Community gardens function as essential social infrastructure, analysis suggests

A new review published in Current Opinion in Psychology suggests that community gardens function as vital social infrastructure that contributes significantly to individual and collective health. The analysis indicates that these shared green spaces foster psychological well-being, strengthen social connections, and promote civic engagement by cultivating specific forms of social capital.

Many modern societies are currently experiencing a period of transformation defined by profound challenges. These challenges include widespread social isolation, political polarization, and a decline in public trust. While community gardens are frequently established to improve neighborhood aesthetics or provide fresh food, the authors of this study argue that these goals often obscure a more profound impact.

The researchers sought to bridge the gap between the practical experience of garden-based community building and the theoretical understanding of how these bonds are formed. They aimed to provide a comprehensive explanation for how shared gardening activities transform into community resilience.

“Community gardens are often praised for producing food or beautifying neighborhoods, but those explanations felt incomplete. In my real-world experience with the Community Ecology Institute and beyond, gardens consistently function as places where trust, cooperation, and a sense of shared responsibility emerge—often among people who might not otherwise connect,” said first author Chiara D’Amore, the executive director of the Community Ecology Institute.

“At the same time, much of the research treated these outcomes as secondary or incidental. This study was motivated by a gap between practice and theory: we lacked a clear psychological explanation for how community gardens build social capital and why those relationships matter for individual and community well-being. The article brings together psychological theory and on-the-ground evidence to make those mechanisms more visible and legible.”

The authors synthesize findings from 50 studies published over the past decade to examine the social benefits of community gardens. They frame their analysis using social capital theory, specifically the framework established by Aldrich and Meyer. This framework identifies three distinct types of social capital that enable communities to engage in cooperative behavior. These are bonding social capital, bridging social capital, and linking social capital.

Bonding social capital refers to the strong ties that develop within a specific group. Bridging social capital describes the connections formed between diverse groups who might not otherwise interact. Linking social capital involves relationships between individuals and larger institutions or those in positions of power. The review suggests that community gardens are uniquely positioned to foster all three types because they are intentionally designed for people to gather and share resources.

Community gardening is consistently associated with enhanced psychological well-being across diverse populations. These benefits often stem from what the authors term the “gardening triad.” This triad consists of caretaking, a sense of accomplishment, and a connection to nature.

For children, the garden environment appears to stimulate curiosity and joy. These experiences tend to foster emotional development and learning. Adults frequently report reduced feelings of loneliness and an increased sense of purpose. Participants also describe elevated levels of happiness and self-esteem.

Community gardens often serve as places of refuge and restoration. Participants frequently describe these spaces as locations where they can experience safety and mental clarity. The act of being in the garden allows for a break from the stressors of daily life.

For immigrant, refugee, and Indigenous communities, these gardens can function as sites of cultural refuge. They allow for the healing affirmation of identity and the preservation of traditions. During collective crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, gardens offered a sense of continuity. They provided emotional grounding when other social structures were disrupted.

The process of gardening also promotes a sense of agency and pride. This occurs through the rhythms of plant care and participation in the food system. These experiences tend to increase self-esteem and motivation. This is particularly true in underserved contexts where individuals may face systemic barriers.

In the Global South, the review notes that community gardens have enabled marginalized groups to reclaim land. This process fosters a sense of control over personal health. Participants describe heightened belonging and self-worth as they see the tangible results of their labor.

The review also highlights evidence that community gardens significantly enhance social connectedness. The shared nature of the work cultivates repeated and cooperative interactions. These interactions nurture trust and reciprocity among neighbors.

One of the primary ways this occurs is through social learning. Gardens enable mentorship and the transmission of knowledge between generations. Older adults are able to pass down cultural and ecological wisdom to younger participants.

For youth, gardening often leads to stronger relationships with peers. It also fosters informal mentorships with adults in the community. School and campus gardens facilitate bridging social capital by linking students with families and educators.

The inclusive nature of these spaces helps to reduce social isolation. This is particularly relevant for urban residents and the elderly. Gardens create environments where individuals from diverse backgrounds can interact.

These interactions foster intercultural trust and dialogue. By working toward a common goal, participants bridge demographic differences. This helps to reduce prejudice and strengthens the overall social fabric of the neighborhood.

The review also highlights the role of community gardens in fostering civic engagement. The authors argue that these spaces act as sites for empathic growth and civic formation. This is especially observed among students and marginalized populations.

Engaging in local food systems tends to promote a grounded sense of social responsibility. It exposes participants to issues regarding sustainability and environmental justice. Students involved in these programs frequently report increased empathy toward underserved communities.

Gardens can also operate as spaces for grassroots leadership. Participants often assume roles in governance or advocacy. This generates linking social capital by connecting residents to policy networks and civic institutions.

Gardening might also deepen the connection participants feel to ecological systems, leading to a stronger environmental identity. Individuals are more likely to engage in pro-environmental behaviors outside of the garden context.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, community gardens demonstrated their capacity as resilient civic infrastructure. They provided food and sustained mutual aid networks. This highlighted their role in both immediate relief and long-term systemic resilience.

“Community gardens don’t just grow food—they grow connection,” D’Amore told PsyPost. “When people work side by side caring for shared land, they build trust, belonging, and mutual support in ways that are difficult to replicate through other programs or policies. These relationships help communities become healthier, more resilient, and better able to face challenges together. The takeaway is simple but powerful: investing in shared, place-based activities like community gardening is an effective way to rebuild social ties at a time when many people feel increasingly isolated.”

Despite the positive findings, the authors acknowledge several limitations in the current body of research. They note that more rigorous data collection is needed to fully understand the scope of these benefits. Future research would benefit from a combination of pre- and post-surveys alongside direct observation.

There is a need to examine how intersecting identities influence access to these spaces. Factors such as race, class, gender, and immigration status likely shape the gardening experience. Comparative studies across different geographic contexts could reveal important variations in outcomes.

The specific mechanisms that cultivate different forms of social capital also require further clarification. It is not yet fully understood which specific activities or leadership styles are most effective at building trust. Understanding these nuances is necessary for optimizing the design of future programs.

The authors also point out the need to explore barriers to garden establishment. Issues such as access to space and funding present significant challenges. Identifying strategies to overcome these obstacles is necessary for creating equitable opportunities for all communities.

The authors conclude that community gardens are a vital form of social infrastructure. They argue that the value of these spaces lies not only in the produce they grow but in the networks they nourish. They encourage continued investment in community gardens as a strategy to address both individual well-being and community resilience.

“As the Founder and Director of the Community Ecology Institute it is our goal to continue to cultivate community garden spaces in our community in Howard County, Maryland and to create tools and resources that help other communities do the same in ways that are connected to research based best practices,” D’Amore added.

The study, “Community Gardens and the Cultivation of Social Capital,” was authored by Chiara D’Amore, Loni Cohen, Justin Chen, Paige Owen, and Calvin Ball.