IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jfpoli/v126y2024ics0306919224000605.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who values urban community gardens and how much?

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Liqing
  • Long, Dede

Abstract

With the rising interest in urban agriculture (UA), community gardens have emerged as a common instrument in UA policies aimed at addressing issues related to food security, environmental sustainability, and equality in urban development. As an impure public good, they deliver both private benefits, such as fresh produce, and public benefits, including ecosystem services. However, there has been limited research estimating the value of various features of community gardens. Consequently, assessing the benefit–cost ratio of community garden development policies is a challenging task. Furthermore, many existing community gardens might have been established without a comprehensive understanding of public preferences. To address this gap, we adopt a discrete choice experiment to quantify residents’ willingness to contribute money and time to community gardens in Los Angeles County, California. Our findings indicate that while residents highly value the gardens’ private benefits, they are not inclined to contribute to their public benefits. Additionally, residents’ preferences for community gardens differ based on their socioeconomic status and level of accumulated gardening experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Liqing & Long, Dede, 2024. "Who values urban community gardens and how much?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:126:y:2024:i:c:s0306919224000605
    DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2024.102649
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919224000605
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.foodpol.2024.102649?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Community gardens; Willingness to pay; Discrete choice experiment; Urban agriculture;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:126:y:2024:i:c:s0306919224000605. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.