protected]

Table of contents List of tables ......................................................................................................................................................... iv Executive summary ................................................................................................................................................ v 1.

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1

2.

Background ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.1.

2.1.1.

Establishment of a local food cooperative ..........................................................................................3

2.1.2.

Pop-up BARBEQUEs .............................................................................................................................3

2.1.3.

Backyard vegetable plots ....................................................................................................................3

2.2. 3.

4.

5.

The Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative project ................................................................................2

The project sites ...........................................................................................................................................4

Literature review ........................................................................................................................................... 5 3.1.

Determinants of food security .....................................................................................................................5

3.2.

Local food security – Access and supply ......................................................................................................7

3.2.1.

Local food systems as a response to food security in Australia ...........................................................8

3.2.2.

Home gardens as a local food solution................................................................................................9

3.2.3.

Access, and utilisation of healthy food ..............................................................................................10

3.2.4.

National and local gardening projects ..............................................................................................11

Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 12 4.1.

Project design .............................................................................................................................................12

4.2.

Participants ................................................................................................................................................13

4.3.

Recruitment of participants .......................................................................................................................13

4.4.

Data collection ...........................................................................................................................................13

4.5.

Data analysis ..............................................................................................................................................14

Findings and discussion ............................................................................................................................... 15 5.1.

Improved local food supply and access .....................................................................................................15

5.2.

Enhanced social inclusion ..........................................................................................................................18

5.3.

Extended skills, knowledge and interest ....................................................................................................22

5.4.

Strategic partnerships ................................................................................................................................25

i

6.

5.5.

Challenges and barriers ..............................................................................................................................27

5.6.

Suggestions for improvement ....................................................................................................................29

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 31

References ........................................................................................................................................................... 33 Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................. 37

ii

List of figures Figure 1- Location of the suburbs of Ravenswood and Waverley due north east of the Launceston central business district ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Figure 2- Determinants of Food Security ................................................................................................................ 6

iii

List of tables Table 1- Characteristics of participants ................................................................................................................ 13

iv

Executive summary In Tasmania, food insecurity is believed to affect a proportionately higher number of people due to a higher level of socio-economic disadvantage compared to other states (Madden, 2003; Madden & Law, 2005). with food insecurity characterised by uncertainty about future food availability and access; insufficiency in the amount and kind of food required for a healthy lifestyle, and the need to use socially unacceptable ways to acquire food (Burns, Jones, & Frongillo, 2010). In recent years there have been a number of initiatives instigated at a community level in Tasmania to address the issues of local food insecurity, The Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative was instigated by the Ravenswood Neighbourhood House (RNH) through funding provided under the Tasmanian Government Food for All Tasmanians (FFAT) Grant. This project aimed to address food insecurity by:  

contributing to local learning around food security and provide evidence for local advocacy and possible future funding rounds; contributing to local skill development, in particular the development of backyard vegetable plots, through the participatory approach used in the project design;



providing valuable feedback to the participants in the program; and



organising a local food cooperative.

The evaluation of this Initiative focused on the investigation of the various food supply and access interventions, community action and attitudinal change. The evaluation framework considered different levels of effect, including process, impact and outcome evaluation. Using semi structured interviews the evaluation process required the collection of stories/ narrative from key stakeholder groups including members of the community involved in the various project activities, neighborhood house staff and volunteers. The comments and stories collected from all the participants provided valuable feedback for future recommendations. The key themes that emerged from the interviews could be classified into four main themes, namely (1) improved local food supply and access, (2) enhanced social inclusion, (3) extended skills, knowledge and interest, and (4) better partnerships. A number of recommendations were drawn from the evaluation and included: 1. Promote and market the benefits of the Initiative A strong focus on the social and economic benefits of the project need to be communicated to participants and project staff and volunteers at all phases of the project. Such an approach would ensure greater buy in and commitment from all parties especially in attracting residents to the pop-up barbecues as well as recruiting participants for the backyard vegetable plots. It is v

recommended that local knowledge be used to inform the development of appropriate promotion strategies in order to ensure higher community involvement. 2.

Expand the Initiative in both scope and nature

The Initiative has shown to have positive impacts on local food security, especially in terms of improved supply of and access to healthy fresh food; enhanced social inclusion; and extended skills, knowledge and interest. Opportunities exist to build an educative component into the project that teaches participants to not only grow produce but to also prepare, cook and present the produce for consumption. Opportunities exist for expanding the project to include the propagation of seedlings, growing of fruit and other fresh produce as well as the production and or distribution of information about different aspects of growing vegetables. It is therefore recommended that continuing efforts be put into expanding the Initiative in both scope and nature. 3.

Regular contact and mutual support among participating members

It is recommended that plans be put in place to create more opportunities for interaction both between participants and project staff/volunteers and, importantly, amongst participants. Such activities would encourage mutual support among participating members themselves and provide back up support when support is not available through the project staff and volunteers. 4.

Involve local community champions

The evaluation revealed that there was a strong level of interest, enthusiasm and in some cases knowledge about backyard vegetable production amongst one or two of the participants. There are real opportunities to engage these individuals in more resourceful ways within the community to promote and support the initiative. Such an approach would not only encourage greater engagement by the community in the project but would also build local capacity for future activities. It is recommended that project staff create a resource bank of local champions who may be able to play a more active role in future endeavours. 5.

Strengthen the partnership framework

To address community issues such as that of food security, an inclusive approach is essential to guarantee the sustainability of the target activities. The evaluation study has demonstrated the possibility as well as benefits of involving various organizations, groups, and individuals through partnership arrangements. It is recommended that the Initiative explore opportunities to expand the partnership to include organisations such as NRM North that supply technical advice on soil quality, biodiversity and irrigation requirements. vi

6.

Pooling/sharing of resources

There is much to be gained in sharing resources, knowledge and skills with other communities conducting similar initiatives. Such approaches not only lead to greater efficiencies but also help secure extra funding for the expansion of the Initiative. It is recommended that project staff investigate opportunities to share resources, knowledge and skills with other communities conducting similar initiatives.

vii

1.

Introduction

Food security is defined as a situation that “exists when all people, at all times, have physical social and economic access to sufficient safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life” (FAO, 1996). Although Australia can be considered a highly food-secure nation, there is research evidence that certain section of the population has inadequate or unstable access to food (Rychetnik, Webb, Story, & Katz, 2003). A range of social, economic, and spatial factors have been identified as barriers to food security among a proportion of Australians (Wise, 2014). Those who are found to be more vulnerable to food insecurity than others include unemployed people, single parent households, low-income earners, rental households and young people (Burns, 2004). In Tasmania, food insecurity is believed to affect a proportionately higher number of people due to a higher level of socio-economic disadvantage compared to other states (Madden, 2003; Madden & Law, 2005). In response to the Food For all Tasmanians – A food Security Strategy (TFSC (Tasmanian Food Security Council), 2012), the Food for All Tasmanians Grants Program (DPaC, n.d.) was established in March 2012. The focus of the strategy is on increasing access and supply of affordable and nutritious food to Tasmanian communities considered most at risk. A key interest of the strategy is to identify community driven approaches that support the four identified priorities to address food security at the local level, namely: 

Increasing foods access and affordability;



Building community food solutions;



Regional development and supporting food social enterprise; and



Planning for local food systems.

The Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative is an example of a project which addresses the above four-priority areas of the Tasmanian Food Security Strategy.

2.

Background

The Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative was initiated by the Ravenswood Neighbourhood House (RNH) through funding provided under the Tasmanian Government Food for All Tasmanians (FFAT) grant. The concept of the Growing Together Initiative emerged from a crises in the community and the subsequent coming together of community members and sharing of food and building of relationships. The project reflects the key elements of a place-based approach to tackling locational disadvantage. Place-based approaches typically engage the whole community in 1

identifying their priority issues and developing sustainable solutions that involve all spheres of government, business and the community working together.

2.1.

The Ravenswood Growing Together Initiative project

The Growing Together Initiative reflects key elements of a local food system in the sense that it is based in a defined geographical area, aims to be economically beneficial for both the growers and the consumers of the produce, employs ecologically sound production and distribution systems and contributes in a positive way to the social fabric of the community. At a micro or community level projects such as the Growing Together Initiative have the potential to strengthen individual, household and community food security, provide opportunities for volunteerism, support the creation of local food enterprises contribute to better community health outcomes through improved diets and exercise and increase self-reliance. The project had four overarching objectives which were to: 

contribute to local learning around food security and provide evidence for local advocacy and possible future funding rounds;



contribute to local skill development, in particular the development of backyard vegetable plots, through the participatory approach used in the project design;



provide valuable feedback to the participants in the program; and



organise a local food cooperative.

Central to achieving this objectives was the development and roll out of three key sub project tasks namely: 

the establishment of a food cooperative within the RNH through the provision of fresh food to the community;



the provision of a series of Pop-up BARBEQUEs within the target project area that feature healthy food options; and



supporting community members through growing their own produce and the provision of seedlings and assistance in establishing backyard vegetable growing plots.

A research framework was developed to evaluate the impact of the Initiative on local food security and in particular, the extent to which activities associated with the three objectives contributed to improved food security. The knowledge, attitudes and practices of participants concerning food security were closely examined through the lived experience of key stakeholders including community members, volunteers and salaried staff of the RNH. This evaluation study aims to examine whether 2

working in a collaborative way with the local community on food security initiatives contributes to: 

helping improve local food security;



increasing social inclusion; and



improving local food skill and knowledge base.

2.1.1.

Establishment of a local food cooperative

This activity was based around the development of a food cooperative model whereby local residents had the opportunity to purchase fresh fruit and vegetables on a weekly basis through the Neighborhood House. Fresh fruit and vegetables were provided by emergency food relief programs such as Second Bite and complemented with surplus produce donate by local residents and in particular residents involved in the backyard vegetable plots sub project. 2.1.2.

Pop-up Barbeques

A number of Pop-up BARBEQUEs were held in unconventional locations such as the sides of roads or near areas where there were significant concentrations of people. The essence of the Pop-up BARBEQUE activity is to firstly enhance the community’s skills in cooking healthy low cost alternatives using produce that can be grown locally. Volunteers and staff from the Neighborhood House are on hand to talk to residents about growing their own food and the different ways in which the food can be prepared. The BARBEQUE also provides an opportunity to provide social interaction between residents, particularly those residents who are not mobile or may have limited access to transport. The gatherings provide to engage with residents who would otherwise not be aware of the services offered by the Neighborhood House. 2.1.3.

Backyard vegetable plots

The establishment of backyard vegetable growing plots component of the Initiative focused on providing assistance to local residents to establish vegetable plots in their backyards or simple planter boxes where residents have limited access to space in which to establish a garden. Based on public and private community based gardening models, expressions of interest were sought from local residents for a commitment to maintaining vegetable plots in their backyards. In return, assistance by way of provision of seedlings, planter boxes, horticultural advice and volunteer support, coordinated through the Neighborhood House, would be provided. Residents whose backyards were selected as vegetable growing sites were expected to work with RNH staff and volunteers in establishing their plot. Once established, the residents were expected to maintain the plots and harvest produce. In addition, residents were asked to contribute any surplus produce to 3

complement the supply of fresh produce provided by emergency food relief programs such as Second Bite to the Neighborhood House.

2.2.

The Initiative sites

The target population for the study were the residents of the suburb of Ravenswood and the adjoining suburbs of Waverley and St Leonard. This area is classified as an area of high socio economic disadvantage in the 2011 census (ABS, 2011). Whilst the suburb of Ravenswood has a population of 3,974 people it is estimated that the project reach extends to a broader population of 6,700 people, which takes in the adjoining suburbs.

Project sites

Figure 1- Location of the suburbs of Ravenswood and Waverley due north east of the Launceston central business district

The project area comprises a wide demographic range in terms of age structure, social status and employment levels. Many of the residents of the project area have experienced, or are experiencing, a high level of social and financial disadvantage. Research has shown that when finances are tight and living costs rise, struggling households find that food is the one area where expenditure can be curtailed in order to afford the costs of paying rent or mortgage, electricity and heating, transport, medical expenses, school fees, and other items (Riessman, 2008). In

4

addition, there is a varying level of awareness about the cost saving opportunities and benefits of growing their own food crops. The RNH acts as a social and educational hub for the surrounding community and is managed by a committee comprising local residents who volunteer their time. The RNH offers a broad range of programs and courses. In addition, a number of service and community organisations run training and sessions from the facility each year.

3.

Literature review

Despite Australia’s ability to produce enough food to feed three times its current population (PMSEIC, 2010), significant challenges to Australia’s food security have been identified. In a recent national survey in 2012, for example, 16% of the respondents reported being worried that their food would run out before they had money to buy more and four per cent indicated they had relied on charitable sources for food supplies (Lockie & Pietsch, 2012). Within this context, there have been many strategic policies and multi-levelled initiatives across the country to strengthen the nation’s capacity for food security.

3.1.

Determinants of food security

Rychetnik, Webb, Story, and Katz (2003) define food security as the ability of individuals, households and communities to acquire food that is sufficient, reliable, nutritious, safe, acceptable and sustainable. Likewise, the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation refers to food security as ‘the state in which all persons obtain nutritionally adequate, culturally acceptable, safe food regularly through local non-emergency sources’ (VicHealth, 2005). Food security emphasises that everyone in the society has adequate means, physically and financially, to obtain healthy good-quality food on a sustainable basis. As opposed to food security, food insecurity is characterised by uncertainty about future food availability and access, insufficiency in the amount and kind of food required for a healthy lifestyle, and the need to use socially unacceptable ways to acquire food (Burns, et al., 2010). The concept of food security includes determinants such as food availability, food access and food utilisation (Barrett, 2010). Food availability is the range of nutritious foods such as fresh fruits and vegetables which are sold or served at local food outlets (Azuma, Gilliland, Vallianatos, & Gottlieb, 2010). Food access refers to the extent to which individuals are physically and economically able to obtain nutritious foods (Apparicio, Cloutier, & Shearmur, 2007) while food utilisation is the appropriate use of food based on knowledge of basic nutrition

5

and care (Burns, Gibbon, Boak, Baudinette, & Dunbar, 2004). Figure 2 provides a model of the link between food supply, food access and food utilisation indicated as skills and knowledge

Figure 2- Determinants of Food Security

Source: Rychetnik, Webb, Story & Katz (2003); NSW Food Security Options Paper, NSW Centre for Public Health Nutrition (2003).

There has been convincing evidence over the last decade that many Australians face physical and financial constraints for daily access to nutritious foods and struggle to feed themselves adequately (McCluskey, 2009; VicHealth, 2007). According to findings from the Victorian Population Health Survey, for example, in 2006, 3.6% of two-parent families and 20.6% of one 6

parent families (both with dependent children) had in the previous year run out of food and had no money to buy more (DHS, 2007). As observed by Burns (2004), some groups such as unemployed people, single parent households, low-income earners, rental households and young people, are more vulnerable to food insecurity than others. Low-income households and those in remote areas, for instance, are less likely to consume the recommended intake of fruit and vegetables per day (AIHW, 2010; Second Bite, 2011). Parents from low income areas are also found to be much more likely to experience food scarcity than parents from other areas (NSW Health, 2002). In Tasmania, research evidence consistently reflects the national trends. In a Community Survey undertaken by Anglicare (Madden & Law, 2005), food scarcity was found among 5% of the 3800 Tasmanian participants, who reported to mostly or always worry about whether the amount of food they could afford would be enough for their households. In the same survey, 19% reported to occasionally worry about their ability to afford adequate food and 4% reported going without meals at some time in the past year due to a shortage of money. A report by Madden (2003) on the casualisation of work in Tasmania also revealed patterns of food shortage among people who were underemployed. In another study of clients of emergency relief and financial counselling services around Tasmania in 2003, Madden (2004) found that 59% of the respondents had gone without meals in the past year due to financial hardship and that 70% of respondents always or almost always worried about whether the amount of food they could buy for their household would be enough. Other highly vulnerable groups such as people living with disability, single parent families and refugees were also reported to experience food insecurity associated with anxiety about food costs or difficulties in finding culturally appropriate food (Flanagan, 2007; Flanagan, 2010a).

3.2.

Local food security – Access and supply

As depicted in figure 2 above food supply and food access are key determinants of food security. The term food supply as it relates to the Growing Together initiative refers to those aspects of the supply of food in the project area that affect the food security of the target population at an individual, household and community level. Food supply not only encompasses the aspects of the location of food outlets (retail and prepared foods) within the community; the availability of food within those stores; the price, quality and variety of the food that is available locally; and the way that different foods are identified and promoted but also what is grown or produced locally. This includes production of food at an individual or household level such as backyard vegetable gardens and the promotion of healthy food choices such as the Pop-up BARBEQUE 7

activity. Such activities are considered to be of particular valuable in communities with a high level of social disadvantage such as those within the project site. Together with food supply, access to food is paramount to improved food security. Food access refers to the resources and ability that communities, households and individuals have (or do not have) in order to acquire and consume a healthy diet. Food supply and food access are interdependent in that access to food depends on an adequate food supply. Although it is important to note that some disadvantaged groups or individuals may not be able to acquire and consume a healthy diet even when local supplies appear plentiful. These include people who are very poor, homeless, or who are living with a physical disability or mental illness (NSW Health, 2003). 3.2.1.

Local food systems as a response to food security in Australia

Emerging against food security concerns, the development of local food systems has been widely championed as a viable pathway to a sustainable food system, one that “equitably balances concerns of environmental soundness, economic viability, and social justice among all sectors of society” as defined by Allen, Van Dusen, Lundy, and Gliessman (1991). According to Duell (2013), local food systems refer to short food supply chains, which are considered as a subgroup of alternative agri-food networks. Local food systems are highly diverse and include initiatives such as community and home gardens, community supported agriculture, community farms, organic produce, farmers markets, farm gate sales, box schemes and the regional labelling of food products. Local food has gained a large amount of focus in relation to improved food security issues. Particularly, the potential of localised food supply chains to sustainably promote regional food production and food access has been emphasized by many researchers. For example, Cameron (2007) examined local food’s revitalization of the agri-food sector and Halweil (2002) pointed to its provision of easy access to fresh food and better nutrition; and its contribution to the reduction of food wastage. Local food systems have also been reported to have many other ecological, economic and social benefits. Connelly, Markey, and Roseland (2011) specifically highlighted the achievement of both sustainability and community transformation through local food initiatives, which involved bottom-up collective action, local innovation responses, inclusive governance, and collective ideas of well-being. Other researchers highlight local food’s capacity to counter ecological degradation (Andrée, Dibden, Higgins, & Cocklin, 2010), contribute to the creation of new wealth (Guthrie, 2006), facilitate greater participation and interaction between community members (Feenstra, 1997), enhance social cohesion and connectivity between diverse 8

populations (Gasteyer, Hultine, Cooperband, & Curry, 2008) and build stronger local economies (Gaynor, 2006). Sitting under the umbrella term of local food systems, home gardens have been largely promoted because of the favourable effects that they are well-documented to generate. Gardens are generally noted as contributing positively to biodiversity, ecological balance, the connection between human and the natural landscape. In addition, home gardens are reported to be connected with other social-economic factors. While examining the potential sustainability of suburban domestic gardens in Australia, Ghosh (2010) highlighted that suburban backyard vegetable gardens can provide multiple sustainability benefits including local food production, recycling of organic wastes through composting, lower urban carbon footprint, water and energy conservation, improved public health and better social connections. The important contributions of home gardens, especially in relation to food security, are discussed in the following sections. 3.2.2.

Home gardens as a local food solution

Sonntag (2008) asserted that backyard gardens constitute an important component of the community food system, which is more economically efficient and sustainable alternative to the market-oriented system. Home food production, for example, eliminates transportation costs and energy consumption, resulting in a more resource-efficient system (Faist, Kytzia, & Baccini, 2001) and monetary benefits to the household (Okvat & Zautra, 2011). In addition, food growing from private households empowers home gardeners to control over their own needs of healthy food, creating an automatic match between food supply and food demand (Zahina-Ramos, 2013). Buchmann (2009) suggested that home gardening could be a response to inadequate access to food through market sources. Apart from food security of individual households, home gardens can enhance community food security through the distribution of plants and food via social networks (Buchmann, 2009).With their contributions to local food production, home gardens are considered to play a role in building a sustainable food future (Ghosh, 2014). In addition to facilitating food access and nutrition, home gardens are reported to contribute indirectly to community food security by increasing social inclusion. As stated by Buchmann (2009), home gardens can be socially oriented, increasing the communication and sharing of food between households and thus enhancing the resilience of local food system and community food security. In his study, Jarosz (2000) confirmed the role of home gardens in promoting community social relations. Similarly, Freeman, Dickinson, Porter, and Van Heezik (2012) found that although household food growing is a solitary activity, home gardens are used by households in New Zealand as a space to create and support new relationships and a point of 9

communication with family members and neighbours. This finding is consistent with that of Zahina-Ramos (2013), who identified the role of home gardens in building community relationship. While the merits of home and community gardens are well recognized, best practices and models for encouraging home and community gardening that attract more participants, especially from disadvantaged groups, have not yet been established. This issue needs to be taken seriously when there is evidence that vulnerable groups in Tasmania are suffering from food insecurity and social exclusion at varying degrees, such as unemployed people, low-income households, young families, migrant families and older people. For example, the cost of food has been found to be a perpetual major concern for low-income families in Tasmania (Flanagan, 2010b) and 25% of the Tasmanian population are confronted with inclusion barriers, among whom vulnerable groups are most at risks (Adams, 2009). In addition, the Department of Health and Human Services (2007) reports a higher proportion of the population with a long term health condition and a lower proportion of the population consuming the national recommended fruit and vegetable intake in Tasmania, compared with the national average. The prevalence of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression is also worrying, with 1 in 9 Tasmanians reporting a long-term mental or behavioural problem (Department of Health and Human Services, 2008). Furthermore, provided with insufficient supportive networks, the people are more prone to isolation and exclusion, which impacts negatively on their physical health, mental health and wellbeing (Adams, 2009). There is evidence that about 13% of Tasmanians, being mostly unemployed people, low-income households, young families, migrant families and older people, are suffering from social exclusion to varying degrees (Adams, 2009; Flanagan, 2010a). 3.2.3.

Access, and utilisation of healthy food

A significant contribution of home gardening, as suggested by the literature, is the improvement of food security through the facilitation of sustainable access to, availability of and utilisation of healthy fresh foods. There is evidence that household food growing contributes effectively to food security through improved access to food and better nutrition (Dickinson et al., 2003). Grown at home, fresh produce becomes more readily available and affordable to family members, thus enhancing healthy food access. Particularly, home gardens play a more important role to immigrants when making culturally-acceptable or ethnic foods more accessible (Byers, 2009; Kortright & Wakefield, 2011). Several studies found that convenience and the ease of obtaining fresh vegetables was related to the amount consumed (Nijmeijer, Worsley, & Astill, 2004). Kortright and Wakefield (2011), for example, found that informal house-lot food growing can support for food security at all income levels by encouraging a more nutritious diet with 10

convenient access to diverse varieties of affordable and nutritious produce (Kortright & Wakefield, 2011). Home gardens are similarly reported to diversify diets by making nutritious fresh foods easier to access (Cabalda, Rayco-Solon, Solon, & Solon, 2011) and enhance household nutrition through increased consumption of vegetables and fruit (Gray, Guzman, Glowa, & Drevno, 2013). Research on community gardening corroborates these findings. For example, according to a report by Alaimo and colleagues (2008), gardens provide access to healthy food for low-income families who can hardly afford fresh produce, and gardeners reportedly consume more servings of fresh fruit and vegetables each day than non-gardeners. Other researchers point to the potential of community gardens in increasing the availability and affordability of unprocessed foods and promoting more nutritious diets (Alaimo, et al., 2008; Wakefield, Yeudall, Taron, Reynolds, & Skinner, 2007) 3.2.4.

National and local gardening projects

Home and community gardening has been widely promoted and become a common practice in Australia. In a survey of 1,390 households across Australia, Wise (2014) reported that more than half (52 %) of all Australian households are growing some of their own food and a further 13 % reportedly intend to start. The most common reasons for growing their own are related to food security, such as to produce healthier food (71%), to save money (61%), and to produce tastier food (61%) (Wise, 2014). Numerous gardening projects have been established nationwide, such as the Monroe Sharing Garden (grows local food and builds sharing spirit in the community), the Brisbane Northey Street City Farm (promotes permaculture education and help growers via website, workshops), the Permablitz team (addresses the issue of lack of growing knowledge and time), and the Edible Yards (supports garden produce sharing, and connect garden food growers and consumers). Particularly aiming at home gardens, the Sharing Backyards project addresses the lack of land issue and seeks to pair up growers with yard owners to not only grow food, but also grow relations (Zahina-Ramos, 2013). In Tasmania, a number of community gardening projects have been launched, including the establishment of the Tasmanian Gardening Network, which is principally meant to promote enjoyable healthy eating (Herzfeld, 2004) and ultimately better food security. Totally, about 100 community and school gardens of various sizes and scopes have been established state-wide (EWT, 2009). In addressing these critical issues in Tasmania, backyard gardening may present a holistic community-based activity. When the best coping model in the current socio-economical context 11

is suggested to be locally-oriented and community-based, interventions and research into how best to set up and cultivate private green space, into residents’ feelings about, barriers to, and support for household food growing is an important step in determining local support for backyard food production. This is also a well-directed step towards improved food security and social inclusion in Tasmania. To this end the evaluation team recognised the value of designing and implementing an evaluative approach that incorporated an element of narrative, allowing project participants to share their insight and to assess outcomes while evaluating program and learning outcomes. Riessman (2008) defines narrative interviews as a discursive process in which participants engage in an evolving conversation that is collaboratively produced. Most Significant Change (MSC) was selected as the model upon which the evaluation would be based (Davies & Dart, 2005).

4.

Methodology

The evaluation of this Initiative focuses on the investigation of various food supply and access interventions, community action and attitudinal change. The evaluation framework considers different levels of effect, including process, impact and outcome evaluation. Using semistructured interviews, the evaluation process requires the collection of stories/narrative from key stakeholder groups including members of the community involved in the various activities, neighborhood houses, volunteers, and staff at different levels.

4.1.

Project design

The Most Significant Change (MSC) (Davies & Dart, 2005) technique was used for collection of stories/narrative data. The MSC technique is a form of participatory monitoring and evaluation. The process involved collection of significant change (SC) stories/narratives emanating from the field, and systematic collection of most significant of these stories by research participants. Stories were collected before, halfway and at the conclusion of the interventions. During data collection, the researcher engaged in thoughtful conversations with research participants, in an attempt to enter their world and understood the story or stories at the heart of the study. The methodology involved a number of distinct tasks including the establishment of a research working group to assist with the submission of ethics requirements, the identification and training of local volunteers/community researchers to assist with data collection processes, the identification and recruitment of participants for the research, data collection, data analysis, and the drafting of a report containing research findings and recommendations. 12

Where appropriate, efforts were made to involve interested community members in the delivery of specific research tasks. A training workshop was provided to up-skill community members/community researchers in the roll out of specific tasks. This was part of the capacity building component that was built into the research

4.2.

Participants

Volunteers, project coordinator/manager and residents involved in the project participated in the study by providing their story in a semi-structured interview process: 

Initiative Coordinator/Manager employed by RNH;



Volunteers who attend the RNH for a variety of reasons. Some are regular volunteers who live locally, others volunteers have opted to undertake their Community Service Hours with the Initiative;



Residents of the suburbs of Ravenswood, Waverley and St Leonards who have agreed to establish a vegetable patch or drum plot on their land.

4.3.

Recruitment of participants

Participants were asked to participate in this study through a personal request from the RNH management team. Those who accepted the invitation were then contacted by the interviewers and a time was scheduled for collection of their story. Table 1- Characteristics of participants

Phase 1

2

4.4.

Number of Interviews 10 3 1 3 1

Role in project

Date

Female

Male

Age

Residents with Gardens RNH Coordinator Focus group with Volunteers from RNH Residents with Gardens RNH Coordinator

Apr – Jun 2014

4 3

6 0 7

20-70 35-70 20-55

3

35-70 35-45

Dec 2013 Nov 2014 1

Data collection

MSC data collection tools for the Growing Together Initiative evaluation were developed and piloted in stage one evaluation. The process used to analyse the stories was modified based on verbal feedback provided by the stage one evaluator. 13

The data collection procedure included a semi-structured interview with participants who have agreed to tell their story/stories. Stories were collected at two points or stages during the project activity cycle: Stage 1 The stories/narratives were collected initially from those involved in the establishment phase of the Initiative. This included the project steering committee members and those employed as part of the Initiative. It also involved community members who were currently associated with the RNHs and its activities, which is the host site for the Initiative. During this stage from April to June 2014 stories were collected from 13 individual participants and one focus group of seven participants. Stage 2 The second stage again aimed to collect stories/narratives from those who had contributed during stage 1 and also included new stories/narratives from those who only joined in stage 2 of the Initiative. During this stage stories were collected from four of the 13 participants previously interviewed in stage 1. The disproportionate number of stories collected in stage 2 was due to limited access and availability to participants. Purposive sampling and snowball sampling were used in the Initiative to collect the necessary data. The participants were information-rich and willing to express their experiences or recall events in depth. During data collection, the researchers engaged in thoughtful conversations with participants, in an attempt to enter their world and understand the story or stories at the heart of the study.

4.5.

Data analysis

Qualitative data was sourced from individual stories. The data collected was then de-identified and copied into the qualitative database using NVivo 10 for data collation and coding. Grouped data was subject to double checking to ensure the integrity of the data. Thematic analysis of data was done to identify key patterns and trends in the data and to compare expressed views. In the first stage, broad categories were identified within an overall schema, and in the second stage, a detailed series of hierarchical nodes and sub-nodes were developed. At the end of this process, all of the domains were examined and the MSC stories were identified by the steering committee. Stories which did not fit any of the domains or cannot be grouped together to establish a new domain were discarded from the process.

14

A number of quotations are included in the report to illustrate and support the accounts emerging from the textual responses.

5.

Findings and discussion

The comments and stories from the community members, volunteers and coordinators of the Initiative were generally positive and constructive. From the interviews and focus groups discussion taken at two points during the project cycle, many values of the program were highlighted which could be classified into four main themes, namely (1) improved local food supply and access, (2) enhanced social inclusion, (3) extended skills, knowledge and interest, and (4) better coalition partnerships. Many practical suggestions for improvement were also made which addressed the identified challenges and barriers facing the initiative participants.

5.1.

Improved local food supply and access

The findings from the two points of interaction with the participants of the Initiative revealed some indications of the extension of healthy food supply and access in a number of ways among the local community. Particularly, the increased availability, quality and affordability of the produce were widely realized by the participants. Regarding food availability, there was an indication that fresh produce was more readily and abundantly available to the participants themselves as well as to their network of friends, neighbours and acquaintances. Some typical comments are as follows. Absolutely tons of produce! We had to give so much away. Um, got about four harvests out of the silverbeet, ah tons of onions… the carrots were a little deformed cause they couldn’t grow deep enough. Baby beets, chives….onions, we had more broad beans than we could eat (Volunteer 2-M-P1) We’ve all managed to put in our own gardens with your guys help, like with soil and everything. And also got enough cabbages out there to, um…feed 5 units. (Volunteer 6F-P1) I think it’s beautiful and I just like the idea of just, you know, lots of food for everybody, vegetables. And you know with a little work and not having to pay so much for it. So that’s great. (Volunteer 7-F-P1) On the part of the participants, much appreciation was expressed on the freshness and quality of the produce. To some participants, the fact that the garden produce is fresher and thus tastier than store-bought produce has been the most significant positive of their participation in the Initiative. 15

Importantly, the high quality of the home grown produce was felt not only by the participating adults but also by the younger members in their family. As Volunteer 1-F-P1 noted, “It tastes way betta, especially the potatoes, he said, Mum, these are better than what you buy at the shop”. Similar appreciation is reflected in the comment below. I’ve seen them pull the outsides off of a lettuce and spay them with water to make them look fresh. Your own….you go out there, cut it off, bring it up here and serve it up on a plate! You can’t get any fresher than that. And the same with vegies…..you just bring them in, you clean them up, you put them in containers and you put them in your freezer. And they’re there until you want them and they’ll go till next year. (Volunteer 3-M-P1) The affordability of the fresh produce was also emphasized. Some participants acknowledged the economic benefits of growing their own vegetables, which they felt was a well worth their effort. This point was manifested in the following comments. Once it’s started, your vegetables cost you practically nothing. I mean you get a packet of seeds for probably 3 dollars, and it would have 50 seeds in it….that’s 50 carrots. You don’t have to put them all in at once. Can you imagine what a family….of say Mum, Dad and 2, 3, 4 kids can do….and look.., you can freeze them. So I mean…it’s a cheap way, because vegetables are not cheap (Volunteer 3-M-P1) So it’s kind of motivated all of us and its stuff that we don’t have to buy at the supermarket. We get to spend that other money on meat or things like that, so it’s cost saving for us. (Volunteer 6-F-P1) We spent $22 last weekend for pumpkin, tomatoes, et. – everything we need… $20 pretty much covers most and you’re saving 10 times over in groceries (Volunteer 2-M-P2) You can fill up a shopping bag for a dollar- you’ve got enough there for two or three days-if you come down on Monday and you’re running short then come down on Thursday that’ll take you through to the weekend and you’ve spent 2 dollars! we have cabbages, caulis, broccoli, silver beet, spinach, kale, spuds, onions- then later on we’ll have onions, tomatoes, cucumbers, zucchinis, pumpkins(Volunteer 3-M-P2) In addition, it was evident through the participants’ stories that a culture of food sharing was naturally developed and embraced among the community members. As expressed by some participants, when the quantity of fresh produce exceeded their own family needs, they would love to share with other people across the community. This mutual sharing of home garden produce seems to have added a new dimension to the traditional mechanisms of increasing local food access. The following comments clearly illustrate this well-embraced sharing practice. 16

We gave probably 4 bunches to the gentleman across the road, a whole heap to our next door neighbour, em, there’s a family that lives diagonally across the road, they….umm, their father in-laws my wife’s uncle, sorta thing, yea, so took up a whole heap over to him as well then there was still 3 shopping bags full that we took down to the neighbourhood house and tomatoes are still growing. (Volunteer 2-M-P1) I only took the tomatoes down, but when the sweet corn was ready, everybody just helped themselves (Volunteer 10-M-P1) Cause I work in childcare and I know there’s a lot of needy families so I said to Col, so maybe if we just go to St. Vincent/St. Paul or City Mission, maybe they’d do something with it. So I took it down there and she was really appreciative of it. (Volunteer 1-F-P1) I brought in silverbeet, today I brought in spinach and parsley, mint then I’ve got beans coming up, onions growing, carrots, parsnips, 140 garlic plants. I have my own garden before but it’s much bigger now because I wanted to grow more and help the community when I found out what it was (Volunteer 3-M-P2) Apart from increased supply and access to local fresh produce, the Initiative has been valued for its contribution to the enhancement of local food sustainability. Some participants highly stressed that their long term needs of fresh produce could be satisfactorily met. “I’ve got the seed for the tomatoes, I’ve kept all them. So there will be a lot of tomatoes around this year.” (Volunteer 10M-P1) In addition, the continuation of home garden growing practice has been and continues to be maintained in many ways. We got a fabulous set of champions who are taking on a huge role in teaching and education so our community is sustaining this. It’s no longer being sustained by workers and the paid workforce. (Coordinator 1-F-P1) We’re going to hope for a little community farm in Waverley and the Launceston City Council are indicating support for that. And that just may well get legs which will relate to that school and to a school kitchen and learning for the kids as well as composting, small animals, and a range of things happening at the lake. So that may even become you know a little café at weekends a bit like the Collingwood Children’s Farm. A lot smaller, but that kind of concept. You know it could happen easily. (Coordinator 1-F-P1) Most significant change

17

It’s saving a fortune too. When it’s coming through, it’s saving me an absolute fortune because I have 4 children and a partner so we’ve got six people to feed. (Volunteer 1-FP1) Most significant change Beforehand we were barely seeing any produce from the gardens outside of here and now we are- it was continual- so through the winter nothing happened at all that was the endso the availability of produce is the biggest thing and the keenness of people to take the plants that are out there- they do swap produce amongst themselves- and we have one of our champion gardeners who has a big garden of his own- he brings down broccoli boxes down every Monday and so people have got to know that – and some –so are just a step away from “Second Bite” they are waiting here for him to arrive from his garden with produce (Coordinator 3-F-P1) Generally, the very first impact of the Growing Together Initiative on community food security reportedly resided in its provision for improved local food system through extended supply of and access to fresh healthy produce among the local residents. The finding was relatively consistent with those of other researchers with the same interests (Gray, et al., 2013; Kortright & Wakefield, 2011) who examined the effects of home gardening in relation to food security. This seems to be a very encouraging finding especially when there is evidence that several groups of Tasmanian residents, particularly the more vulnerable groups, are facing food insecurity at varying degrees (Flanagan, 2010a; Madden & Law, 2005). With special regards to more affordable and fresher produce, it is all the more beneficial to the local residents in Tasmania, where the price of fruit and vegetables is usually higher than that in the mainland. It seems that from the perspective of the participants, the Growing Together Initiative has been successful partly because it was aimed at accommodating the real needs of the community in terms of healthy fresh food. When this Growing Together Initiative has proven to contribute to the enhancement of healthy food supply and access among the local people, there is strong ground for the promotion of similar initiatives in the northern parts of Tasmania as a viable solution to building community capacity for food security.

5.2.

Enhanced social inclusion

In addition to its contribution to local food, there is evidence to show that the Growing Together Initiative is providing necessary opportunities and conditions for enhanced community engagement and social inclusion in Ravenswood.

18

The number of participants was reported to gradually increase as the Initiative rolled out. “It’s looking really good now, like there were about 8 fellas out there yesterday getting stuck into it, which was really good” (Volunteer 1-F-P1). Once attracted to the growing practices, the participants tended to involve others in their network as well, thus extending the Initiative participation in various ways. “Terry the volunteer who heads up the garden at Munson street just loves it and he’s addicted to it and he’s got 2 young boys about 21 who are quite happy to work with him and they come without fail” (Coordinator 3-F-P1). Particularly, individuals who were once socially isolated now had good reasons and renewed urges to connect with other community members. The following comments offer interesting illustrations for their willingness to re-engage themselves in the community. I get out a bit more, en that, you know. Like because I’m schizophrenic en that. Like I used to lock myself in the house all the time … It’s beast paranoia (Volunteer 9-M-P1) It gets me out, gives me something to do – having depression for the last couple of years, it’s been good to get out and have something to do- something to focus on (Volunteer 2M-P2) She actually came on down to the neighbourhood house and asked for some produce. She didn’t want to engage in conversation too much but she actually knew that from the pop up Barbeque, even though it wasn’t a positive experience for her she realized that the neighbourhood is there and we do have food and that is something she could actually tap into. And knowing this lady in the community for quite a while it was a huge step for her to walk through those doors. (Coordinator 2-F-P1) Most significant change I suffered badly with depression so I was practically locked up in the house for nearly 4 years and it was only through here that I managed to come down and meet a couple of people- then I’d sort of run home and was in bed- now I come down every day- I’m mister meet and greet- my little job is to meet people coming through the door… I couldn’t talk like this 2 or 3 years ago- you wouldn’t get a word out of me – now you sort of can’t stop me talking (Volunteer 3-M-P2) I just love this project- I love everything about it – I love how the volunteers are so passionate about what they do and how much they’ve grown and we’ve got older ones working with younger ones and they’re sharing their skills and for a couple of people it’s just changed their lives around really .. eg a bloke who was depressed and now he’s just

19

flying and another young girl who every time I see her says “oh you need to help me with seedlings” and she just….it’s been fairly good! (Coordinator 3-F-P1) Some participants acknowledged that old relationships were rekindled and new relationships were established through the process of working and sharing with each other. As noted by Volunteer 1-F-P1, “Getting to know my neighbours a lot better… I mean the social aspect of that. Um, I didn’t know this neighbour here, and I didn’t know this one over here but we’ve sorta come together now. If I’ve got lettuces or something that just sprung up I’ll take em over there and she’ll give me eggs that she’s just got off the farm, so it’s great!” Aspects of social inclusion were also realized through the sharing of ideas and experiences in growing vegetables, eventually leading to extended social relationships. The manifestations of enhanced interaction and social inclusion are particularly clear in the following comments. The neighbours are loving it! cause we have so much … We got heaps of corn so quite a few neighbours come to visit (Volunteer 1-F-P1) Mr. Brewer, across the road he already has a garden and um so he’s already into it and he gives me a hand with a few ideas every now and again… You wind up sort of going from being an individual to a small group of people, people that you know. (Volunteer 2M-P1) We do have a friend out at St Leonards- we got her involved in the program and she still grows beans, tomatoes- we’re over there pretty regularly- it would actually be nice to have a little growers group. I take any excess produce into Neighbourhood house where it’s given away (Volunteer 2-M-P2) Places like when you go out to St. Leonards and there’s five units and four of the units are sharing a strip of what was building rubble and growing veggies and the kids are getting involved and one mum who knows nothing about it she does child minding while the others do the weeding and so it’s become one of the catalyst for them to be a tight knit community and that’s a fantastic thing that’s happening. The community, I always find our community to be constantly astonishing and embracing of opportunities and always willing to work with each other and they can share…we have one woman who is older and I only noticed occasionally and she sneaks in literally with a bag of tomatoes and she sneaks it on to the bench then rushes out. And she won’t let me catch her, she won’t let me talk to her but she provides fresh food to our community during tomato season. So people involve themselves to the level they feel comfortable and that is a subject of great pleasure and joy. (Coordinator 1-F-P1) 20

The effectiveness of this Initiative was also displayed through the explicitly expressed eagerness of the participants to expand its scope and nature to various degrees. A number of innovative ideas were reportedly generated as a result of the Initiative in an effort to engage people cross community towards consuming a healthier and fresher diet. This eagerness can be seen in the comments below. So I’ve done the planning and all that and we’re hoping to get a bus shelter with a seat so when people get tired they can go there and have a sit down and a bit of a natter- we’re looking at a portable barbeque we can take in there and have a cook up and we can have a barbie while they’re talking about the gardens. We’ve got quite a few people who are interested in coming including a couple of aboriginal people who are interested in bush tucker and that’s a part of my gardening that I don’t know about. We’ve got a gent comes in here who’s offered to take me out bush and show me a lot of the bush tucker that Aborigines used to use also a lot of them can’t be transplanted to an urban garden- they only survive in the bush – but the ones that can he’s going to try to get some of his people to come along and grow them in our area and show us how they do it and we want to show them what we do… To me this is reconciliation in gardening and it’s just a chance to get to know each other better and our ways and our cultures. I know a lot of them live like us but they are not like us- they have their own ways of doing things and we’d like to tap into that and find out about some of their thoughts (Volunteer 3-M-P2) That’s what they’re doing- seed sharing- people bought tomato plants in and some mix and they’re doing seed sharing and seedling sharing and they’re discussing different ways of doing things on the cheap like pest control, cutting out the tops of their milk cartons and keeping snails out and things like that.. it’s fantastic….. (Coordinator 2-F-P2) The vivid stories from the participants clearly indicated that all of these activities would continue to grow with more and more people getting interested in and willing to get started. For example, it was a story about an 85 year-old lady in Waverley who offered a piece of garden in lovely condition with good soil to the program (Coordinator 3-F-P1). Some other residents who used to receive fresh produce from their neighbours now showed their willingness to start planting themselves. “We’ve now got more people than ever with planter boxes in their backyard- they’re either a half a metre squared or a metre by a half a metre and they’re growing vegetables in them so they can have something fresh…they want to try to grow them instead of just picking them up.” (Volunteer 3-M-P2) The finding from this evaluation study has revealed another positive impact of this Initiative with respect to the enhancement of social inclusion, and thus the facilitation of food security. This 21

finding is strongly supported by the literature. Other researchers such as Buchmann (2009), Freeman, Dickinson, Porter, and Van Heezik (2012), or Zahina-Ramos (2013) also emphasised the socially-oriented aspect of home gardening initiatives. Throughout the interviews echoed the stories of how such growing practices have promoted community social relations, strengthening bonds among family members and neighbours, creating new relationships, and bringing otherwise strangers and isolated individuals together. This effect would have been expected by the Initiative organizers, but it seems to grow bigger than they could have imagined. As commented by Coordinator 2-F-P2, “You don’t very often get such a huge response across all our service area - it’s Ravenswood, and Waverley.” This is particularly meaningful to communities in Tasmania, who are reported (Adams, 2009) to be more vulnerable to isolation and exclusion. In the more socially isolated areas as that of Ravenswood, which is famous for antisocial behaviours, it also means “breaking down the barrier” (Coordinator 2-F-P1) and a conceivable increase in socially acceptable behaviours. Such an effect on social inclusion and community participation is prompted the continuation and expansion of similar programs to Growing Together Initiative.

5.3.

Extended skills, knowledge and interest

As suggested by the findings, the Initiative has also created opportunities for the extension of knowledge and skills among community members through both formal training and informal exchanging of ideas. “The actual seed raising, the seed planting because some seeds are planted straight into the ground like beetroot …how and when to water so not to rot or kill the plant… to spray, not jets of water… the raising, the watering, how to look after them… even preparation and cooking.” (Volunteer 3-M-P2) The interviewed participants were willing to share all of the new things that they had gained while investing their time and effort into this growing project. Many emphasized the building of the knowledge base about seedlings, different species, how to deal with the changing seasons, fertilizers, etc. which renders them more excited in managing their own gardens. A lot of strategies we knew about the planting and what have you... ideal harvest times, and sort of things like that and, what to do after the harvest, and things of that nature. It’s all these little things that you don’t know that all of a sudden pop up. (Volunteer 2M-P1) The stories from some participants were indicative of another benefit of this Initiative in fostering the confidence of individual members in skill and knowledge development. As Coordinator 2-F-P1 shared, “We forget that some people don’t get positive reinforcement in their 22

life and they’re used to failing because everyone tells them they are a failure. So to grow one thing successfully is a huge milestone because I can do something, look! I’ve done this, this is me. And I’m not useless, I can do something.” Some even felt the need to further self-study to grow better and others found excitement in collecting their own produce. There was a strong indication of increasing interest in home gardening and self-esteem as a result of the Initiative. I’ve got some gardening books lying around and, I just sort of flick through when um, ah, just go down to the nursery, buy a new plant, have a bit of a look, and then generally don’t do any more research than the couple of books that we’ve got, but I’m now having to sort of expand that knowledge base out to other things. At the moment we’ve got a big wasp nest in the backyard so looking for practical ways of getting rid of those without trying to use too many poisons and what have you. (Volunteer 2-M-P1) Most significant change It’s about in this case, an individual, who’s never done this stuff before. Had a go, produced a beautiful plant, very proud of it, and given him that sense of purpose... he takes us round the back of his house and he’s got this one tomato plant growing in a pot. And like he showed it to us, he talked about this and he was so proud of this one plant. That was his veggie plot, you know! And it was great for me because he was obviously a single bloke, living by himself, and that was his first go at growing anything. And quite rightly, why would you have a huge garden necessarily if it’s just you. He probably said to one of the volunteers, “look, I just want to start small”. But for me it was so enlightening to see him looking at this one plant and saying, “This is what it is about for me, look at this, isn’t it good!” (Coordinator 2-F-P1) The participants learned not only about growing vegetables but also about preparing, cooking and preserving food for later use. “People want to know how to cook things …with vegetarian food…And they’re quite intrigued by that.”(Coordinator 1-F-P1) A change of eating habits towards more healthy food was also reported by some participants. For example, Volunteer 7-FP1 noted, “I’ve learn the value of eating your own vegies. Um, I now eat more vegetables.” As indicated throughout the interviews, the Initiative has more or less enabled participating families to increase the diversity and variety of their diets with new healthy foods being introduced into their daily meals. The following comments illustrate this point. With the amounts of produce we actually got was probably the biggest problem; we couldn’t get through it all! And I mean you give so much away, en then you’ve still

23

got…and so now we’re looking at saving some jars and learning how to make pickles and relish and all this other stuff now (Volunteer 2-M-P1) We had one of our community members who come in regularly and he came in with much pride and said he had learnt to cook it! A single man too. (Coordinator 3-F-P1) One of the great things about this is that it’s introducing different forms of a staple food which is bread, different ways of eating bread to a community that has probably never had that exposure before. They’ve got things like Vietnamese mint and thyme and things and they’re not used to herbs. So once they get to know what an explosion you can have with herbs in your food, you don’t need salt and you don’t need fat, you know you can have it with fresh herbs that are strait out of your garden and the flavour…And I think that’s fascinating…And people in the community are talking about this bread. Now it’s not for everybody obviously but the people that have got it just love it. (Coordinator 1-FP1) In addition, the transfer and application of knowledge and skills between generations and individuals were clearly felt and highlighted by the participants. According to some home gardeners, a sense of familial inclusion was fostered when parents and children were involved at their own will in learning how to grow, and how to prepare their own healthy meals. “Well the kids really enjoy it… The kids have certainly been trying things, different recipes, en that sort of thing.” (Volunteer 2-M-P1) This increased interest and involvement on the part of the kids or the younger members of the community in fresher and healthier diets appears to be a welcome effect of the Initiative. The appreciation on the part of the interview participants can be seen in the following comments. Ryan, one of my middle sons, he’ll just loves going out to the back yard and picking whatever’s available, and he’ll just eat it right there and then, loves it, loves it! (Volunteer 1-F-P1) Um, it’s helped my son to learn things about the garden as well, and help me out a little bit. (Volunteer 7-F-P1) Probably given us and the kids something to go out and look at together, sort of thing. See how it’s going. Kids did the little plants out the front here. (Volunteer 4-M-P1) Most significant change 3 kids –the oldest 2 aren’t that interested (16 & 17) – the 7 year old has taken a real interest, particularly harvest time and planting time – the actual maintenance he’s not so 24

interested - there is a garden at his school Invermay primary- we’ve been along to a couple of working bees there- we’ve also got him to paint up some little markers for the plants … It’s been good getting the kids outside- getting them out to do little jobs such as weeding – even the 17 year old will get out on occasion – gets them off the computer… and there’s a change in diet too… kids especially youngest started eating more veggiesparticularly over the summer, berries and a whole lot of lettuce, easier and cheaper to do healthy cooking, have been harvesting the produce (Volunteer 2-M-P2) Evidence from the study shows that the Initiative has been successful in extending the knowledge, skills, and interests among the local residents in growing their own vegetables. On the part of project coordination, it was initially a challenge to arouse people’s interest and get them involved in project activity. As indicated by the focus groups participants, “People love to see a garden, but to get in to do it with the people, they back off”. However, as the program progressed to a later stage, the initial doubts and reservations among the local residents have given way to emerging interests and hence increasing eagerness to be a part of the program. This could be a very encouraging finding for the ambition to bring this current initiative to the next stage with a larger scope. Once a proportion of the community have acquired the necessary knowledge and skills as well as developed necessary commitment, they will become champions for this home growing practice by transferring that knowledge and skill base to others in the community. While there are thousands of backyard gardens waiting to be tapped into, individual programs will not be able to do the job. It is necessary to harness concerted efforts from those champions in a community-based framework to promote and extend the target activities throughout the state. As a case in point, the second phase of the Initiative has witnessed the spread from home gardening to community gardening with the introduction of the Pioneer Parade with plots that people can have for themselves. This can only be possible with the increasing knowledge base, interest and commitment among the local residents.

5.4.

Strategic partnerships

Apart from the three main impacts as discussed above, the opportunities to establish and strengthen networks between community groups and individuals were highlighted as an important achievement of the Initiative. The city council, community houses, schools, clubs and even small businesses were reported to contribute at some level to the Initiative, with a view to extending its current activities and reach. The partnerships and collaborations that have been built are reflected in the comments below.

25

We’ve been lucky enough –if we can show that Pioneer parade is going ahead-that’s just a matter of getting the rocks up there… then asking the Lions club of Kings meadows to come over -they are going to give a donation of $2000 and that will do a lot of the infrastructure and the grant we’ve got will help to cover things like cartage and all the other bits and pieces. By doing a bit more fund raising and things like that we’re able to save money that can go into plants. I’ve got a hothouse at home that was started by the greens and finished by my brother and I and I now I’m propagating seeds for the garden and it doesn’t matter which one it goes to as long as it goes (Volunteer 3-M-P2) We’ve planted tomatoes at the school. So yesterday I replanted the tomatoes from the school and they’re all out front for sale. And people that want new gardens I go and talk to them and find out what it is that they want and see what we can do in response….. Perhaps it’s because they’re seeing the produce coming in-we saw 2 young mums who came in this morning and were quite excited about the concept of tomato plants. (Coordinator 3-F-P1) Now this is a bloke who runs the Black Stallion Pub and he’s a bloke to make money and he’s a bit of a lad and he’s heard that we do gardens and he wants to be on our good side because he’s a bit bolshy and he wants us to have a garden. Did we want to open a café in his pub? I want to sell him the vegetables from his land into his pub garden in the hopes that he might have healthy counter meals that might bring people up to Ravenswood who don’t come here, you know, so there’s a whole social inclusion prospect. (Coordinator 1-F-P1) Most significant change Pioneer Parade is up and running- in an area known for antisocial behaviour, criminal activity and had multiple buildings arson attacked and a murder… so we wanted to do something nice up there just to change people’s ideas of what Pioneer parade is – so we decided to put a community garden in there and it’s taken a little bit of time but it’s all starting to happen now and that’s thanks to having partners like Launceston City Council who’s putting rocks in there, Community housing who’s given us the land. We’re working with Launceston Lions Club about a few dollars to help us with the sleepers and the dirt, and Cape Hope-we’ve been in negotiation with them about a small $10,000 grant just to keep things ticking over … Absolutely because it’s such a great initiative and the community love it – the backyard veggie boxes and things like that- funding is running out and we are still getting requests so we are looking at ways to keeping it going ….requests for more plants or more soil and for more gardens from other people (as they see that 26

someone else has a garden). So we just got to keep this going past the grant and evidently have to and we’ve got some amazing volunteers that go up and set it all up and everything and who’s just about to start their Horticulture 2 certificate. so we got to keep it going (Coordinator 2-F-P2) As evidenced from the findings, the Initiative started on a relatively limited scale, but has been constantly expanding with the collaboration and support from various parties and individuals. Provided that government funding for such activities are usually restricted to a certain period of time, it is essential to secure more sustainable support and resources from a variety of organizations, communities and individuals. It is believed that broader and more strategic partnerships will help established further activity in various areas in Tasmania towards the common aim of revitalizing the local food system through such activities as home and community gardening and hence boosting the state’s food security capacity.

5.5.

Challenges and barriers

Apart from the positive changes brought about by the Growing Together Initiative, the interviewed participants also detailed some of the challenges they encountered during the whole program. Firstly, a lack of human resources was reported to be a big challenge. As noted by a coordinator, “The challenge is really getting that resource of those people who are prepared to do that, are happy to do that”. The fact is that many activities of the program relied heavily on the availability of volunteers whose participation and commitment were unfortunately not always guaranteed. Look at times you get quite frustrated. At times we’ve needed muscle, muscular men really because it’s turned out where we thought people would provide their own labour …that hasn’t always happened. We had a dreamy thing happen where a couple of young lads who are amongst the most remarkable, physical workers I think we’ve seen, at all, um, reliable, resilient and fantastic with people in a very beautiful, iconic, Australian way …provided innumerable starts on gardens with the rotary hoeing and the digging where no man wanted to go. We have lost them to employment…which is great story too (Coordinator 1-F-P1) The lack of helping staff seemed to have led to other challenges on the part of the home gardeners. Because most of the participants had little experience in growing their own food, they encountered some initial difficulties in getting their gardens ready and maintaining a good condition for their vegetables. In addition, some experienced time constraints when there were 27

other priorities in their daily life. An example was the case of a mum with 8 children who could not extend her garden albeit her desire to do so (Coordinator 3-F-P1). For those reasons, the participating gardeners expected to have greater initial support and more frequent on-going assistance during the whole growing reason. There hasn’t been quite enough contact. En, sort of like that direction you need. I mean there’s also things like….composting and things like that, you sort of have to do your own research and try and get it to work. Um…whereas a little bit of guidance would probably be a bigger assistance. I suppose with most gardening its getting that groundwork and the foundation of it right, once you have that and, um, a reasonable knowledge base ah, and the hard landscaping done you can pretty much go at it. (Volunteer 2-M-P1) The participants also faced a number of difficulties that any gardener may have encountered in their growing endeavours, especially in the northern part of Tasmania, such as weeds, bad soil, and inefficient watering system, threats from cattle and snail, or cold weather. Some typical barriers can be seen in the following comments. We have such a horrible watering system. We were connecting 3 or 4 hoses together and trying to keep the water on it, so the only thing was, they were explaining bout all that to me about how to keep the water onto it efficiently and that and um…I wasn’t doing it correctly so we had a little bit of loss but not too major. (Volunteer 1-F-P1) Unfortunately some of the soil that was given had a lot of grass seed and weed already in it. So even though you sort of turned it through, it didn’t take very long for all the weeds to start coming up amongst all the seedlings… It doesn’t help with the cattle getting out and eating everything either...the backyards got large divots in it, now ah, gonna have to fill it all up. All the corn got eaten; um….the fruit trees out the front were eaten. And a….the little ornamental, the flowering cherry out the fronts been stripped as well... (Volunteer 2-M-P1) Getting out and actually pulling some weeds in these horrible winter months. Yes, bit of a challenge... And snails, big tiger snails. (Volunteer 8-F-P1) Growing lettuces with snails around. I tell you what; if they had long enough necks I’d strangle them (Volunteer 7-F-P1) Up here we try and water every second day at least… tend to have to wait to put things in because the frosts up here tend to get heavy as compared to say down in Invermay (Volunteer 2-M-P2) 28

A better understanding of the challenges and barriers to all of the involved parties would lead to better-informed decisions regarding the management and coordination of the initiative.

5.6.

Suggestions for improvement

On the basis of their lived experience and observations, the interviewed participants suggested a number of ways to help the program better achieve its objectives. According to some gardeners, to increase the variety of healthy fresh food, the types of seedlings should be extended to include fruits as well. “The only thing I would suggest is some fruit…ya know, strawberries or blah, blah, blah, the fruit aspect of it.” (Volunteer 1-F-P1) In addition, more guidance regarding healthy recipes should be provided to community members. For example, Volunteer 3-M-P1 recommended the involvement of a food educator and Volunteer 2M-P1 suggested the organization of a practical workshop regarding cooking recipes and methods. Similar suggestions with some elaboration on their rationale can be found in the following comments. It’s just like with the Zucchinis … and like squashes, I didn’t know what to do with them or how to cook them or anything like that, so I just gave all them away to all my neighbours. So that is actually a good idea, like, what you can do with ‘em and what you can put them in and yeah, that’s a great idea! (Volunteer 1-F-P1) The produce that comes into the neighbourhood house is just sitting out and people can come in and just grab what they need. And sometimes when people are doing it a bit tough they want emergency relief and we say, well grab these vegetables here, making the assumption that they know what to do with it. And Jen and I had a person come in and said I actually found out what to do with broccoli after about a week and a half. So having the recipes with them and teaching people how to use the produce. I mean, a lot of people will look at an eggplant or, an avocado because they don’t know how to do it. So spending some time on that aspect of it is probably the next stage (Coordinator 2-F-P1) In terms of program introduction and promotion, it was suggested that a more efficient approach should be employed to attract more participants in the local areas. The role of promotion was particularly emphasized. “Promotion is everything. If you don’t promote, people don’t know. If people don’t know, you’ll never get them to join anything, do anything or help with anything” (Volunteer 3-M-P1). Specifically, approaches to local residents should be more personalized and there is a need for more attention to details and local detailed knowledge.

29

It was like that pop up Barbeque which didn’t work because it was not advertised properly. That was poor, I mean somebody trying to ring around here, trying to get people to come up here on the day! And most of em weren’t at home! You know, so that’s, that’s, that’s absolutely no good (Volunteer 3-M-P1) It’s knowing the community, looking at their fences, seeing where the garden should be put in. Um, what needs direct full sunlight and what can be planted in the shade. (Volunteer 3-M-P1) If I go, I knock on doors. Leafleting is not enough. Letter boxing won’t do it…You actually, literally have to go and knock on the doors of the community and in a very warm invite… (Coordinator 1-F-P1) Additional suggestions were made on how to make gardening a more positive experience and productive effort for the participants. Particularly, the ideas of tapping into the group of existing home gardeners and co-gardening have been proposed as a viable way to pool resources, knowledge and skills. For those who do not have large private gardens, it was recommended that public space be provided to encourage and foster their interest in growing produce. The two neighbours could go together and do it together in one neighbour’s backyard. Share it, share farming. Now that is something we could definitely look at! One bloke will say, “I’m going to take it from there to there, you grow what you want, I’ll grow what I want and if I have too much and you have too much we’ll swap”. Now that is important too because instead of just one bloke having a garden and another bloke hanging over the fence drooling, you’ve got ‘em both together. That becomes better neighbours. (Volunteer 3-M-P1) A lot of people in Ravenswood are doing their own gardens. We could target these people for excess produce or provide seedlings to them. (FG) The little ones are not successful even if they are in their own home. Need public space where people can put in their own plants. (FG) Most of these suggestions were made in the first phase of the initiative and they were taken seriously by the program coordinators as well as the participating members. As a response to these suggestions, attempts have been made towards the end of the second phase with joint efforts in extending the variety of seedlings, diversifying promotion methods, and incorporating the concept of co-gardening through the up-coming introduction of the Pioneer Parade. The responsiveness to constructive feedback, the promptness in action, and the resourcefulness of all 30

involved parties are believed to guarantee that the initiative will maintain its current momentum beyond the funding.

6.

Recommendations

On the basis of the evaluation findings, the following recommendations have been developed with a view to increasing the effectiveness of similar initiatives in the future: 1.

Promote and market the benefits of the initiative

A strong focus on the social and economic benefits of the Initiative need to be communicated to participants, project staff and volunteers in all phases of the project activities. Such an approach would ensure greater buy in and commitment from all parties especially in attracting residents to the pop-up barbecues as well as recruiting participants for the backyard vegetable plots. Valuable lessons have also been learnt as to how to approach and engage local people in the target initiative. It is recommended that local knowledge be used to inform the development of appropriate promotion strategies in order to ensure higher community involvement. 2.

Expand the Initiative in both scope and nature

The Initiative has shown to have positive impacts on local food security, especially in terms of improved supply of and access to healthy fresh food; enhanced social inclusion; and extended skills, knowledge and interest. Opportunities exist to build an educative component into the Initiative that teaches participants to not only grow produce but to also prepare, cook and present the produce for consumption. Opportunities exist for expanding the Initiative to include the propagation of seedlings, growing of fruit and other fresh produce as well as the production and or distribution of information about the different aspects of growing vegetables. It is therefore recommended that continuing efforts will be put into expanding the Initiative. 3.

Regular contact and mutual support among participating members

Participants who had worked with project staff to establish gardens on their blocks expected that there may have been more frequent contact and support from both project staff/volunteers and other participants. This expectation is understandable as many residents may have little experience in maintaining their own their garden. While a lack of human resources was a constant challenge, it would be hard to rely only on a few champions for support. For this reason, it is suggested that plans be put in place to create more opportunities for interaction both between participants and project staff/volunteers and, importantly, amongst participants. Such activities would encourage mutual support among participating members themselves and provide back up support when adequate support is not available through project staff and volunteers. 31

4.

Involve local community champions

The evaluation revealed that there was a strong level of interest, enthusiasm and in some cases knowledge about backyard vegetable production amongst one or two of the participants. There are real opportunities to engage these individuals in more resourceful ways within the community to promote and support the initiative. Such an approach would not only encourage greater engagement by the community in the Initiative but would also build local capacity for future activities. It is recommended that project staff create a resource bank of local champions who may be able to play a more active role, such as mentors, in future endeavours. 5.

Strengthen the partnership framework

To address community issues such as that of food security, an inclusive approach is essential to guarantee the sustainability of the target activities. The evaluation study has demonstrated the possibility as well as benefits of involving various organizations, groups, and individuals in the Initiative through partnership arrangements. For this reason, it is suggested that innovative ways are explored in building and strengthening the partnership framework among stakeholders who share the same interest in building community capacity for food security. These partnerships could expand to include organisations such as NRM (North) that supply technical advice on soil quality, biodiversity and irrigation requirements. 6.

Pooling/sharing of resources

An inherent limitation of all funded projects is they are often not financially sustainable. There is much to be gained in sharing resources, knowledge and skills with other communities conducting similar initiatives. Such approaches not only lead to greater efficiencies but also help secure extra funding for the expansion of the Initiative. Pooling of resources and/or sharing of knowledge has proved to be a wise solution, which helps maintain the financial viability of the Initiative and at the same time increase community engagement and participation and increase leverage for future funding.

32

References ABS. (2011, 19 December 2014). Census for a brighter future Retrieved 10 December, 2014, from http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/census?opendocument&navpos =10 Adams, D. (2009). A Social Inclusion Strategy for Tasmania. Tasmania. AIHW. (2010). Australia's Health 2010 - The twelfth biennial health report of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Retrieved 20 September, 2011, from www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=6442452962 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), 94101. Allen, P., Van Dusen, D., Lundy, J., & Gliessman. (1991). Integrating social, environmental, and economic issues in sustainable agriculture. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 6(1), 34-39. Andrée, P., Dibden, J., Higgins, V., & Cocklin, C. (2010). Competitive productivism and Australia's emerging 'Alternative' Agri-food Networks: producing for farmers markets in Victoria and beyond. Australian Goegrapher, 41(3), 307-322. Apparicio, P., Cloutier, M. S., & Shearmur, R. (2007). The case of Montreal's missing food deserts: Evaluation of accessibility to food supermarkets. International Journal of Health Geographics, 6, -. doi: Artn 4 Doi 10.1186/1476-072x-6-4 Azuma, A. M., Gilliland, S., Vallianatos, M., & Gottlieb, R. (2010). Food Access, Availability, and Affordability in 3 Los Angeles Communities, Project CAFE, 2004-2006. Preventing Chronic Disease, 7(2), 1-9. Barrett, C. B. (2010). Measuring Food Insecurity. Science, 327, 825-828. Buchmann, C. (2009). Cuban home gardens and their role in socialecological resilience. Human Ecology: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental Psychology, 37(6), 17. Burns, C. (2004). A review of the literature describing the link between poverty, food insecurity and obesity with specific reference to Australia. Victoria: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. Burns, C., Jones, S. J., & Frongillo, E. A. (2010). Poverty, household food insecurity and obesity in children. Preventing Childhood Obesity: Evidence Policy and Practice, 16, 129-137. Burns, C. M., Gibbon, B., Boak, R., Baudinette, S., & Dunbar, J. A. (2004). Food cost and availability in a rural setting in Australia. Rural and Remote Health, 4(311). Byers, K. (2009). The psycho-social benefits of backyard and community gardening among immigrants. Masters, University of Georgia. 33

Cabalda, A. B., Rayco-Solon, P., Solon, J. A. A., & Solon, F. S. (2011). Home gardening is associated with Filipino preschool children’s dietary diversity. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 111(5), 5. Cameron, A. (2007). Farmers markets as small business incubators and safety nets: Evidence from New Zealand International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research Policy, 13(6), 367-379. Connelly, S., Markey, S., & Roseland, M. (2011). Bridging sustainability and the social economy: Achieving community transformation through local food initiatives. Critical Social Policy 31(2), 308-324. Davies, R., & Dart, J. (2005). Most Significant Change Retrieved 23 June, 2011, from http://mostsignificantchange.org/page.php?open=msc-about-us Department of Health and Human Services. (2007). Tasmania's Health Plan Tasmania: Department of Health and Human Services. Department of Health and Human Services. (2008). Health indicators - Tasmania 2008. Tasmania: Epidemiology unit, Population Health, Department of Health and Human Services. DHS. (2007). Victorian population health survey 2006: selected findings. Melbourne: Victorian Government Department of Human Services, Melbourne, Victoria. Dickinson, J., Duma, S., Paulsen, H., Rilveria, L., Twiss, J., & Weinman, T. (2003). Community gardens: lessons learned from California healthy cities and communities. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1435-1438. DPaC. (n.d.). Food for all Tasmanians Grants Program Retrieved 20 May, 2013, from http://www.dpac.tas.gov.au/divisions/siu/grants/food_for_all_tasmanians_grants_progra m Duell, R. (2013). Is ‘local food’ sustainable? Localism, social justice, equity and sustainable food futures New Zealand Sociology 28(4), 123-144. EWT. (2009). Tasmania's School and Community Gardens. Retrieved 11 July 2011, from Eat Well Tasmania http://www.eatwelltas.org.au/gardencommunity.php Faist, M., Kytzia, S., & Baccini, P. (2001). The impact of household food consumption on resources and energy management. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 15(2), 183-199. FAO. (1996). Rome Declaration on World Food Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action. Rome. Feenstra, G. (1997). Local food systems and sustainable communities American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 12(1), 28-36. Flanagan, K. (2007). Dropped from the moon: The settlement experiences of refugee communities in Tasmania. Hobart: Social Action and Research Center, Anglicare Tasmania Flanagan, K. (2010a). Hard times: Tasmanians in financial crisis. Hobart: Tasmania Anglicare. 34

Flanagan, K. (2010b). Hard times: Tasmanians in financial crisis. Hobart: Tasmania Anglicare. Freeman, C., Dickinson, K. J. M., Porter, S., & Van Heezik, Y. (2012). “My garden is an expression of me”: Exploring householder’s relationships with their gardens. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32, 135-143. Gasteyer, S., Hultine, S., Cooperband, L., & Curry, P. (2008). Produce sections, town squares, and farm stands: Comparing local food systems in community context. Southern Rural Sociology, 23(1), 47-71. Gaynor, A. (2006). Harvest of the suburbs: an environmental history of growing food in Australian cities. Crawley: University of Western Australia Press. Ghosh, S. (2010). Sustainability potential of suburban gardens: review and new directions. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 17(3), 165-175. Ghosh, S. (2014). Measuring sustainability performance of local food production in home gardens. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 19(1), 33-55. Gray, L., Guzman, K., Glowa, M., & Drevno, A. G. (2013). Can home gardens scale up into movements for social change? The role of home gardens in providing food security and community change in San Jose, California. . Local Environment 1-17. Guthrie, J. G., A.; Lawson, R. & Cameron, A. (2006). Farmers' markets: the small business counter-revolution in food production and retailing. British Food Journal, 108(7), 560573. Halweil, B. (2002). Home grown: the case for local food in a global market. Washington DC: World Watch Institute. Herzfeld, M. (2004). Eat Well Tasmania - Annual report. Januray 2004 to December 2004 Hobart: Eat Well Tasmania. Jarosz, L. (2000). Understanding Agri-food Networks as Social Relations. Agriculture and Human Values, 17(3), 279-283. Kortright, R., & Wakefield, S. (2011). Edible backyards: a qualitative study of household food growing and its contributions to food security. Agriculture Humanity Values 28, 39-53. Lockie, S., & Pietsch, J. (2012). Public opinion on food security Retrieved June, 2014, from http://lyceum.anu.edu.au/wp-content/blogs/3/uploads//Food%20Security_Poll.pdf Madden, K. (2003). Blue collared: The shrinking world of work in Tasmania. Hobart: Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania. Madden, K. (2004). Bread and Board: when the basics break the budget. Hobart: Social Action and Research Centre, Anglicare Tasmania. Madden, K., & Law, M. (2005). The Tasmanian community survey: Finacial hardship. Tasmania: Tasmanian Anglicare. McCluskey, K. (2009). Food security in Moreland: A needs assessment. Melbourne: Merri Community Health Services. 35

Nijmeijer, M., Worsley, W., & Astill, B. (2004). An exploration of the relationships between food lifestyle and vegetable consumption. British Food Journal, 106(7), 520-533. NSW Health. (2002). New South Wales Child Health Survey 2001 Retrieved 20 September, 2011, from http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/pubs/2002/pdf/nswchildhealthsurvey.pdf NSW Health. (2003). Food Security Options Paper: A planning framework and menu of options from policy and practice interventions Retrieved 22 December, 2014, from http://sydney.edu.au/science/molecular_bioscience/cphn/pdfs/food_security.pdf Okvat, H. A., & Zautra, A. J. (2011). Community gardening: A parsimonious path to individual, community and environmental resilience. American Journal of Community Psychology, 47, 374-387. PMSEIC. (2010). Australia and Food Security in a Changing World. Canberra, Australia: The Prime Minister’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council. Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Boston: Sage. Rychetnik, L., Webb, K., Story, L., & Katz, T. (2003). Food Security Options Paper: A food security planning framework: A menu of options for policy and planning interventions: NSW Centre for Public Health Nutrition, NSW. Second Bite. (2011). Food Rescue - A Fresh Approach. Report 1 : The social and nutritional impact of fresh rescued food on Victorian community meal programs and their clients Retrieved 20 September, 2011, from http://secondbite.org/sites/default/files/2011SecondBiteAFreshApproachReport_1_EMAI LVERSION.pdf Sonntag, V. (2008). Why local linkages matter; findings from the local food economy study. Seattle, WA: Sustainable Seattle. TFSC (Tasmanian Food Security Council). (2012). Food for all Tasmanians – A food security strategy Retrieved 20 May, 2013, from http://www.dpac.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/159476/Food_for_all_Tasmanian s_-_A_food_Security_Strategy.PDF VicHealth. (2005). Healthy Eating - Food Security. Investment Plan 2005-2010. Melbourne: VicHealth. VicHealth. (2007). Food Security Fact Sheet. Melbourne: VicHealth. Wakefield, S., Yeudall, F., Taron, C., Reynolds, J., & Skinner, A. (2007). Growing urban health: community gardening in South-East Toronto Health Promotion International, 22(2), 92101. Wise, P. (2014). Grow your own - The potential value and impacts of residential and community food gardening: Policy Brief No. 59. Zahina-Ramos, J. G. (2013). Attitudes and perspectives about backyard food gardening: A case study in South Florida Doctor of Philosophy, Florida Atlantic University, Florida.

36

Appendix Food Security – Growing Together Initiative STORY PROFORMA Title of the story (optional): ……………………………………………………………. Confidentiality We may like to use your story for reporting to our funders, or sharing with other people working on similar programs in Tasmania and interstate. Do you (The story teller): Want to have your name on the story? Yes…… No……… Consent to us using your story for publication? Yes….. No……… Person collecting the story (if told to a researcher): …………………………………………………………………………………………… Name of person telling the story: ………………………………………………………. Position: ……………………………………………… Location: ……………………. Date: ……………………………………………………………………………………. Researcher use Domain:  local food access  Social inclusion  Improve local skill and knowledge base

1. Tell us about how you became involved in the Food Security - Growing Together Initiative project:

37

2. What has happened since you have become involved in the Food Security - Growing Together Initiative project? This may include any changes you have seen or experienced yourself. Please try and tell this in the form of a story:

3. Have there been any challenges (or difficulties you have experienced regarding your involvement with the project)?

4. For you- what do you think is the most significant change you have experienced or observed? (Can you name one thing that has changed for you since using or becoming involved in the Growing Together Initiative project) Please try and tell this in the form of a story:

Signature:

38