Community Vegetable Garden Sliedrecht

A Feasibility Study:
Community Vegetable Garden
Sliedrecht
Team 808: Jurriaan Visser, Annemoon Kentin, Xi Wang, Sebastian Laurenz, Sita Tiwari, Menila Kharel
4/21/2011
Commissioner: Mirjam Lankreijer and Annelies van den Dool
Coach: Bart Hermans
Expert: Esther Veen
Disclaimer
This report (product) is produced by students of Wageningen University as part of their MScprogramme.
It is not an official publication of Wageningen University or Wageningen UR and the content herein
does not represent any formal position or representation by Wageningen University.
Copyright © 2011 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed
in any form of by any means, without the prior consent of the authors.
1
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 6
2. General introduction........................................................................................................................... 8
3. Social feasibility report ....................................................................................................................... 9
3.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 9
3.2. Theoretical background ............................................................................................................... 9
3.2.1 The community garden .......................................................................................................... 9
3.2.2 Health promotion through community gardens.................................................................... 9
3.2.3 Social cohesion through community gardens ...................................................................... 10
3.2.4 Community gardens for involving wider participation ........................................................ 10
3.3. Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 11
3.3.1 Target group selection ......................................................................................................... 11
3.3.2 Case studies ......................................................................................................................... 11
3.3.3 Survey................................................................................................................................... 12
3.3.4 Limitations of the study ....................................................................................................... 12
3.4. Findings and Discussions ............................................................................................................ 12
3.4.1 Questionnaire respondents ................................................................................................. 12
3.4.2 Social acceptance ................................................................................................................. 12
3.4.3 Social relationship ................................................................................................................ 13
3.4.4 Community participation ..................................................................................................... 13
3.4.5 Community’s expectation .................................................................................................... 14
3.4.6 Good leadership ................................................................................................................... 14
3.4.7 Benefits to school children .................................................................................................. 14
3.5. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 15
4. Business plan..................................................................................................................................... 16
4.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 16
4.1.1. Objectives............................................................................................................................ 16
4.1.2. Mission ................................................................................................................................ 16
2
4.1.3. Keys to success .................................................................................................................... 16
4.2. Organization summary ............................................................................................................... 17
4.2.1. Legal Entity .......................................................................................................................... 17
4.2.2. Start-up summary (including start-up funding, investment, expenses) ............................. 18
4.2.3. Funding strategy ................................................................................................................. 18
4.2.4. Locations and facilities ........................................................................................................ 19
4.3. Services and products ................................................................................................................ 24
4.3.1. Service and fulfilment description ...................................................................................... 24
4.3.2. Products .............................................................................................................................. 24
4.4. Market analysis summary .......................................................................................................... 27
4.4.1. Target group description..................................................................................................... 27
4.4.2. Main alternatives for the target group ............................................................................... 30
4.4.3. Target market segment strategy......................................................................................... 31
4.4.4. Pricing strategy ................................................................................................................... 31
4.5. Strategy and implementation summary .................................................................................... 32
4.5.1. Trends ................................................................................................................................. 32
4.5.2. Brand Positioning ................................................................................................................ 32
4.6. Management summary .............................................................................................................. 33
4.6.1. Organizational structure ..................................................................................................... 33
4.6.2. Personnel plan for managing the garden ........................................................................... 34
4.7. Financial plan ............................................................................................................................. 36
4.7.1 Income of vegetable production.......................................................................................... 36
4.7.2. Income from other activities............................................................................................... 37
4.7.3. Set-up costs ......................................................................................................................... 38
Essential costs ............................................................................................................................... 39
Important costs ............................................................................................................................. 39
Extra costs ..................................................................................................................................... 39
3
Investments................................................................................................................................... 39
4.7.4. Yearly costs ......................................................................................................................... 40
4.7.5. Financial risks ...................................................................................................................... 41
4.7.6. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 42
5. Operational Plan ............................................................................................................................... 43
5.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 43
5.2. Methodology.............................................................................................................................. 43
5.3. Location and layout of the garden ............................................................................................. 43
5.3.1. Location............................................................................................................................... 43
5.3.2 Layout of the garden ............................................................................................................ 45
5.4 Background information ............................................................................................................. 46
5.4.1. Soil analysis ......................................................................................................................... 46
5.4.2 Crop management ............................................................................................................... 48
5.4.3 Nutrient management ......................................................................................................... 49
5.4.4 Water management ............................................................................................................. 50
5.4.5 Pest, disease and weeds management ................................................................................ 51
5.5. Practical recommendations ....................................................................................................... 53
5.5.1. Soil preparation for cultivation ........................................................................................... 53
5.5.2. Crop plan ............................................................................................................................. 54
5.5.3. Fertilizer plan ...................................................................................................................... 57
5.5.4. Irrigation plan...................................................................................................................... 57
5.5.5. Pest, disease and weeds management plan ....................................................................... 58
5.5.6. Labour plan ......................................................................................................................... 60
5.5.7. Building and machine plan .................................................................................................. 60
6. References ........................................................................................................................................ 61
7. Annex ................................................................................................................................................ 67
4
5
1. Executive Summary
In 2010 the commissioner Mirjam Lankreijer developed the idea of growing vegetables locally. This
turned later into establishing a community vegetable garden with the overall goal of enhancing
social cohesion among Sliedrecht’s citizens. The major knowledge gap of the commissioner is about
the implementation of her idea into practice. A team of multidisciplinary students from the
Wageningen University studied social, financial and practical feasibility of the community vegetable
garden in Sliedrecht and made some recommendations for the realisation of the garden.
In order to study the feasibility of the project, the academic consultancy team prepares a social
feasibility analysis followed by a business plan and an operation plan. First, a literature study and
survey as a part of the social feasibility analysis gained reliable insight about the project’s viability.
Personal interviews and questionnaires are addressed to different potential target groups,
customers and investors. Second, the business and operational plan are simultaneously and
interactively developed based on literature, locational preconditions, information from similar
community gardens and the outcome of the social feasibility study.
The objectives of the garden are to create a space where people of the community of Sliedrecht can
meet each other, become financially self- sufficient after two years, have a high quality successful
garden that attracts people to participate. The overall mission of the garden is social cohesion and
education about growing vegetables for the participants of Sliedrecht. The success factors are the
ability to attract and retain motivated participants in the garden and happy participants that socially
benefit from the garden and/or gain knowledge into gardening and growing vegetables.
Although limited survey size allows only indications, its results reveal absolute acceptance and
considerable interest in participating in or financially supporting a community vegetable garden
among different groups of Sliedrecht community. The garden is open for all citizens of Sliedrecht.
Research shows that the following groups are interested in participating in the garden; elderly
people, primary and secondary school students, psychiatric clients, people with a low income and
refugees and immigrants. The motivation and needs of these groups are diverse. Motivations of
participating include social contacts, learn how to grow vegetables, interact and socialize with
people, receiving vegetables and learning Dutch. Needs of the participants are a strong leader,
wheelchair accessible, shelter for rain, shadow and a leader that can interact well with people.
The legal entity should be a foundation, since it has no members and the decisions can be made
quicker. The strength of the garden is the management. A strong leader is needed that has the
capacity to motivate people, has good gardening capabilities and to organize the participants and
external stakeholders.
Sponsors are an essential target group for the garden. Funding could be either through a donation or
material and labour. To reduce the cost of establishing and running the garden, it is advised to use
second hand materials and try to get materials from possible sponsors. The establishment cost for
the garden within the first two years is minimally €6750 and €2860 is required to create a financial
buffer. The annual financial yield from vegetables and herbs, for community garden Sliedrecht are
calculated to be €2700.
6
The main customer for the vegetables and herbs of the garden is the restaurant “de Heeren van
Slydregt”. The motive of the restaurant is to buy fresh, organic and local vegetables. The rest of the
products will be distributed to the participants and the food bank.
The ideal location for the garden would be in the community and easily accessible, has a permit to
build a canteen, toilets and a greenhouse, has access to drinking water, sewerage and electricity and
has good ground conditions. The municipality indicated two potential locations that could be
provided. The location at the Parralelweg in Sliedrecht of 3000m2 would be the best location out of
these two, because it is almost twice as large in size. The location is silent and clean, accessible, free
of shadow for the production of vegetables and has an intact soil structure. However, there is no
permission to build and there is no connection to water, sewerage and electricity.
Based on the social feasibility study, example gardens and literature study, an operational plan is
developed for the selected location. A garden layout and practical recommendations on crop
management, irrigation, nutrient, disease/ pest/weeds management are provided. An example crop
rotation is provided with an explanation how a specific rotation for the garden should be made.
7
2. General introduction
In 2010 the idea of growing vegetables in the unexploited space between roads and public buildings
emerged to Mirjam Lankrijer, the eventual commissioner of this project. She started to share it with
neighbours and with responsible persons from the municipality of Sliedrecht, who were keen to
support her request. The concept of creating a community vegetable garden subsequently started
with the overall aim of improving social cohesion in Sliedrecht, because relations between citizens or
even neighbours are often superficial and communication is insufficient (Direct communication with
commissioner).The main question is about converting this idea into practice. According to this, the
commissioner has several knowledge gaps that need to be filled. The knowledge gaps concern the
citizen’s acceptance and support, costs, the management and concrete operational plans for the
community garden. A consultancy team consisting of students from the Wageningen University with
biological, social and management backgrounds was instructed for investigations. This project is
conducted in line with the Academic Consultancy Training (ACT) course.
First of all, insight in the social feasibility of a community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht is required
in order to develop a business and operational plan. Therefore, the ACT team conducts literature
research and surveys among potential target groups and stakeholders. Beneficiaries of the project
are participants, who have the interest to work outdoors in the garden, to socialise or just to give
the day a structure. Elderly, disabled, unemployed, but in general socially isolated people are a
special target group of the project. Primary school pupils might also benefit educationally. However,
the group of participants is supposed to contain people from all different social status and the entire
community of Sliedrecht is addressed. Finally, inhabitants’ acceptance of a community garden and
finding a sufficient number of participants is essential to meet the project’s goals.
Based on local environmental preconditions, experiences from two similar projects and the
conclusions of the social feasibility study, an operational plan for the vegetable garden is created.
This plan includes theoretical research and provides relevant agro-technical background knowledge.
Furthermore, practical recommendations and concrete plans are given for the implementers of the
community vegetable garden to run successfully. These are additionally elaborated and organized in
tables and figures, so that they can easily be used as a tool to track progress.
Managing and financing of the project besides social feasibility is an important aspect to realize the
community vegetable garden. A business plan partially requires findings and conclusions of the
social feasibility study and interacts closely with the operational plan. The project is supposed to be
financially self-sufficient after the starting phase of about two years. Therefore, a sound analysis of
the costs and benefits is conducted to operate the garden successfully in the long run; a concrete
business plan needs to be developed for fund raising and finding sponsors. This information provides
the project with more insight in the financial requirements to start the community vegetable garden
and in the managerial structure to maintain it self-sufficiently.
8
3. Social feasibility report
3.1. Introduction
The social feasibility study is carried out to find out the social viability of the community garden
project in Sliedrecht. The study is based on a field survey and desk review. It scrutinised various
social aspects that may affect the project. Survey findings related to people’s willingness to accept,
support and participate in the vegetable garden will help the implementers to probe the feasibility
of the project in the community.
The social feasibility study of the community vegetable garden was carried out with the following
specific research questions:
•
•
•
•
•
What is the status of social cohesion in Sliedrecht?
Which specific groups should the project target?
Will the community people accept a community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht?
In what ways is the community interested to participate in the garden?
What are the benefits the community would like to have from the garden?
3.2. Theoretical background
The answers to the research questions are partly found in the literature. A literature study is done
with a major focus on the concept of community vegetable gardens. The overall goal of the
community garden in Sliedrecht is to improve social cohesion in Sliedrecht. The literature is
researched to study the idea that a community vegetable garden improves social cohesion. The
social feasibility survey is focused on a specific group of people who are socially isolated. The
literature is reviewed to see which groups have the highest chance of being socially isolated. These
groups will then be specifically targeted to participate in the field study for this project.
3.2.1 The community garden
A community garden is a green space managed by a neighbourhood community (Shell Better Britain
Campaign, 1999) in which urban agricultural activities take place (Irvine et al., 1999). A community
garden may consist of a single garden maintained by people of the community or one subdivided
into multiple plots which are maintained by community people individually. In urban areas, unused
and uncared places can be transformed into community gardens as important community assets.
At the beginning, the purpose of community gardens was to produce food for the neighbourhood,
especially for the low-income citizens in the community. With the development of community
gardens, the purposes expanded to the concept of organic and other issues related to health,
education and training (Leigh, 2004).
3.2.2 Health promotion through community gardens
Vegetables and fruits are a good source of minerals and nutrients in human diets. Several studies
have proven that the quantity of fruit and vegetable intake has inverse relationship with the risk of
cardiovascular diseases, some forms of cancer and obesity (Lanza et al., 2001; Kok and Kromhout,
2004; Trichopoulou et al., 2005).
9
Community gardens are taken as a viable health promotion strategy for health of the individual and
local communities (Armstrong, 2000a and Aliamo et al., 2008). Household participation in
community garden is considered beneficial as it helps to improve fruit and vegetable intake among
urban adults (Dibsdall et al., 2002). Existing community gardens provide local fresh, healthy and
tasty food to the community through schools, shelters and organisations serving the urban poor
(Dibsdall et al, 2002 and Aliamo et al., 2008). There are gardens which sell their produce through
local shops and their own garden shop. Community gardens promote physical fitness and recreation,
reduce stress among gardeners, improve air quality and are aesthetically pleasing to the eye (Lawson,
2005; Levkoe, 2006; Saldivar-Tanaka and Krasny, 2004).
3.2.3 Social cohesion through community gardens
Community gardens may promote social cohesion in the community in multiple ways. They create
harmony and increase cooperation and collaboration among communities. Working in the
community garden provides psychological well-being (McBey, 1985; Francis et al., 1994) and social
well-being of gardeners and local residents (Sommer et al., 1994). Community gardens are a place
where communities gather and work together. It is also a place where they can share their feelings
with each other. Teig et al. (2009) differentiate community gardens in a way that social contact and
relationship are more pronounced and meaningful compared to the private garden. They further
affirm that there is a face to face interaction among community people and helps to develop strong
social ties.
Teig et al. (2009) found that the multiple social processes (e.g., mutual trust, reciprocity) are
increased by participating in gardens and that participation is meaningfully translated outside of the
community garden setting. The relationship thus formed leads to a stronger overall sense of
community. This finding reveals that community gardens are not just a means to produce food but
also help the community in broader aspects of the day to day activities. Moreover, the community
gardens assist to disseminate information about food preparation, storage, reducing food waste by
giving the extra food to friends, family and neighbours among the members (Dibsdall et al., 2002).
Besides producing food, a community garden encourages different entertainments. Fisher (1992)
found that community gardens can include music, theatre and storytelling activities in the gardens.
Such activities promote strong local neighbourhood involvement, interaction and entertainment
among community people.
3.2.4 Community gardens for involving wider participation
The community garden concept creates a favorable environment to involve interested community
people in a participatory way. According to Draper and Freedman (2010), the term community in
community gardening refers to the wider participation of the community from diverse settings such
as schools, neighbourhoods, city blocks, prisons, nursing homes, and hospitals in order to grow food
for themselves. Thus, the community garden is a place which brings individuals together. The
participatory approach increases ownership and we feeling among the community which can lead to
successful execution of the garden activities.
To ensure effective participation every garden should have a good leadership. Teig et al. (2009)
mentioned that most of the gardens should have a leader to manage the activities in the garden. A
leader assists to create a friendly environment in the garden where participants obey norms set for
10
the garden, trust each other, make decisions in a participatory way. A leader can also motivate
others to participate in the garden.
Some community gardens have a particular socio-demographic or program focus, targeting
particular age-groups like children, and elderly; socioeconomic groups with low income families;
and/or special population groups such as mentally disabled and battered women's shelter
(Armstrong, 2000b). Milligan et al. (2004) reported that gardening can help to maintain health and
well-being of elderly people. Marcus and Barnes (1999) have stated in his article that gardening acts
as a therapeutic healing and positively affect the mental health of mentally disabled people.
A garden is also useful for school children in a number of ways. It provides knowledge to school
children about growing vegetables, healthy food and nutritional benefits (Morris and Zidenbergcherr, 2002). A garden also increases their preference and interest for eating more vegetables
(McAleese and Rankin, 2007). Participating in the garden increases children’s ability to interact and
socialize with other people (Robinson and Zajicek, 2005; Hung, 2004). A garden can also help
children to become more creative and provide ideas to design the garden to make it more
interesting and enjoyable (Whiren, 1995).
There is a possibility of social isolation in communities where people from various socio-cultural
settings live. A research conducted by Kobayashi et al. (2009) shows that the elderly people, people
with lower incomes, female, people with poor mental and physical health status are likely to be
more isolated. The research further affirms that people born in the (native) country are less likely to
be isolated than people that are born abroad. Hence, community gardens could be an opportunity
for the people vulnerable to social isolation to mix with other community people to reduce their
lonely feelings.
3.3. Methodology
Different methods were followed to study the social feasibility of the garden. Primary data were
mostly collected by using a survey. Secondary data were collected from scientific literature,
meetings and discussions with the commissioner, information and documents provided by the
municipality and other members of community garden project team. Furthermore, direct
observation of example gardens in Leiden and Utrecht were done.
3.3.1 Target group selection
The project aims to include citizens of Sliedrecht from all different backgrounds. However, it focuses
on people who are socially isolated or are more vulnerable to isolation. The target groups for the
social feasibility study were selected based on the literature review on social isolation and cohesion,
interaction with the commissioner and the demographic information of Sliedrecht. Elderly people,
disabled people, school children and participants were identified as specific target groups of the
project.
3.3.2 Case studies
Two community vegetable gardens in the Netherlands, one in Leiden and the other in Utrecht were
visited. Information regarding the aim of the garden, its management, success factors and difficulties
were gathered. For gathering this information gardens were observed, discussions were held with
11
the project coordinator and the chairperson of the garden (in Utrecht) and the coordinator of the
project in Leiden. The information was later documented.
3.3.3 Survey
The survey was carried out by using a questionnaire (Annex 3) and personal interviews with major
stakeholders (Annex 5). Hereafter, the people who participated in filling the questionnaire forms
will be called respondents and the people with whom the personal interviews was taken will be
called interviewee. The Commissioner of the project facilitated identifying participants for the
questionnaire and giving the questionnaire to people in the target community. Fourteen people
responded. As the respondents were chosen by Commissioner and were limited in number, the
findings might not be generalized to conclude the opinion of overall citizen of Sliedrecht. Eight
personal interviews were carried out to get more in-depth information about the stakeholders’
interest and willingness to support the project.
3.3.4 Limitations of the study
Due to the limited duration of the project (6 weeks) and time and resource constraints, the
questionnaire could not be administered to more respondents and an interview with school
representative of primary and secondary school was not possible despite attempting to make an
appointment. However, secondary information was reviewed to identify the benefits of community
garden to school children.
3.4. Findings and Discussions
3.4.1 Questionnaire respondents
Fourteen people participated in the questionnaire (Annex 4). Of the total respondents, 71 % were
male and 29% were female. The age distribution was between 31 - 78 years with an average age of
47. 57 % of the respondents had job whereas 28 % were jobless and 14 % were pension holders. Out
of 57 %, 75 % had full time job. Half of the respondents is MBO educated, 28 % LBO and 14 % is HBO
educated, whereas 8 % did not have any education. 72 % married, 14 % divorcee and 14 %
unmarried filled out the questionnaire forms. The average family size ranged from 1-5 members.
3.4.2 Social acceptance
Most of the respondents of the questionnaire (93 %) mentioned that they would like to see a
vegetable garden in Sliedrecht. Only one respondent indicated that he doesn’t want a community
vegetable garden in Sliedrecht, in the second question he did indicate that he would like to work in it.
Out of the total respondents, 21 % are growing vegetables/herbs for household consumption in the
private garden. Among those who are not growing vegetables or herbs (79 %), 7 % lacks knowledge
and 57 % doesn’t have the land to grow vegetables or herbs, 21 % has no time and 21 % has no
interest in growing vegetables or herbs. Literature shows that people who do not have any interest
in growing their own vegetables or herbs show their enthusiasm for community gardens as they can
get extra benefits like learn gardening skills from each other, interact with the neighbourhood and
take their family during leisure Teig et al. (2009).
12
All interviewees from personal interviews were found to be positive and interested to the idea of the
social vegetable garden. The interviewees indicated different reasons for participation in the garden.
The main reason is the social contacts for the target groups.
3.4.3 Social relationship
The social relationship can be explained by social contact, interaction within the community and
participation in social activities in Sliedrecht. All respondents from questionnaire responded that
they are satisfied with social contacts but 50% mentioned that they would like to have more social
contacts with people in Sliedrecht. Most of the questionnaire respondents (62 %) mentioned that
they participate in different kinds of social activities (50 % attend 2-4 activities per month) organized
in Sliedrecht. Out of the total questionnaire respondents, 50 % expressed that they participate in
such activities to increase their social contacts and interaction with inhabitants of Sliedrecht. Other
reasons to participate in social activities are for fun, relaxation and to fill their time.
Hence, the findings from the questionnaire revealed that despite the fact that 93% of the
respondents live in Sliedrecht for more than 10 years, 29 % has only ‘some’ social contacts and 7%
has hardly any contact. Participants in the social activities indicate they do this for intangible outputs
like fun, relaxation and time pass. As suggested by Dibsdall et al. (2002) the establishment of a
community garden would ensure increased social relationships and bring about tangible output like
fresh vegetables that could be gifted to friends and neighbours. Furthermore it provides financial
resources and learning opportunities for further expansion of social cohesion in Sliedrecht.
The personal interviews show that all interviewed target groups are interested in the social
vegetable garden. All the interviewees indicate they like the idea that different social groups are
mixed. One interviewee indicated the garden shouldn’t have a morning for elderly, for mentally
disabled etc. but that it is nice to mix these groups so people feel less ‘handicapped’. The
interviewees from the mentally disabled, refugee work, elderly home, physically disabled and food
bank all indicate that among these target groups a considerable amount of people are socially
isolated or lonely. They all indicated the community garden could be a nice opportunity for these
people the get more social contacts. All interviewees however also indicated that some of these
people are very hard to motivate.
3.4.4 Community participation
Both the questionnaire and personal interviews revealed that people are enthusiastic about the idea
of a community garden. From the questionnaire, 57 % respondents responded that they would like
to work and participate in the garden.
The representative from ‘Yulius’, a mental care home, described the reasons of mentally disabled
people to participate in the garden. The major motives are to be active outside, have social
relationship and become part of the society. Because of their mental disability, clients might not be
able to do a lot of work in the garden. Still being in the garden helps them for their psychological
wellbeing and to feel ‘normal’. Likewise elderly people can participate in the garden for the motive
of self-satisfaction that they are doing something for themselves. So, they can enjoy their work and
have more social interaction with people from Sliedrecht. From the demographic information (Annex
2), the group of people that are 65 years and older is higher in Sliedrecht (29 %, compared to the
group of 20-64 year old) than in the whole of the Netherlands (25 %) and this number is likely to rise
in the coming years due to the aging population. It is very important that the garden includes some
13
facilities for physically disabled and elderly people to make them feel more comfortable in the
garden. The garden should be accessible by wheel chair and if there is a toilet it should also be
wheelchair accessible. There should be shade for the people to relax and protect from the sun and
rain.
The representative of refugee work mentioned that refugees (from India, Somalia, Iraq, Iran,
Afghanistan etc.) can also participate in the community garden. The main interest of this group
would be to learn Dutch, work outside, have social contact and get vegetables. However, this group
of people might be difficult to reach due to the language problem. She further mentioned that she
can also help to reach refugees. The representative from the food bank indicates some of their
clients are refugees. The clients of the food bank have a very low income. For this group social
contacts are important, but vegetables from the garden are also very important as this group has
almost no money to spend on food. Also this group can be hard to reach.
3.4.5 Community’s expectation
The questionnaire respondents (57 %) expressed that they would like to work in the garden and all
respondents (100 %) prefer to be rewarded with vegetables. They mentioned different expectations
from the garden. Most of the respondents (78 %) expect fresh vegetables for their own use whereas
13 % expect money and other 13 % don’t expect anything from the garden. 44 % of respondents
responded that they expect to have more social contacts with friends and neighbours through the
garden whereas others (22 %) mentioned that the garden provides a place to work outside and 11 %
mentioned that garden gives a structure in their life. Besides gardening, respondents like to have
some cultural activities, playground for the children, information about food/nature/art and other
social activities. The other expectations of community are to learn about cooking and know about
different vegetables.
Representatives of the volunteer bank and food bank mentioned their concern that giving
vegetables to participants can cause problems. It will be difficult to distribute equal amount of
vegetables to all participants, according to their working time, working effort etc. However, they also
mentioned that clear rules and regulations can fix criteria to reward participants by vegetables.
3.4.6 Good leadership
All interviewees emphasized that the garden needs to follow a good structure. It should have a good
leader who has the capacity to manage the garden and participants working with clear rules. This
will help to avoid the conflict among the participants regarding their working hours and benefits
they receive from the garden. The leader should make a clear scheme of who will do what and how
the garden is organized. These findings are consistent with Teig et al., (2009).
3.4.7 Benefits to school children
Primary and secondary school children are also one of the important target groups of the
community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht. Due to time constraint, field research on interest of
school children to participate in the garden could not be carried out. However, based on the
literature, it can be said that a garden provides various benefits to school children. Thus, primary and
secondary school children can participate in the garden to provide physical, mental and social
benefits to them.
14
3.5. Conclusion
Out of the total respondents from the questionnaire, 57 % mentioned that they are willing to
participate and work in the community garden. It indicates that enough people can be found to work
in the garden. The interviewees from qualitative interviews also expressed their interest to support
the garden. This indicates the feasibility of the community garden in Sliedrecht. The garden should
be accessible to all, but the special need of the target people in the communities such as elderly,
children, and people with disabilities (physical and mental) should be taken into consideration when
designing the garden. Cultural activities should be organized to meet communities’ expectations.
Like the garden in Utrecht (Annex 1) the garden should have an influential and committed leader.
Hence, the community garden would be an effective means to bring people out of isolation and
promote social cohesion and improve social relationship in Sliedrecht.
15
4. Business plan
4.1. Introduction
This business plan is written as part of a larger study for the community vegetable garden in
Sliedrecht. The main purpose of this plan is to create an overview of the managerial side of the
operational plan and to provide a strategy on how to approach the market.
4.1.1. Objectives
The overall goal of the garden is to create social cohesion within the community of Sliedrecht
through a community vegetable garden. The garden could be seen as a community centre in an
open/ outdoor space. The objectives are to:
1. Create a space where people of the community of Sliedrecht can meet each other
2. Become financially self- sufficient after two years
3. Have a high quality successful garden that attracts people to participate
4.1.2. Mission
The community vegetable garden exists to encourage social interaction and a feeling of solidarity for
the people of Sliedrecht. It aims at including all citizens of Sliedrecht although targeting specific
groups. The aim is to increase citizens’ participation to the community; this means having work,
gaining knowledge and be actively involved in increasing the standard of life for its own community
in a meaningful way for the participants. The garden provides work and activities for people in an
outside environment and teaches people how to grow vegetables. Participation in the garden will
improve the living standard of participants and is a great incentive for other groups to see how fresh
vegetables can be produced and used locally.
1. Focus is on the higher objective of creating social cohesion in the community Sliedrecht
2. Get people out of isolation
3. To share and increase the knowledge (education) of growing vegetables
4.1.3. Keys to success
The keys to success are:
1. The ability to attract and retain motivated participants in the garden
2. Happy participants that socially benefit from the garden and/or gain knowledge into
gardening and growing vegetables
It is important that there is enough support in the community of Sliedrecht to support the garden
and to actively participate in it. The feasibility study shows that 57% of the respondents of the
questionnaire are willing to participate in the garden for an average of 3.5 hours per week. All
representatives of the different target groups responded very positively towards the idea of the
garden and indicated that it would be interesting for people to participate. The representatives of
the target groups that need guidance to go to the garden indicated that they could provide this
support (transport to the garden for elderly, initial guidance for psychiatric clients). It should be clear
that support is on a facilitating level and that these target groups will not play a role in managing the
garden. Based upon this wide support within the community of Sliedrecht, it is assumed that
16
enough people will feel attracted to participate in the garden. However, once the garden is
established these groups should still be motivated to participate. A key to success is that these
groups will keep supporting the community vegetable garden. Furthermore, there should be people
from diverse backgrounds of the population in Sliedrecht, which come to the garden to work and to
be involved in other activities. As a result, people could experience benefits of mental happiness,
better health, social cohesion and (education about) vegetables.
4.2. Organization summary
4.2.1. Legal Entity
To set up the garden action have to be taken on the managerial, financial and practical side, but also
the legal aspect is important. For example to attract sponsors and to be able to get land of the
municipality, a legal organisation needs to be founded. Since the garden is not aiming for financial
profit two legal entities are commonly used in the Netherlands. These are a foundation (Stichting)
and an association (Vereniging).
When an organisation has full legal authority it means that it is viewed as a separate legal person. A
foundation has full legal authority meaning that the members of the board are not personally liable
for debts or damage by the foundation. An association can have two different legal authorities; one
in which the board members are partly liable for debt, in the second case the board members are
not liable for debt and damage. Both a foundation and an association need to be registered at the
chamber of commerce (KVK, Kamer Van Koophandel) and the statutes need to be registered at a
notary (Rijksoverheid 2011). A foundation and association need to have an ANBI (Algemeen Nut
Beogend Instelling) for donations to be tax deductible (www.anbi.nl).
The highest authority in an association is the members who have voting rights in the general
assembly. This is also the main difference between a foundation and an association. A foundation
has no members, it has only a board. The amount of board members is not fixed as long as there are
more than two board members.
The advantage of an association are the members, that have voting right in the general assembly
and by this they will feel heard and more connected to the whole project. However, the fact that an
association needs members is also the main disadvantage compared to a foundation. For making
decisions in an association a general assembly needs to be organized and all members should be
invited to vote. The decision making process is faster in a foundation where it is the board agreeing
upon decisions. Especially at the beginning of the garden a lot of decisions need to be made, for this
reason a foundation is more suitable. To guarantee continuity for the garden it is important that the
efflux of members of the association or board members of the foundation is not too high. This is a
second reason to favour the foundation. If the members of the association are changed regularly,
the risk is that there will be no continuity in the policy of the garden. The members of the board of a
foundation need to be appointed for a period of some years to assure continuity of the garden.
17
Table 1: Pros and Cons of a foundation and Association Legal Entity
Type
Characteristics
Foundation
•
•
•
•
Association
Board is highest authority
Seen as a separate legal
person; board is not liable
for debt or damages by the
foundation
Registration KVK and
notary
ANBI, for donations to be
tax deductible
•
•
Members with voting rights
Two legal authorities; people
are (partly)liable, people are
not liable
• Registration KVK and notary
for donations to be tax deductible
•
•
Decision making; general
assembly
ANBI, for donations to be tax
deductible
4.2.2. Start-up summary (including start-up funding, investment, expenses)
At the moment there is no budget to set up the garden. In order to set up the garden funding in
money and/or materials is needed. The total set up costs required for the garden is €6750,-. Since
the fundraising has not been done yet, and there is no insight of what could be raised, estimation is
made that distinguishes between necessary costs and less necessary costs (see financial plan). Since
the idea is to establish the garden within and for the community of Sliedrecht, sponsoring would
ideally be also from within the community. Therefore, the main idea is to get funding in material and
labour and to make as much items as possible with help from the participants. Since the garden
should be operated as sustainable as possible (wish commissioner), second hand material could
serve well for the materials needed in the garden. Second hand material is more sustainable1 and
requires a lower budget. Taking the above points in account it is however important, that the garden
should be qualitative and accessible. A qualitative attractive garden creates a more appealing
environment to work in, to organise activities and to attract visitors.
4.2.3. Funding strategy
Funding is an essential starting point of the project. The commissioner, who initially had the idea of
the community vegetable garden, is also active in trying to realise the project. She approached
university students for the feasibility study, explores different market possibilities and target groups,
and uses her network for potential funding. In order to get funding there are two main approaches,
the bottom up approach and the top down approach (Finance Hub). “The bottom up approach
involves looking around your own area to see what sources of help and support are available
(infrastructure support)”. The infrastructure networks that are accessible organizations in Sliedrecht
like the volunteer bank, the rotary club (private sponsors), locale administration, and Stichting
Welzijn Sliedrecht. However, the most valuable tool here is word of mouth.
1
Materials and products that are still usable are given a second life. The products are most often still in good
state. It is environmental friendly to ensure a long life of products and not to purchase. www.terborgse.nl
18
Table 2: List of potential sponsors based on interview with Maarten Kop and Volunteer bank
List of potential sponsors
Contact details
Rabobank
Arie in het Veld (previous director)
Tel: 0184 417982
Gerrit Maat (has old caravans)
Caravan Centrum “Gerrit Maat”
Lelystraat 93
3364 AH Sliedrecht
Kringloopwinkel Sliedrecht (profit goes to
community projects)
Arie de Ruiter
Tel: 06 11496525
Volunteer bank (has a small fund for citizen
innitiaves)
Joke Brouwer
Email: [email protected]
“The top down approach involves finding organisations that act on behalf of a particular interest
group, usually known as national and technical umbrella organisations.” The top down strategy is
making use of the network of a larger organisation. In this case, the municipality acts on behalf of
the interest group of chosen politicians, but also acts on behalf of the citizens of Sliedrecht. The
range of resources such as access to local media, facilitation possibilities, knowledge and access to a
larger network are beneficial for the project. The active role of the municipality gives the project
more awareness and helps setting up the garden organisationally. The strategy of both, word of
mouth (bottom up) and the cooperation with the municipality (top down) are already applied by the
commissioner. During the visits to Sliedrecht and conversation with diverse stakeholders it was
noticed, that the community of Sliedrecht is a close community and that word of mouth is a
successful approach to include and reach out to people.
One of the objectives of the garden is to become self-sufficient after two years. The strategy of
Martin Vos, chairman of Stichting Moestuin Projecten, to raise funding for the garden in Utrecht was
to ask for a contribution once. The entrepreneurial approach of the garden in Utrecht motivated
sponsors to support the initiative. If the project in Sliedrecht is sponsored once and it will become
self-sufficient after a period of two years, it will be less dependent on sponsoring for the
continuation of the garden. It would ensure continuity of the garden from a financial perspective.
Therefore, the strategy is to raise enough funding capital to start up the garden and be operational
for the first two years, and additionally attach friends to the garden that support it financially every
year. After that the garden should be able to pay for the yearly costs. Sources of income will be
selling the vegetables, friends of the garden and possible income from (organised) activities.
4.2.4. Locations and facilities
The site of the community vegetable garden can be seen as an open space for the community to
meet and work together. To satisfy the need of social cohesion it is important that also other
19
facilities additionally to gardening are at the site, and that there is a possibility of organising other
activities. As indicated in the feasibility report, people would like to have these activities next to
gardening (from highest interest to lowest interest); information on nature and food, cultural
activities, play yard for children, social activities and art. Based upon the demand from a
participant’s point of view as well as a practical and operational side the conditions of the ideal
locations are summarized in Table 3.
4.2.4.1. Ideal conditions for the garden
Table 3: Ideal condition of the garden
The site
•
Attractive surroundings
•
Silent and clean
•
Easily accessible and safe
•
Permit to build a canteen/shelter, toilets, greenhouse and a barn
to store the materials
•
Access to (drinking) water, sewerage and electricity
Location and access
•
Nearby; a place in or close to the community
•
Accessible by public transport or bike
•
Free of shadow; production of vegetables
•
Parking possibilities for cars and bikes
The land
•
Contiguous piece of land with the possibility to expand
•
Long term renting contract (minimum of 5 years, preferably
longer)
•
Low costs
•
Soil not polluted and declared clean
•
Soil not contaminated with soil pathogens
•
Intact soil structure
•
Not too wet, not too dry; appropriate ground water level
•
Water available for irrigation
20
4.2.4.2. Potential locations
The municipality probably provides the community garden with a piece of land. Two sites have been
visited that could serve as potential locations. Both plots were at the Parallelweg in Sliedrecht
(Annex 6). The locations are both situated in “het Groene Hart”. This is a thinly populated area in
the Netherlands that is surrounded by the main cities, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Utrecht and Leiden.
The area is characterized by its rural character and green spaces.
For the area “het Groene Hart” a government policy was created in 2003 to preserve it. There is a
limit in amount of houses on the edge of the area as well as a restriction on greenhouses and other
commercial buildings within the area. The government, other institutional bodies, social institutions
and “de Stuurgroep het Groene Hart” work together on a scenically beautiful, ecological, economic
and a vital area in which life is good for residential and recreational purposes (Stuurgroep het
Groene Hart, website , accessed 2011).
Figure 1: Google earth, possible location 1 and 2, accessed April 13, 2011(zoomed out picture; in appendix 1)
Location one is about 3000 m2. It is currently in use as grassland where horses graze. As can be seen
in Figure 1 the plot is surrounded by small channels. The second plot is about 1500 to 2000 m2 and is
currently in use as a silt deposit. From the potential locations available the plot of location one is the
most suitable for the community garden. The size of 3000 m2 is more appropriate to start up the
project.
Based upon the plan, van voedselbank naar voedseltuin (Janssens 2011), a piece of land of 3000 m2
would ideally have 20 to 30 participants (see 4.6.2.), the size of 3000 m2could be a restriction for a
21
larger amount of participants. The amount of vegetables and herbs the customers demand could be
larger than the garden can produce. However the pro of starting with a plot of 3000 m2 is starting on
a small scale. Less participants and funding is needed to make the garden a success. From a
managerial and operational perspective the garden would also be easier to manage. Location one
has a reasonable size for exploring and gaining know how on how to start a community vegetable
garden with the aim of social cohesion, education and to be self-sufficient after two years.
The ground quality of location two is questionable. Heavy machineries might have harmed the soil
structure and the silt could have contaminated the ground. Both locations are equally accessible and
are best reached by bike or private transport. The distance to the train station of Sliedrecht is about
one kilometre.
For the garden a toilet and places to shelter/drink coffee and stall the materials are needed. It would
be preferable to have a greenhouse on the plot. The area of “het Groene Hart” includes restrictions
from this side. There is a possibility that governmental bodies will not give permits to install these
facilities. The municipality indicated that factually there is no permit to build or rebuild on the
potential locations. On the location are no facilities for (drinking) water, sewerage and electricity.
For the purpose of the garden this is a problem that should be taken into consideration.
22
Table 4: Potential location and ideal conditions
The site
Potential location 1
Attractive surroundings
Silent and clean
Easily accessible and safe
Permit to build a canteen/shelter, toilets, greenhouse
and a barn to store the materials
Access to (drinking) water, sewerage and electricity
Location and access
Nearby; a place in or close to the community
Accessible by public transport, bike or car
Free of shadow; production of vegetables
Parking possibilities for cars and bikes
The land
Contiguous piece of land with the possibility to expand
Long term renting contract (minimum of 5 years,
preferable longer)
Low costs
Soil not polluted and declared clean
Soil not contaminated with soil pathogens
Intact soil structure
Not too wet, not too dry; appropriate ground water
level
Water available for irrigation
23
4.3. Services and products
4.3.1. Service and fulfilment description
The garden can be seen as an open space for the community. In this open space people can work
together, meet each other and join activities. The service of the garden is to fulfil the demand of an
outdoor community centre; a place where people meet each other with the final aim of social
cohesion. Therefore, organizing activities next to gardening is important for appealing to a broader
target group within the society. As indicated in the target group description, people have various
motives and needs. Activities that can be interesting for a range of target groups, and fitting with the
aim of the project, are mentioned in the Table 5. To include participants’ (and sponsors and visitors)
ideas, and to motivate them to share it, an “idea box” is proposed that could be placed in the
canteen.
Table 5: Example of possible activities
Activities
Fulfilment and Function
Gardening
Social cohesion, fresh vegetables
Cooking
Social contacts, education (how to prepare
food)
Primary and Secondary school students; teaching
them how to grow vegetables
Education
Information about nature and food production
(growing vegetables)
Education
Play ground
Social cohesion, entertainment
Cultural and social activities
Social cohesion
4.3.2. Products
Restaurant
The chef of the restaurant “de Heeren van Slydregt”, Arjen Haak, indicated that he could be a
potential customer for the community garden. Taken the size of the current potential garden into
account, the demand of the restaurant would be higher than the garden can fulfil. Based upon the
calculation in the operational plan, the garden with the proposed plot cannot produce enough for
multiple restaurants, or the demand of these restaurants should be very small (Annex 7). Therefore,
the restaurant of the “de Heeren van Slydregt” could be the only customer of the garden. The
vegetables would be interesting for him because they are locally and organically produced, are
seasonal and have a better taste. Organic products are important but the restaurant of “de Heeren
van Slydregt” does not require the vegetables to be certified. The commissioners aim to have good
quality food, zero transportation emissions and to grow the vegetables environmentally friendly.
24
This can be achieved without a label. Since it also costs time and money to certify vegetables it is
advised to grow vegetables in an organic way, but not aim for certification.
The restaurant indicated that they would be interested in seasonal vegetables, red fruit and a range
of herbs. An additional of advantage the garden is that the chef and his cooks can visit the garden to
see and learn how vegetables grow. This could be seen as an additional service the garden can
provide to its main customer.
It is a risk for the garden that they become depended on one customer but it also opens
opportunities. A big advantage is that the type, amount and timing of crops can be planned into
detail together with Arjen Haak. Close collaboration would be profitable for both the garden and the
restaurant to tune demand and supply. Arjen Haak indicated that he is willing to make a schedule
together with the project planner of the garden.
Participants
The personal interviews showed that some, but not all target groups would be interested in
receiving vegetables as a reward for working in the garden (for example, some people don’t cook
themselves). However, all respondents of the questionnaire responded that they would like to
receive vegetables as a reward for working in the garden. Therefore, it can be assumed that
receiving vegetables is a motivation for people to work in the garden. It should be noted that the
questionnaire was not distributed to a diverse target group and that probably not all people would
be interested in receiving vegetables as a reward for participation.
Table 6: Target group for products, estimated amount in percentage
Target group
Restaurant
Participants
Visitors of the
garden
Food bank
Harvest
65 %
20 %
5%
10 %
To motivate participants in working in the garden, and also to eat fresh vegetables grown by
themselves it is advisable to give them a percentage of the harvested vegetables. A similar system to
the garden in Utrecht is proposed. Second choice vegetables and crops with an excessive yield are
collected in a box and participants could take a part out of it. The general rule is that people could
take enough for one to two days for one to two persons. The personal interviews showed that
participants need clear rules and equal treatment. Therefore, it is proposed that the project planner
explains these rules beforehand and monitors the system. In case of misuse the project planner
should note it to the participant. The project planner should also be aware of vegetables that are left
over. A strategy could be to give the participants some extra vegetables. Arjen Haak (restaurant de
Heeren van Slydregt) also indicated that he would be willing to take ‘left over’ vegetables for an
attractive price.
25
Visitors and the Food Bank
To stimulate people to visit the garden and to generate a small extra amount of income it is nice if
people can buy vegetables at the plot. The restriction of the current plot in size and permit to build
would make a real shop unrealistic, but it would be possible to sell some vegetables in a box (Figure
2). A price lists could be laid down next to the box, together with a jar where people can put the
money in.
The food bank of Sliedrecht indicated that they have a supplier of fresh vegetables, but can use
vegetables as an input for the food packages. Within Sliedrecht there are about 65 people receiving
food packages from the food bank. It is proposed to give 10 % of the harvest of vegetables to the
food bank. Additional left overs of vegetables can also be distributed to them. The reason to do this
is to give part of the harvest for a good purpose. The feasibility study shows that people are
motivated to join a project for altruistic reasons. The garden can give something back to society, and
additionally has a place to go when the harvest of a certain product is too high to fulfil consumer
demand.
Figure 2: Example of box of vegetables
from which customers can buy
Figure 3: Example of a money box
26
4.4. Market analysis summary
4.4.1. Target group description
The target group of the community vegetable garden can be segmented into three different groups;
participants, sponsors and customers. These three groups have their own motivation and needs to
participate in the garden.
Participants The commissioner would like the garden to be open for all citizens of Sliedrecht. Within
the feasibility study representatives of different target groups have been interviewed. Overall the
response was very positive. Although some groups, elderly and physical disabled, might have
limitations to actively participate in the garden, other activities could be organized to include them.
The garden would like to attract motivated people and give an incentive to work in the garden, but
does not aim to actively convince people to be motivated to work in the garden.
To realise social cohesion within the community of Sliedrecht it would be ideal if people from
different backgrounds and target groups meet each other and can work together. Therefore the
advice is to mix different people and not to work in the garden in specific groups. For instance
psychiatric clients showed their interest in being accepted by society rather than working in a group
of psychiatric clients only. However it should be noted and taken into account that other participants
might not like to work with, for instance, psychiatric clients. Based upon literature study and
personal interviews the following target groups are distinguished that have an interest in actively
participating in the garden:
Elderly people: the representative of the volunteer bank indicated that people that like to do
volunteer work are largely elderly people. The motivation of elderly people is most often that they
want to do something after (early) retirement and to have social contacts. In a conversation with the
head of activity support of the elderly home Waardeburgh it became clear that this group of elderly
people would also be interested in participating in the garden. Waardeburgh is an elderly home of
Sliedrecht where 130 people are living in the care home and 30 people in the nursery. Besides this
Waardeburgh has a day centre that is open for three days a week. Elderly people that live on their
own come here to participate in the organized activities. Furthermore there is Waardeburgh-plus
which is a kind of association for people older than 55 years. This association organises all kind of
activities, including the transportation to activities. People from Waardeburgh-plus live on their own
and some might not be able to run a garden for themselves. A community vegetable garden would
be an opportunity to still work in a garden. In the elderly home are divers clubs, like a cooking club
and walking club. A garden club would for instance be interesting, and the cooking club can visit the
garden. The head of activities of Waardeburgh said that the reward for these people is probably
working outside and social interaction.’’ When there are for example strawberries it is nice if people
can eat a few and we could cook for on occasion the vegetables from the garden with the cooking
club. I don’t think people need to be rewarded with vegetables’’. The need of this target group would
be a good leader who is in control of the garden and who can tell people what to do. The garden
should be wheelchair accessible and there should be a toilet that is wheelchair accessible. There
should be a place to get out of the sun when it is very sunny and a place to shelter for the rain. The
location of the garden should be easily accessible by either public transport or by bike/car. For the
27
elderly people of the care home this is less important, since they have access to a shuttle bus from
Waardeburgh.
Primary and secondary students; a garden provides school children with knowledge about growing
vegetables (Morres and Zidenberg-cherr, 2002) and increases their preference of eating more
vegetables (McAleese and Rankin 2007). Participation in the garden increases children’s ability to
socialize and interact with other people (Robinson and Zaijcek). The mentioned benefits would make
primary and secondary students an interesting group to target as participants the garden. In the
Netherlands it is quite common that pupils (primary school) of one grade have a small garden for
themselves in which they learn how to grow vegetables. Students of the secondary school could be
included by doing a social internship (maatschappelijke stage) in the garden2.
Psychiatric clients: the group of people that “Yulius” targets are psychiatric clients with all different
kind of problems. According to the team leaders of “Yulius” these people find it difficult to come out
of the house and to take part in society. What the team leaders liked about the garden is that people
could meet friends there and that it is outside. Especially important for this target group is that they
can meet people of other groups and they are seen as people by the society rather than as clients.
The people have the need for a good structure and a person in charge that they can contact. They
also need a contact person that can socially interact well. The garden should be easily accessible and
nearby. It is important for the psychiatric clients that the garden is easy to approach (laagdrempelig).
Yulius has the facility to accompany people to the project but would prefer that people would go
there by themselves and be motivated by the group that works in the garden.
People with a low income: the total number of incapacity benefits in the last quarter of 2009 in
Sliedrecht was 1270 people (CBS, 2011). In Sliedrecht there are about 65 people that receive food
packages of the food bank. According to a representative of the food bank the motivation of people
with a low income to participate in the garden, would be to receive vegetables and to get more
social contacts. This group can be best motivated if the personal benefits are communicated to them.
The group of people that might come from the food bank will need (knowledge) assistance in
working in the garden; a leader that has a good overview of what needs to happen and someone
who can listen to their stories. According to the representative of the volunteer bank this group is
hard to motivate and the average response for volunteer work is low.
Refugees and Immigrants: the target group of refugees in Sliedrecht is about 300 to 400 people.
According to the representative of the refugee work (Vluchtelingenwerk) a lot of those people are in
social welfare and have large families. This group is according to the refugee work definitely
interested in participating in a social community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht. The motivation of
this group would be to learn Dutch, gain social contacts, receive vegetables and to be outside.
Women are more difficult to reach than men. The representative of the refugee work indicated that
for religious and cultural reasons women are sometimes not allowed to work with men other than
their own.
2
The Dutch government states on their website (Rijksoverheid) that the way people interact with each other is
an important social issue for citizens. There is a clear need for more social cohesion. A social internship for
students of the secondary school stimulates people to meet others on a young age. Since 2007 the
government introduced the social internship and it is legally obliged for all secondary school students from
school year 2011-2012.
28
Table 7: Target group, motivation and needs
Target
group
Elderly People
Motivation
Do something
after
retirement,
Social contacts
Needs
Strong leader,
clear tasks,
Wheelchair
accessible
garden and
toilet, Shelter
for rain and
shadow,
Transport
Primary and
Secondary
students
Learn how to
grow
vegetables,
Social
internship,
Interact and
socialize with
other people
Psychiatric
Clients
Plots of
about 2m2
per child,
Person with
garden
knowledge
that can
handle
children
Structure,
strong leader,
contact person
that can
socially
interact well,
Nearby
location,
Guidance
(person
depended)
Be active
outside,
Social
contacts,
Become part
of society
People
with a low
income
Receiving
vegetables,
Personal
benefits,
Social
contacts
Refugees and
Immigrants
Leader with
overview,
Contact
person that
can socially
interact
well, Need
to be
motivated
Leader with
overview,
Contact
person that
can socially
interact well,
Separate
woman groups
Receiving
vegetables,
Learn Dutch,
Social
contacts,
Work outside
Sponsors
Sponsors are an essential target group for the garden. Funding is needed to start the garden and to
keep it running for the first two years. Since there is no starting budget, sponsors need to be
convinced of the aim of the garden and the success factors of the project. As an incentive for
companies and organizations to donate money the name of the company/organisation could be
mentioned on the sign of the garden, advertisement on the website and activities in the garden.
Friends of the garden are private sponsors that support the garden yearly with a donation of €50,-.
As a return people will be called friends of the garden and their name will be mentioned on the
notice board in the canteen and on the website. Companies and organisations can also be a friend of
the garden by either supplying the garden with goods or services or sponsor €100,- yearly. The same
conditions as for private sponsors regarding name awareness will apply to companies and
organisations. Name awareness and a positive image could be an incentive to sponsors.
29
Table 8: List of type of sponsors
Type of sponsors
Companies/organisations
Type of funding
Financial or in Material (one
time sponsoring)
Private sponsors
Financial or in Material
Governmental bodies (Gemeente,
Provincie)
Friends of the garden
Financial or in Material (land)
Yearly amount of 50€ (private)
or 100€ (companies) (or an
equal amount in material)
Possible incentives
Advertisement, activities
in the garden, Altruism
(doing good)
Activities in the garden,
Altruism (doing good)
Societal benefits
Mentioned as friend of
the garden in the
website and on notice
board in the canteen
Customers
To buy the vegetables of the garden there are three types of customers; Restaurant “de Heeren van
Slydregt”, visitors of the garden and the food bank of which the first two customers are paid
customers. The needs and motivation of customers are described within the section products.
Table 9: Customers and motivation
Customers
Restaurant
Motivation
Buy fresh, organic and
local vegetables;
marketing value;
Seasonal vegetables;
learn how to grow
vegetables
Visitors of the
garden
Leisure time
(activities), learn
how vegetables
grow, fresh organic
and local vegetables
Food bank
Supply food to people
with a low income,
Food should not be
wasted
4.4.2. Main alternatives for the target group
Alternatives for social cohesion
The garden aims to improve social cohesion within the community of Sliedrecht. The garden is not
the only initiative aiming at this goal. There are multiple social initiatives for the people of Sliedrecht.
In 2003, the municipality installed three community platforms to work in districts (wijkplatforms).
Every district has a platform: East, West and the Centre of Sliedrecht. The goal is to increase
liveability in the neighbourhoods. The platforms talk to citizens, advice and help the citizens to
realize their plans. Activities organized in 2009 and 2010 were for instance a neighbourhood party, a
drawing competition to make children more aware of road safety, play day on the street, multiple
playgrounds, benches for in the park and the creation of a fishing spot. These organisations stand
close to the community and are driven by citizen’s initiatives (In de Wijkkrant, Gemeente Sliedrecht,
November 2010).
The volunteer bank of Sliedrecht is a central point where supply and demand comes together.
Organisations are operating in a broad diversity of fields such as human rights, sports, ecclesiastical
work or cultural events (www.vrijwilligerspuntsliedrecht.nl). Within the community of Sliedrecht are
diverse churches actively involved in the community (www.hervormdsliedrecht.nl). Examples of
30
activities organized are bible studies, youth work, informative and diaconal activities. Sliedrecht also
has multiple sport clubs and (leisure) associations (www.sliedrecht.com).
Alternatives for organic products
The vegetables will be purchased for 70 % by the restaurant and the visitors of the garden. Other
potential suppliers to the restaurant are basically all other suppliers of vegetables, including
wholesalers, gastronomic suppliers and local stores. What is unique about this project is that the
vegetables are grown in Sliedrecht, and that it will provide the restaurant with fresh organic
vegetables. The possible location of the garden is unique since the distance from the garden to
restaurant is low, about one kilometre. Visitors of the garden can buy organic, fresh vegetables in
either supermarkets or in the stores in the surrounding of Sliedrecht that aim for organic food
(Estafette).
4.4.3. Target market segment strategy
Participants will be approached trough local media, word-of-mouth and via organisations. Applicable
tools are a website, brochures and a sign for the garden. Organisations and institutions that also
have activities to create social cohesion can be seen as a partner to reach to the target group.
Cooperation can help to create awareness for the garden and to attract interested participants. An
example could be cooperation with the food bank. The garden can provide a supplement of fresh
vegetables for the food packages. A brochure could be added in the food packages that explains
about the garden’s purpose. For the participants, the restaurant and sponsors every year there will
be held a harvest festival. This festival is to show the people appreciation but also to enjoy the
harvest together and to have a good time.
For both the restaurant and sponsors it is important to have close and direct contact. The contact
should be on a personal level and the contact person for the garden should be reachable. Meetings
with the restaurant are necessary on a yearly basis to determine crop demand and planning. To
reach out to sponsors a good network is needed, that might be accessible via the rotary club and lion
club. For sponsors a yearly presentation could be held to discuss the strategy and results of the
garden.
4.4.4. Pricing strategy
The prices of vegetables are changing on a daily basis. The restaurant indicated that they currently
have one main supplier of vegetables. They are willing to pay around the same price for the
vegetables of the Sliedrecht garden. Since the harvest cannot be guaranteed at the beginning of the
garden and the products are not organically labelled this would be a fair price. Customers that will
visit the site can expect somewhat the same prices, since there are no shop facilities and there is no
security of supply.
31
4.5. Strategy and implementation summary
4.5.1. Trends
Trends in the Food sector
Food trend watcher Hans Steenbergen published in 2011 the Food Inspiration Yearbook 2011
(Duurzaamnieuws November 7, 2010). The most important trends according to Steenbergen can be
categorized in eight trends; slow food served fast, close and sustainable, vintage chic, anti-glamour,
substance over style, guerrilla food, new Dutch and value for money. The community vegetable
garden fits well in the trends of slow food served fast, close and sustainable and new Dutch.
Therefore, these trends are briefly explained in more detail. Slow Food Served fast refers to the rise
of products from mother earth; the apple, the carrot, the sprout and kale. The food and drink should
not be hurried by technology and industrialisation. Food should come from nearby, but prepared
and served quickly. The trend Close and Sustainable refers to a vegetable garden as a supermarket.
What is served at the table is related to the season and the weather and not by the supermarkets,
chef or consumer demand. The menu card should have a balance of 80 % vegetables and 20 % of
meat; good for the wallet and for the planet. Another trend that is related to the garden is new
Dutch. Real Dutch products are restyled into something fashionable. This could have an effect on the
demands of restaurants for more authentic Dutch vegetables (Steenbergen, 2010). Arjen Haak
indicated in the interview that he follows some cooks on the Internet, of which one was
Steenbergen. He mentioned that the trends of slow food served fast, close and sustainable and new
Dutch are also important to him as a chef. The trend is visible in the multiple restaurants that have
their own garden, most of them belong to the higher segment of restaurants.
4.5.2. Brand Positioning
Brand identity is the self-expression of the brand in communication, behaviour and symbols. The
brand image is a subjective idea of the brand that people share. It is important that the garden is
branded in a way that the consumers and participants are appealed by it (image) but it is equally
important that the brand shows what the organisation/brand really is (identity)(Eurib, 2011).
In order to communicate towards the different stakeholders a strong brand positioning helps to
determine how to approach stakeholders and which means are the most effective. The brand values
that are based upon the identity of the garden and the project help to direct the brand and
communications strategy. Brand values are the core values represented by a brand and to build an
emotional connection with the stakeholders. A brand strategy is most often determined on two
pillars; to distinguish the product from the competitors and to give the brand more value for the
consumer (Eurib). It is advised that the garden should base its communications upon the following
brand values and create a brand strategy that is line with these values. The name for the garden,
internal communication and external communication (website, brochures) should all be determined
upon these values to communicate a clear and consistent message.
32
Figure 4: Brand values
The values for the garden are happiness, local, together and fresh. The value happiness relates to
the aim of the garden. The garden is there to give people a better life, and create more social
cohesion within the community. Happy people working together should be the result of that. The
unique aspect of the garden is that it is an initiative from a citizen in Sliedrecht for the community of
Sliedrecht. Working all together to establish the garden and to make it a success. Producing food
locally and consuming it locally is a competitive advantage towards other suppliers of organic food.
The brand value fresh expresses the value of fresh vegetables and also the idea of working outside
and supports the value of the fresh and energetic idea of a community vegetable garden. It follows
the rising trend of how we look at food and production.
4.6. Management summary
4.6.1. Organizational structure
People in the board should be inhabitants of Sliedrecht with a network in the business community of
Sliedrecht. The board is responsible for the long term strategy and survival of the garden. The people
in the board should be experienced in running a business and be able to make long term planning
both, financially and with respect to people working there.
For the board an odd number of people are required to prevent a draw when voting. Three people
should be enough to run the board of the garden. The chairman is responsible for chairing the board
meetings, is the contact person of the garden and responsible for fundraising. The treasurer is
responsible for the finances of the garden. The secretary is responsible for reporting and preparation
of the board meetings.
The main purpose of the board is to ensure the conditions are created to run the garden successfully.
This also entails that the right people are put at the right place on the operational side. The board
33
should appoint the right persons to run the garden operationally. The land for the garden is provided
by the municipality. An important task for the board is to ensure the garden will be financially stable
in the future. The board should be aware under what conditions the municipality provides the land
and monitor that the garden meets these conditions.
4.6.2. Personnel plan for managing the garden
The founding of the garden requires people who will be able to work when guided by a skilled
person/expert. This is particularly so, because in the initial stage different garden structures like the
green house, rest room, fences, bridge, paths, toilet, and a playground for children have to be
constructed. When the garden has been established, the regular vegetable production and social
activities can be carried out in the garden. The number of people required to work in the garden is
estimated by using information of the plan to build a social vegetable garden in Utrecht (Van
voedselbank naar voedseltuin, 2010).
The six hectare garden in Utrecht calculated that they need 200 volunteers working two half days a
week. Every ten volunteers are guided by a manager, so there are 20 managers. Six hectares (60.000
m2) divided by 200 volunteers is 300 m2 per volunteer. The proposed location for the garden of
Sliedrecht is 3000 m2. This means that the location needs at least 10 voluntary participants to work 2
half days. However, the respondents of the questionnaire indicated that they preferable work for 3.5
hours per week (average of 14 respondents) in the garden, which is about half a day. For the garden
of Sliedrecht therefore the number of 20 participants and 2 managers are needed. This number
however varies depending on the type of participants (elderly people, psychiatric patients, mentally
disabled people, and people with some physical disability) and time they can actively work in the
garden. Similarly, some activities (work) require more work than others. And some seasons of the
year need less work than others, for example there will be less or no work in the garden during the
winter months. So, the number of participants working in the garden has to be decided taking into
consideration the following points:
Type of participants: the number of participants has to be decided depending on the type of
participants; if the participants are elderly people who can work less than other people, or if the
group has more mentally disabled people who do not work as efficiently as other people then more
people are needed to do the same work. Managers may have to spend more time to accompany for
the mentally disabled or psychiatric people, elderly people, and people with some physical
disabilities.
The season of the year: less work in winter and more work in spring, summer and the beginning of
autumn. This means that the total amount of working hours are therefore higher or the number of
participants in the garden can be higher in spring, summer and autumn.
Type of work: construction work like bridges, a toilet or fences will require technical skilled people.
For growing vegetables skilled people are needed, that have the know-how and are able to share
this knowledge. For garden work like weeding and land preparation less skilled people are needed.
The main construction work is don once but maintenance has to be done regularly.
Taken these aspects in account including the aim of the garden; social cohesion. The purpose of the
garden is not productive work, rather than working together and getting new social contacts.
34
Therefore, also time for activities, leisure time, and small talk should be calculated. In the hierarchy
is counted upon 30 participants, and three managers (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Example of management structure, based on 30 participants
One of the success factors of the garden is a good management. Martin Vos, who has a lot of
experience in setting up the garden in Utrecht, mentioned that the most important aspect of their
garden was the right project manager. The garden in Utrecht was large scaled, and had the benefit
of being able to pay for a good manager. As can be seen in Table 7 (target group, motivation and
needs) elderly people, psychiatric clients, people with a low income and refugees and immigrants
need a strong and good leader. Someone who they can turn to in case of problems and that can
provide strong structure and planning. People need to know what to do, and need specific tasks. The
characteristics of being a good and strong leader are required for both the operational planner as
the manager. Additionally, the operational planner needs to communicate with the restaurant, the
board and other external contacts, and therefore needs good communication skills. Overall the
management should be inspiring and able to motivate people to actively contribute in the garden.
Preferable the managers of the garden should have strong gardening skills and experience with
growing vegetables.
35
4.7. Financial plan
One of the objectives for the social vegetable garden in Sliedrecht is that the garden should be selfsufficient in two years. This means that after two years the income of the garden should be sufficient
to cover all expenses. The funds to start the garden still have to be raised, it is difficult to assume
how much money sponsoring will provide. This will partly depend on the funding strategy. The
financial plan aims to set up the garden with as little financial means as possible. Costs are divided
into different categories to determine which costs are essential and less essential. Without making
the essential costs the garden cannot be setup. The category important costs are costs that have to
be covered within the first two years for the garden to be successful. Extra costs and investments
should be made if the money and/or materials are available. The division of costs can help the
executers of the plan to prioritize costs. If the full amount of sponsoring needed is not raised the
garden can still be set up.
4.7.1 Income of vegetable production
The vegetables that grow in the garden will be sold to the restaurant ‘Heeren van Slydregt’ and
visitors of the garden. Based upon a list of the commissioner, restaurant and questionnaire a list of
vegetables and herbs is made (Annex 10). Determining the yield and prices of all these products is
time consuming. It will give only a broad assumption of the amounts that can be harvested.
Therefore, the plan ‘van voedselbank naar voedseltuin’ (Janssens 2010) is used to determine the
yield and the financial income of the garden’s vegetables and herbs.
The plan, ‘van voedselbank naar voedseltuin’, a feasibility study to create a food garden in Utrecht, is
intending to sell 100% of the produced vegetables for wholesale prices (Janssens 2010). These are
about the same prices as the Sliedrecht garden will charge the restaurant. The plan for the new
garden in Utrecht aims to have a plot of six hectares. The garden in Sliedrecht has about 2200 m2
were vegetables and herbs can grow, which is a lot smaller. However, the information from the
Utrecht plan can be adjusted and used in Sliedrecht. A great variety of both vegetables and herbs are
suggested to be produce in the plan for the new garden in Utrecht as well as in the plan for the
garden in Sliedrecht.
70 % of the vegetables produced in the garden in Sliedrecht will be sold (Table 6). 70 % of the
2200m2 is about 1540 m2. The other part of the harvest goes to the participants and the food bank.
The total sales estimated by the plan for the new garden in Utrecht of six hectares is €210.000,-. The
size of the area where vegetables and herbs for the restaurant and visitors are grown is 2.57 % of
the Utrecht garden. 2.57 % of €210.000,- is about €5400.-. Part of the six hectares of the garden in
Utrecht is not used for crop production, however relative to the Sliedrecht garden this area is much
smaller.
The garden in Utrecht gets its income by only growing high value yielding crops with organic
certification. On some of the plots more than one crop per year is grown. Professional gardeners are
hired to manage the garden and its volunteers. The garden in Sliedrecht will be run by participants
only, which are not expected to be as skilled as the professional gardeners in the plan for the garden
in Utrecht. The garden in Sliedrecht will aim to produce high value yielding crops, but is expected to
also grow less value yielding crops, like potatoes. The crop rotation will be less intensive then in the
plan of Utrecht. The soil conditions of the potential location in Sliedrecht are unknown. This makes
36
it uncertain what yields can be expected. For these reasons the estimated financial yield of the
Sliedrecht garden is half of that of the plan in Utrecht, namely €2700,-.
4.7.2. Income from other activities
Activities other than gardening could bring in additional income. Due to time restrictions the full
potential of other sources of income has not been explored. If the garden has been started up and
runs successfully, the activities can be explored. An example of possible income from activities could
be to organize team building days for organisations and companies. Extra costs for facilities should
then also be taken into account, for instance lunch and drinks. Other excursion could also bring in
extra money, but it should always be balanced with the expenditures.
37
4.7.3. Set-up costs
Table 10: Onetime expenses for the garden
Set-up costs
Essential costs
Working materials
Prepare the land( ploughing,
harrowing)
Manure/compost
Buying price (2nd hand)
Potential sponsor
€500,€300,-
Garden shop, 2nd hand store
Farmer, professional gardener
€300,-
Farmer, municipality, petting
zoo (kinderboerderij)
Essential costs
€1100,-
Important costs
Lime
Greenhouse
Garden furniture
Fencing
Material storage
Canteen
Nonolet
Toilet building + wheelchair
proof
Water tank
Lawn mower
Additional cost
Important costs
Extra costs
Irrigation system
Fruit trees/bushes
Playground
Garden kitchen
Signs
Market stall
Extra costs
Investments
Rotovator(frees)
Paved paths
Connection to utilities(water,
electric, gas, sewerage)
Investments
Financial buffer
€440,€600,€400,€250,€300,€1000,€830,€1000,-
Farmer/contractor
Garden materials supplier
Garden shop, 2nd hand store
Garden shop, municipality
Construction company
‘Maat’ caravans
Construction company
€130,€200,€500,€5650,-
Manufacturer
Garden shop
€800,€230,€500,€500,€250,€200,€2480,-
Garden shop
Grower
Garden shop, toy shop
Kitchen shop, garden shop
Building materials shop
Building materials shop
€1500,€2200,-
Garden shop
Construction company
Municipality, construction
company
€3700,€2860,-
38
Essential costs are costs that are absolutely vital to start up the garden. Without making these
costs it is impossible to start the garden.
The working materials’ costs are based upon the resources indicated in the operational plan (Table
10). The costs for preparing the land are based upon the contractor’s fee. The manure and compost
cost are a rough estimation, since prices are not available. Compost could be donated by the
municipality (www.sliedrecht.nl), manure might be arranged through the local petting zoo.
Important costs are costs that are important for successfully running the garden. The garden for
example could exist without a greenhouse. However, in the greenhouse vegetables can be grown to
extend the growing season and seedlings can be produced to reduce the cost of purchasing seedling
and it is interesting work for the participants. Same holds for the other important costs. They are
needed for the success of the garden but do not have to be build and purchased at once. One of the
objectives is to be self-sufficient within two years. By this time the important items for the garden
should be financed.
All important cost, excluding lime and the Nonolet toilet, were found through marktplaats.nl, a
photo impression of some items can be found in Annex 8. The costs are a good indication of what
good quality second hand materials costs. Expenses for lime are difficult to calculate since there are
no soil samples taken. Based on the scientific article described in the operational plan the first year,
4400 kg lime is needed. From agrikal.nl the price of lime is derived to be around €0.10 per kg, the
same company provides soil sampling for €70,- per plot. There is no connection to running water,
electricity, gas or sewerage on the garden. Connecting to the garden will cost enormous amounts of
money and it is questionable whether it is possible to get permission for it since the plot is in “het
Groene Hart”. Because in first instance the garden is not certain to stay on the proposed location,
these kinds of investments will probably not be done if this uncertainty stays. For the toilet a
Nonolet can be considered, it does not need sewerage, running water or electricity
(www.de12ambachten.nl). Since there is no running water on the garden, a water tank is needed to
be able to wash hands and clean. Additional costs are all kinds of smaller and unexpected cost, like
some paint, renting a trailer, buying nails and screws.
Extra costs are costs which do not have to be made within the first two years of the project. The
items add significant value to the project, but without these items the garden will also be able to
exist.
For instance following fruit plants are included in extra costs: 5 tall trees, 20 blackberries, 20 red
berries (www.batterijen.nl). Wood and paint need to be bought for making the signs. All other extra
costs are based upon figures of Marktplaats (www.marktplaats.nl).
Investments will only be made if the garden can stay for a longer period or when money or a
sponsor is available. The rotovator for example can be rented and preferably be donated by
sponsors.
The costs for the rotovator are derived from Marktplaats. For paving the paths €10,- per m2 is
calculated. This is for stone and sand and excludes labour cost. The garden will have about 220 m2 of
paths. About 167 m2 of these will be in the actual vegetable garden and the rest in the social
cohesion corner and the herb garden.
39
4.7.4. Yearly costs
Table 11: Yearly costs for the garden
Buying price (2nd hand)
Potential sponsor
€650,€340,€450,- assumed, to be provided
€990,-
Seed company, garden shop
Renting company/ garden shop
Municipality
€50,€70,€1000,€250,€500,€500,€2370,-
Farmer/contractor
Soil sampling company
Restaurant, supermarket
Pump station
Website, brochures
Activities
Subtotal
€200,€500,€700,-
Webhost, printing company
Total yearly costs
€4060,-
Yearly costs
Essential yearly costs
Seed/seedlings
Renting rotovator
Renting the ground
Subtotal
Important yearly costs
Lime
Soil samples
Coffee/tea/drinks
Fuel
Reservation
Additional cost
Subtotal
Extra yearly costs
Essential cost
The cost of seeds/seedlings, are based on practical information from the visit to the garden in
Utrecht. The project manager of the garden in Utrecht said that they need to spend around €4000,on seeds and €3000,- on seedlings. Calculating this for the proposed Sliedrecht garden of 2200 m2
this leads to an amount of €650,-. The amount of money spend on seedlings can be reduced when a
greenhouse is bought. Seedlings for the garden can then be grown in the greenhouse. The renting
price for a big rotovator is €76,- per day and €190,- per week (Boels.nl). It is assumed that the
rotovator is rented for one week and two separate days per year. The renting price of agricultural
land is about €1500,- per hectare, for 3000 m2 this is €450,-. However, it is assumed that the
municipality will provide the needed land.
Important costs
To maintain good acidity level in the soil of the garden, lime needs to be applied regularly. According
to Lobb (1997) about 2000 kg of lime needs to be spread regularly on peat soils to maintain good
acidity level for a vegetable garden. For Sliedrecht this means that about 440 kg of lime needs to be
applied every few years. To be able to determine the necessity of spreading lime, soil samples
should be taken yearly. The costs for the drinks are based on 200 working days were each day €5, - is
spent on drinks and cookies. Fuel costs are calculated for the rotovator, lawn mower and
transportation, if needed.
40
Reservation
The aim of the vegetable garden Sliedrecht is to be self-sufficient within two years. This means all
finance and equipment must be sponsored within the first two years. After this period the garden
should be self-sufficient. In Table 11 all costs of items that need to be bought every year are
presented. Yearly money has to be reserved to be able to buy new equipment or buildings in the
future when the first are worn-out. For all items in the important costs excluding the lime and
additional cost, it is assumed that they are worn-out in ten years. This is an average, some items will
be worn-out earlier and some might serve for more years. It means that in ten years’ time new
equipment and building need to be bought. The money that has to be reserved has to be put on a
bank account which is assumed to give an interest rate that is equal to inflation. This has to do with
the time value of money; due to inflation money is worth less every year. The total costs of the items
which have to be reserved for are €4710,-. Assuming inflation rate of 2,0 %, based on the average
inflation of the last ten years (homefinance.nl), these items will cost €5740,- within ten years. This
means for ten years, every year about €500,- needs to be reserved and put on a bank account to be
able to be self-sufficient.
Extra costs
The cost for the website and brochures is based on €20,- per year for the website and the rest for
printing cost of brochures. Costs for the harvest festival, costs for a little present for participants and
sponsors are placed under costs for activities.
Profit loss account
Income from sold vegetables
Income from services
Income from friends of the garden
Total turnover
€2700
€0,€1360,€4060,-
Essential costs
Important costs
Extra costs
Total costs
€990,€2370,€700,€4060,-
Total profit
€0,-
4.7.5. Financial risks
There are three major financial risks in the project. The Sliedrecht garden has no money yet, so startup funding is needed to be able to start the garden. The amount of start-up funding needed is
calculated to be €6750,-. This is the sum of essential and important costs. All materials needed for
the garden can in principle also be sponsored in kind (natura). In this way the amount of money
needed to start up the garden can be reduced to hypothetically zero.
The second risk is that yearly €3360,- including essential and important excluding extra costs, is
needed to be able to run the garden in a successful way. Of this amount €2700,- income from
vegetable sales is calculated. A bad growing season, lack of product quality and inability of finding
customers are big financial risks.
41
The third risk is the yearly sponsors of the garden, the ‘friends of the garden’. The friends of the
garden need to provide funding for the financial gap between the costs of the garden and the
income of the garden from vegetables and activities. This ‘financial gap’ is calculated to be €660,The financial risk can be reduced by a financial buffer. The financial buffer is needed for financially
bad years. It is proposed that the financial buffer is at least equal to the needed costs to run the
garden for one growing season, only including essential and important costs, excluding reservations.
This financial buffer then needs to be at least €2860,-. The financial buffer should be raised in the
first two years the garden exists after this period the garden should be self-sufficient.
In this financial plan the only income from the garden in the long term are income from the
vegetable and the friends of the garden. The garden however can also try to generate income
through other sources like organizing paid activities for example. In this way the garden can become
less reliant on the income of only the vegetables and the friends of the garden. This will reduce the
financial risks of the garden.
4.7.6. Conclusion
To be able to start up the garden money and materials are needed. The costs can be divided into
different categories. Within the first two years minimally €6750,- on materials is needed and €2860,finances to create a financial buffer. After the first two years at least €3360,- of income is needed for
the garden to be able to stay in business. In this way the essential costs and important yearly costs
are covered including reservations. For all the costs that were used in this financial plan, low budget
solutions were searched which are expected deliver high quality. The investments costs for the
rotovator and paths were not included in the financial plan, since these investments do not have to
be made in the first two years.
Table 12: Summary of costs
Summary costs
Amount
Total start-up costs
Essential + important costs
€6750,-
Total financial buffer needed
Essential + important costs for one
growing season
€2860,-
Income from vegetables
Derived from the Utrecht plan
€2700,-
Minimal yearly costs
Total yearly costs – extra costs
€3360,-
Minimal income from friends of the garden
Minimal total yearly costs – income
vegetables
€660,-
42
5. Operational Plan
5.1. Introduction
The operational plan discusses the practical approach to run the community vegetable garden
successfully. The research question, how to manage the community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht
on an operational level, is answered in this chapter. The current situation of the project relevant to
the operational aspects, the theoretical support and the experiences from two similar projects which
were visited is discussed in the background information. Based on this, the practical
recommendations and concrete plans are given for the implementers of the garden. These are
additionally elaborated and organized in tables and figures, so that they can easily be used as a tool
to track progress.
5.2. Methodology
The operational plan is developed in a participatory manner. In order to provide a precise and
practical operational plan, following three sources of information are combined: 1) the current
situation of the project relevant to operational aspects, e.g. the objective condition of the location
that might be provided by the municipality; 2) academic knowledge on organic vegetable gardens;
and 3) the experience from the similar projects.
The information of the current situation of the project relevant to operational aspects is derived
from the results of the social feasibility study. The academic knowledge on organic vegetable garden
is taken from scientific literature, books and the study background of the group members.
Furthermore, two similar projects were visited to collect the experience on how to run an organic
community vegetable garden successfully.
The combination of these three sources of information makes sure that the final operational plan
provided by the ACT group will be an optimal and feasible one, under the premise of satisfying the
preference of potential participants as much as possible.
5.3. Location and layout of the garden
5.3.1. Location
There are two potential locations that will be provided by the municipality of Sliedrecht (Figure 6).
Location 1 has been used as grassland for several years. Therefore, soil has not been physically
operated or cultivated anyhow. The land is not organically certified, which means the land might be
fertilized with chemical fertilizer. The land is probably used for horses, so the ground was
additionally fertilized by horse dung. The irrigation and drainage of the soil is automatically
regulated by canals that border each location.
Location 2 has been used as a silt depot for several years. This means that the ground might be
compacted by the heavy machinery driving on it. The chance that the soil is polluted is much higher
since silt from all different places is dumped there.
As stated in the business plan, none of the two locations is perfect for building up a vegetable
garden. However, location 1 is preferred over location 2, because it is larger, unused for several
43
years and has less pollution risk. Thus, the operational plan is generated for this location. However, it
can be adjusted and used for other fields if larger and more suitable locations will be available in
future.
Location 2
Location 1
Figure 6: Map of two possible locations for the community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht (source: www.maps.google.nl)
The location is at Parallelweg 3, Sliedrecht. It is around 3,000 m2. This location gets enough sun light
in most of the months in the year, moderate temperature, precipitation and wind strength (Annex 9).
The site is surrounded by canals which can be used as an irrigation source. Around the location there
are farmlands and roads; on the west side there is a ground for horse riding, stable and warehouses.
The land is flat, and it is not allowed to construct buildings higher than 2 m on it since it is an
agriculture and recreational area.
44
5.3.2 Layout of the garden
The site for the garden is selected based on the availability of the land. The garden will be divided
into two main parts: social cohesion corner and the vegetable and herb garden. Various elements of
the two parts of the garden are visualized in Figure 7.
‘Social cohesion corner’
Sitting area
Material barn
Canteen
Toilet
Playground
Fruit trees
Berries
= Raspberries and flowering plants
Greenhouse
Herb garden
Herb garden
T
r
a
c
t
o
r
Road side
Insect
hotel
P
a
t
h
Path
P
a
t
h
p
a
t
h
Figure 7: Layout of the garden
Social cohesion corner: the total area allocated to this corner is about 600 m2. The following
elements are allocated in this area:
•
Rest area: this is a rest place for the people coming and working in the garden. The area will
have some tables and chairs.
•
Store room: this is for storing garden equipment and other materials and harvested
vegetables.
•
Canteen
•
Toilet
•
Play ground: this is a small area for kids to play. It should be well fenced to prevent children
from falling into the canals.
•
Fruit trees and berries: around the edges of this area a few fruit trees and berry bush will be
planted.
The locations of these elements can be changed within this 6oo m2 corner because their locations
have roughly been defined in the Figure 7.
45
Vegetable and herb garden: The total area for vegetable and herbs including paths in between the
plots now remains about 2500 m2. The following elements will be included in this area:
•
Herb garden: about 50 m2 of the area near the entrance will be used for growing perennial
herbs.
•
Greenhouse: about 30 m2 of the area is allocated for a greenhouse. The green house is
mainly for raising seedlings.
•
Bridge: there is a need to build one new bridge in the garden.
•
Paths: there will be paths between the plots. The main paths of 1.5 m width and the feeder
paths of about 0.5 m width. The paths are grass paths. If the garden is going to be there for
longer period, then it can be gravelled.
•
Fences: fences around the garden.
•
Bike racks and car parking: about five bike racks and car parking near the entrance of the
garden.
•
Irrigation canals: water from the existing canals will be used for irrigation.
•
Vegetable plots: the vegetable garden will have three plots of around 353 m2 and other
three plots of about 499 m2. Each plot is for one vegetable per year. Each vegetable plot can
have some annual herbs in between the rows of vegetables.
•
Insect hotel: locates in the centre of the garden.
•
Flowering plant and berries: used as fences of the garden, and refuge for beneficial insects.
5.4 Background information
5.4.1. Soil analysis
Soils can have different physical and chemical characteristics depending on their history, origin and
geography. The soil type of the potential locations for the future vegetable garden in Sliedrecht is
peat. Peat soils contain mainly organic matter (93- 97 %) and soil solution, i.e. water and dissolved
minerals (particularly plant nutrients) (Lobb, 1997). The following table shows the advantages and
disadvantages of peat soil on vegetable production, and the improvement approaches in case of the
disadvantages.
Table 13: Advantages and disadvantages of peat soil on vegetable production, and the relevant improvement
approaches
Advantage
Disadvantage
Improvement approach
High porosity
Very acid (about PH 3.5)
Adjusting PH with lime (see 5.5.1)
Good water holding capacity
Innutritious
Fertilizing (see 5.4.4 and 5.5.3)
Good aeration
Saturated with water
Irrigation (see 5.4.5 and 5.5.4)
Good physical resistance
Easy to be compacted
Tillage
On the one hand, this soil type can be beneficial for vegetable production due to its high porosity,
water holding capacity and good aeration when drained (Lobb, 1997). Since it does not contain grit
46
or stones as physical resistance, peat soil facilitates
tillage operations and root penetrations. The latter is
for instance important for the quality of root crops like
carrots. On the other hand, natural and not well
prepared peat soils are actually inappropriate for
vegetable production; they are very acid, innutritious
and saturated with water. A low pH of 3.5 is usual for
peat soils.
Soil horizon is a specific layer in the land area
that is parallel to the soil surface and possesses
physical characteristics which differ from the
layers above and beneath (FAO, 1998).
Soil generally consists of visually and texturally
distinct layers, which can be summarized as
follows from top to bottom:
The pH influences the mobility and availability of plant
nutrients present in the soil. Therefore, in order to
grow vegetables in peat soil, the adjustment and
maintaining the acidity of the soil to the requirements
of vegetables is very important. Because of certain
differences in their chemical and physical properties,
the desired pH of different soil types for vegetable
production also differs. The pH for optimal vegetable
growth in mineral soils is 6.5, however, it is 5.5 in peat
soils. An inappropriate pH results in nutrient
deficiencies, toxic effects due to over-availability of
certain nutrients and consequently to a decreased yield
and low product quality. In conventional gardens, the
minor variations from the optimal pH can be equalized
with the application of mineral fertilizers with
respective chemical effects. However, in organic
gardens, liming is the most common and effective
materials to enhance the pH particularly of very acidic
soils like peat.
Depending on how soon the pH change is needed and
certain nutrient levels (e.g. magnesium) different sorts
of lime can be chosen. Calcitic (CaCO3) limestone is
Figure 8: Soil horizons
preferred, when a rapid neutralization is wanted;
(www.glogster.com/media/2/5/69/8/5690846.gif)
dolomitic (CaCO3*MgCO3) limestone should be applied
at a low magnesium level in the soil. Because also the
soil acidification (pH decreases) continues constantly due to decomposition in tilled soil, lime needs
to be applied regularly. Particular for peat soils the amount of lime for the first application to adjust
the pH is much higher than the amount of lime needed to maintain the optimal pH in following years.
However, soil tests should optimally be conducted and analysed by experts to obtain the acidity and
other relevant chemical properties of the soil. Therewith precise recommendations on type and
amount of lime to achieve an optimal pH adjustment can be determined. Also annual soil tests are
necessary for monitoring the acidity and maintaining a pH of 5.5. The lime must be equally
distributed on the soil surface and well incorporated, because it is very immobile and a uniform pH
level within the entire rooting zone is wanted.
47
Every soil type is separated into different horizons. However, the topsoil horizons are certainly the
most important ones for vegetable production. Especially the top layer of peat soils can be
extremely water repellent after dry periods (Schwaerzel et al., 2002).
The water repellency of dry peat soils inhibits the soil water uptake by
Crop rotation is the
plants, supports the water infiltration and therefore the eluviation of
practice of growing a
mobile plant nutrients from the top soil to the deeper horizons.
series of dissimilar
Furthermore, strong alteration between wet and dry periods influences
types of crops in the
the soil structure; shrinking during draining and swelling during wetting
same area in
is typical for peat soils. This can decrease the gas exchange and water
sequential seasons for
capacity. Consequently, extremely dry topsoil should be avoided by
various benefits
optimized irrigation during dry periods of the year, but particularly in
(Bullock, 1992).
summer.
Soil tillage is necessary to prepare the field for cultivation operations,
to provide optimal soil conditions that facilitate sowing and planting of the vegetables, and minimize
the physical resistance for their roots. However, intensive soil tillage should be avoided to maintain
the soil structure and beneficial properties of peat soil. Periods of fallow soil without any vegetation
and regular deep tillage support the drying-out of the topsoil and therefore promote soil erosion
particularly by wind. Furthermore, the decomposition rate of organic matter increases, which results
in subsidence and compaction.
5.4.2 Crop management
Crop rotation is widely used as an effective crop management method in agriculture, especially in
organic farming systems. The benefits of using crop rotation are various, within which the following
points are important for a vegetable garden (Bullock, 1992):
1) Distributing economic risk. Crop rotation contributes to diversification of vegetable species,
decreases the reliance on purchased inputs and lowers the risk associated with bad weather and
market conditions.
2) Improving soil fertility. Utilization of a variety of crops (and manure) on the same piece of land
over a number of years typically is associated with greater soil organic matter, soil structure and
aggregation compared to simple rotations or mono-cropping. Enhancement of such properties
reduces soil erosion potential due to increased water infiltration and water holding capacity.
3) Reducing impact of pests, diseases and weeds. Crop rotation makes it difficult for pest, pathogen
and weed populations to build-up, establish and create chronic problems by disrupting their life
cycles.
4) Decreasing environmental influence. Greater nutrient utilization and cycling, less use of pesticides,
and improved soil quality are important factors in a crop rotation, particularly a diversified or
complex rotation, that may reduce the overall environmental impact of crop production.
Therefore, designing a good crop rotation plan is very important for an organic vegetable garden.
The starting point for the design of a rotation should always be the soil type, soil texture, climatic
conditions and the effect of these considerations on the vegetables that will be produced in the
48
garden. Within the cropping limitations imposed by the environmental constraints, the following
basic guidelines should be observed (Lampkin, 2002a):
• Suitability of individual crops with respect to climate and soil.
• Deep rooting vegetables should follow shallow rooting vegetables, helping to keep the soil
structure open, assisting drainage and exploiting more soil space for nutrients.
• Nitrogen fixing crops and low nitrogen demanding crops should alternate with high nitrogen
demanding crops. Ideally it should be possible to meet all the farm’s nitrogen requirements
from within the garden.
• Where a risk of disease or soil-born pest problems exists, potential host crops should only
occur in the rotation at appropriate time intervals. In practice, crops from the same family
should not be grown continually.
• Keep the soil covered by crops as long as possible in the year to prevent weeds.
• Seasonal labor requirements and availability.
• Cultivations and tillage operations.
5.4.3 Nutrient management
All vegetables require a number of nutrients to be able to grow. As well as acting as a base for the
growth of plant roots, the soil forms the main source of the plant’s nutrients. Although some soils
have adequate supplies of some nutrients and do not require further additions, it is rarely in reality
that the soil is ideally fertile and contains sufficient quantities of all the nutrients required for plant
growth. The common limiting elements are nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium (which are required in
larger amounts) and calcium, magnesium, iron, boron, copper, molybdenum, zinc, and manganese
(required in smaller amounts). Many of these elements react with each other, and some interactions
can lead to nutrient deficiencies or toxicities. Deficiencies in both macro and micro nutrients are one
of the long term problems associated with vegetable production on peat soils (Bleasdale and Salter,
1991).
Therefore, fertilizers must be applied to the soil to ensure that the vegetables have sufficient
nutrients to enable them to grow satisfactorily. The amount of fertilizer to be applied depends on
the amount of nutrients available in the soil and the crop nutrient requirements for yield goals.
The main types of livestock “wastes” used in organic farming systems are farmyard manures, either
fresh or stockpiled, slurry and, occasionally, liquid manures such as separately collected urine (Table
14). Rotted farm yard manure and compost normally works better than fresh manure. Compost
made with livestock “wastes” and crop residues is also widely used. Besides, green manure, which is
a type of cover crop grown primarily to add nutrients and organic matter to the soil, is another type
of popular fertilizer in organic agriculture (Hobson and Robertson, 1977).
Table 14: Available nutrients in farm yard manure (FYM) and slurries (Spring application)
Available nutrients in season of application (kg/t)
Nitrogen (N)
Phosphate (P2O5)
Potash (K2O)
FYM cow
1.5
2.0
4.0
Undiluted slurry
1.5
1.0
4.5
Source: MAFF/ADAS Booklet 2081, 1986ed.
49
In vegetable gardens, fertilizers are usually applied in a single spring application. Fall or early winter
application of fertilizers, particularly nitrogen, is neither effective nor efficient (Table 15). Multiple
applications of fertilizer can be used to improve fertilizer efficiency, but may not be practical in most
of the cases (Ott, 1986).
Table 15: Relationship between time of application of farm yard manures and the amount of available nitrogen
remaining for the spring growth
Time of application
Available nitrogen effective for spring growth (%)
Autumn
0 – 20
Early winter
30 – 50
Late winter
60 – 90
Spring
90 – 100
Summer
(a)
(a) Crop response to summer application is very variable and is dependent upon the weather.
Source: MAFF/ADAS Booklet 2081, 1986 ed.
The main consideration when spreading fertilizers is the need to incorporate the material as quickly
as possible to avoid pollution, nutrient loss and soil compaction. A possible way to achieve this when
applying farm yard manure is to have one person ploughing and other people spreading the manure
onto the ploughed area. The manure can then be harrowed in, thus avoiding burying it at the base of
the plough layer. Compared with those required for spreading farm yard manure, the technologies
and machines needed for applying slurry and liquid manures are more complex, such as injection
system. Thus slurry and liquid manures are not recommended for small gardens (Lampkin, 2002b).
5.4.4 Water management
Water is very important for the growth of vegetables, and sufficient water can give better growth,
better quality and higher yields. However, apart from the waste of water, time and effort, watering
unnecessarily may merely increase the growth of the plant without increasing the size of the edible
part. It may discourage root growth, wash nitrogenous fertilizers out of reach of the roots, and
reduce flavour (Zavadil, 2009). So it is important to know how to water vegetables effectively and
efficiently.
The climate, the ability of different soil types to hold moisture, and the types of vegetables decide
the irrigation of a garden at the same time. So much depends on various factors that it’s usually
difficult to give specific directions for watering a vegetable garden. However, the following general
instructions should always be remembered (Bleasdale and Salter, 1991):
1. Vegetables need about 2.5 cm of water per week.
2. Adding organic matter to the soil if when necessary. For sandy soils, organic matter gives the
water something to soak into, rather than just sinking right through. For clay soils, organic
matter gives the soil some lightness and air.
3. The best time to water the garden is in the morning. If the garden is watered in the evening
or at night when the day is cooling off, the water is likely to stay on the foliage and increases
the danger of disease.
4. When watering the vegetable garden, always soak the soil thoroughly. A light sprinkling can
often do more harm than no water at all: it stimulates the roots to come to the surface,
where they are killed by exposure to the sun.
50
There are many ways of watering vegetables, such as watering cans, sprinkler irrigation, rain barrel,
soaker hose and drip irrigation. Methods differ in cost, labour involved and how well they conserve
water (Table 16). A combination of devices may be used to create the most effective vegetable
watering system.
Table 16: Advantages and disadvantages of different types of irrigation (Locascio, 2005)
Irrigation option
Watering Cans
Sprinkler Irrigation
Rain Barrel
Soaker Hose
Drip Irrigation
Advantage
- Easy
- Cheap
- Readily available
- Commonly used
- Many types to choose
- No cost
- Free of chemicals in tap water
- Commonly used
- Cheap
- Little or no water waste
- Furrows remain dry to walk along
- Less weed growth
Disadvantage
- High labour consuming;
- Only suitable for small garden
- Waste a lot of water to
evaporation
- Depend on precipitation
- Attract insects (mosquitoes)
- Waste water to evaporation
- Encourage disease to settle on
the wet foliage
- Expensive at the beginning
- Occasional problems of
plugging of the tiny drip orifice
5.4.5 Pest, disease and weeds management
The prevention and monitoring of pests, pathogens and weeds is particularly important in the
protection of organically produced vegetables, in order to keep the pressure below an acceptable
threshold. However, methods to fight present herbivores without using pesticides are rare and often
not sufficiently effective. Following potential preventing control methods and some possibilities to
control already present pests, pathogens or weeds are describes and recommended (modified from
Lobb, 1997).
Preventing control methods:
1. Purchase of certified seeds/seedlings (i.e. pure, clean, uncontaminated, not infested)
2. Selection of resistant/tolerant crop varieties
3. Regular soil tests to observe, adjust and maintain soil pH and fertility to an optimal level (see
5.4.1)
4. Ensuring of soil drainage and aeration to avoid water stagnation and long wet periods. By this
enough essential oxygen is provided to the plant roots, plants are vital and less susceptible to
pathogens.
5. Ensuring sufficient aboveground air circulation for a good microclimate within the crops by
keeping an appropriate plant density (plant and row distances). Especially important against
microbial pathogens like powdery mildew, which needs a certain wet period to infest the
plant (Bleasdale and Salter, 1991)
6. Keep of strict sanitation practices to make infestations unlikely.
7. Tillage operations before or after cultivation period to incorporate weeds, harvest residues,
eliminate sedentary pest stages (pupae, eggs). However, peat soils support re-rooting and
tillage operations promote decomposition, which negatively affects soil structure and pH (see
51
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
5.4.1). Therefore, light tillage operations like rotovation or hoeing and removing weeds
manually should be preferred whenever possible.
Temporary fallowing of a plot for one year. For this period plants with beneficial effects on
the subsequent crops are cultivated instead of vegetables. For instance legumes are often
used as green manure, mostly because of their nitrogen fixing properties.
Crop rotation (see 5.5.2.1)
Grow certain crops simultaneously on the
same plot (Intercropping) to achieve
either beneficial effect for the current
crop(s) or for subsequently cultivated
crops without influencing each other
negatively. Examples of effects are weed
suppression, pest repellency, attraction of
beneficial organisms, nitrogen fixation or
synergistic effects on yield. Synergistic
effects (yield/quality of crops higher when
intercropped than grown separately) are
Figure 9: Intercropping cabbage with garlic
often based on more effective
(www.thailand.ipm-info.org/components
exploitation of the soil space/nutrients
/intercropping.htm)
and sunlight. However, intercropping
should not be overdone due to possible
nutrient shortages (not permanently, not high nutrient demanding crops simultaneously).
Furthermore, the three main criteria for crop rotation (family, rooting depth, nitrogen
demand; see 5.4.2) should be kept for intercropping as well. Further criteria like aboveground
growth habit, growth rate or cultivation periods need to be considered.
Covering the crops with mulches or nets to suppress weed growth and control in-/vertebrate
pests. This is particularly important during fly periods of a certain pest or at early
developmental vegetable stages, which are more susceptible to pests.
Promotion of beneficial organisms with the help of technical or agricultural measures.
Flowering plants provide with nectar and pollen a secondary food source for parasitic wasps
or predators of pests. Lacewing larvae for example are predators whereas their adults
facultatively feed on pollen and nectar. Plants that emit volatile attractants can be grown next
to the crops (see “10. Intercropping”). Hedges, shrubs, trees or special installations pose ideal
places for all kinds of predators (e.g. insects, spiders, birds) or parasitoids (= adults deposit
eggs inside or next to host, larvae feed on and develop inside host) to overwinter, hide or
refuge.
52
Control methods against present pests, pathogens and weeds
1. Utilization of other organisms to control pathogens, weeds
and particularly pests like nematodes, insects or mites
(biological control). Certain bacteria are often used against
all kinds of pest arthropods, entomopathogenic nematodes
usually against belowground pests, entopathogenic fungi
Figure 10: Biological control
(www.gardenerstips.co.uk/blog/w
mostly against aboveground pests. Furthermore, several
pcontent/uploads/2009/04/ladybi
predatory or parasitic bio control agents are commercially
rd.jpg)
available and commonly applied in greenhouse crops.
However, those agents are most often not yet efficient enough in field production.
2. Manual collection and destruction of easily recognizable pests (e.g. caterpillars, beetles,
aphid colonies) or weeds (Bleasdale and Salter, 1991).
3. Immediate removal and destruction of plants infested with pathogens (e.g. fungi, bacteria,
viruses)
4. Installation of environment-friendly traps or repelling installations against pest animals.
5.5. Practical recommendations
5.5.1. Soil preparation for cultivation
Due to the water saturation and high acidity, the first operations before starting a vegetable garden
on peat soil are draining the field, raising the pH to an appropriate level. The potential locations for
the community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht are already drained by water moats.
It is possible to grow vegetables directly on peat soil, however, in order to produce high quality
vegetables, adjusting the acidity of peat soil by applying lime is required. It is strongly advised to take
soil tests and analyse the results yourself or by experts to obtain the acidity and other relevant
chemical properties of the soil. Therewith precise recommendations on type and amount of lime to
achieve an optimal pH adjustment can be determined by experts. However, if soil tests cannot be
conducted in reality, estimated 20,000 kg/ha lime is needed
to start vegetable production on peat soil and about 2,000
kg/ha lime is required for pH maintaining in subsequent years
(Lobb, 1997). The lime should be spread equally on the soil
surface. For the actual operation one half of the lime is
applied, rotovated and tilled to a depth of about 40 cm by
ploughing. Afterwards, the rest of the lime is incorporated
into the upper 10 to 20 cm with the help of a rotovator. If the
machinery is not available, the lime can also be incorporated
manually with spades, rakes and additional physical effort.
Figure 11: Rotovator
It is suggested to do soil tillage once a year in spring before
(www.rotovator.eu/images/rotovator.j
pg)
sowing, together with the application of manure which will
be discussed below. Especially for the restaurant the quality
of the product has highest priority. Since appropriate pH and fertility levels are very important to
53
obtain high quality vegetables, it is recommended to follow the above described soil preparations as
much as possible.
5.5.2. Crop plan
5.5.2.1. Crop rotation
Based on the area of the garden, as well as the life cycles of some important vegetable pests and
diseases (e.g. potato nematodes), it is suggested to divide the crop area into 6 plots, following a 6
year crop rotation.
The following steps should be followed to make a good crop rotation plan:
Step 1: Fulfil the Vegetable Category Table. Using the guidelines of creating crop rotation, the
following vegetable category table is designed to make it handier for the operational planner to
decide the rotation which will be used in the garden (Table 17). In the vegetable category table,
there are four columns named Family, Root depth, Nitrogen demand and Crops. Before operational
planner wants to add one new vegetable in the crop rotation, the relevant information of this
vegetable should be found from internet or books about gardening. The vegetable should then be
put in the right place in the table. Annex 10 shows an example of creating a vegetable category table,
which includes the vegetables preferred by the Sliedrecht community.
Table 17: Vegetable category table to design crop rotation for the garden
Family
Root
depth
……
deep
middle
shallow
……
deep
middle
shallow
Nitrogen
demand
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
Crops
……
……
……
Step 2: Select crops, which are suitable to soil type, current soil acidity and fertility, and to the
Dutch/north-west European climate conditions (use crops from Annex 10 or optionally add crops to
this list); but always include one year of grass clover.
54
Step 3: Rotate the family. Try to have 2-6 years (the more the better) between growing crops from
the same family on the same plot.
Step 4: Rotate the root depth and nitrogen demand. Alter between crops with different root depth
and nitrogen demand properties (e.g. high nitrogen demanding and important crop after year with
nitrogen fixing grass clover).
Table 18 shows an example rotation created following the steps mentioned above.
Table 18: Example of a Crop rotation plan based on the physiological characteristics of vegetables
Year
Plot 1
2
3
4
5
6
cabbage or
Grass clover
Pea
or cauliflower
Parsnip
or
1
(SF)
Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
tomato (DL)
cabbage or
Pea
or cauliflower
Parsnip
or Grass clover
2
Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
tomato (DL)
(SF)
cabbage or
Pea
or cauliflower
Parsnip
or Grass clover
3
Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
tomato (DL)
(SF)
Pumpkin(DH)
cabbage or
Pea
or cauliflower
Parsnip
or Grass clover
4
bean(MF)
(SH)
tomato (DL)
(SF)
Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)
cabbage or
cauliflower
Parsnip
or Grass clover
Pea
or
5
(SH)
tomato (DL)
(SF)
Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
cabbage or
Parsnip
or Grass clover
Pea
or cauliflower
6
tomato (DL)
(SF)
Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
Note: SF=Shallow rooted and Nitrogen fixing crop, DH=deep rooted and high nitrogen demanding
crop, SL=Shallow rooted and low nitrogen demanding crop, DF=Deep rooted and low nitrogen
demanding crop, SH=Shallow rooted and high nitrogen demanding crop, DL=Deep rooted and low
nitrogen demanding crop, MF=Middle rooted and Nitrogen fixing crop.
Step 5: Adjust the crop rotation. In reality, operational planner must consider much more things
besides the physiological characteristics of vegetables. An integrated consideration, including profit,
labour cost of vegetables, risk distribution and additional facilitations, should also be taken into
account. Table 19 shows the adjusted crop rotation plan after implementing the integrated
consideration based on above the crop rotation plan.
55
Table 19: Example of a crop rotation plan with an integrated consideration
Plo
t
Year
1
2
3
4
5
6
cabbage or
Grass clover Beetroot(M
Pea
or cauliflower
1
(SF)
H)
Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
Parsnip(DL)
cabbage or
Beetroot(M
Pea
or cauliflower
Grass clover
2
H)
Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
Parsnip(DL)
(SF)
cabbage or
Pea
or cauliflower
Grass clover Beetroot(M
3
Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
Parsnip(DL)
(SF)
H)
cabbage or
Pea
or cauliflower
Grass clover Beetroot(M
4
bean(MF)
(SH)
Parsnip(DL)
(SF)
H)
Onion(SL)
cabbage or
cauliflower
Grass clover Beetroot(M
Pea
or
5
(SH)
Parsnip(DL)
(SF)
H)
Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
cabbage or
Grass clover Beetroot(M
Pea
or cauliflower
6
Parsnip(DL)
(SF)
H)
Onion(SL)
bean(MF)
(SH)
Note: SF=Shallow rooted and Nitrogen fixing crop, DH=deep rooted and high nitrogen demanding
crop, SL=Shallow rooted and low nitrogen demanding crop, DF=Deep rooted and low nitrogen
demanding crop, SH=Shallow rooted and high nitrogen demanding crop, DL=Deep rooted and low
nitrogen demanding crop, MF=Middle rooted and Nitrogen fixing crop, MH=Middle rooted and high
nitrogen demanding crop
What should be mentioned here is that probably more than one vegetable will be grown in the same
plot in one year. On the one hand, several vegetables can be grown together at the same time in one
plot, which is called intercropping (see 5. 4.5 and 5.5.5). On the other hand, if the cultivation period
of one vegetable in crop rotation is shorter than the potential annual cultivation period in The
Netherlands, it is better to grow another vegetable or already a winter cover crop (see 5.5.5) after it,
to keep the soil covered (weed suppression) and to get more profit. In these cases mentioned above,
more than six vegetables will be included in the crop rotation. How many vegetables to grow in one
plot in one year depend on the characteristics of the crops, as well as the sowing calendar (Annex
11).
For some of the vegetables, it is suitable to grow with seeds. However, for some others, it is better
to start with seedlings (Annex 11). Normally seedlings are much more expensive than seeds, but will
provide higher survival rate. It is suggested to use seedlings in the first year when the garden is built
up. But the operational planner needs to make a decision based on the actual situation. The
information about how many seeds/seedlings are needed per unit area, and the expected yield of
each vegetable can be found in Annex 11 (but this is based on conventional yield, it needs to be
decreased appropriately into organic yield, normally multiply with 0.6), or consult a seed company
or expert. The total amount of seeds/seedling can be calculated as the amount of seeds/seedlings
required per unit area * plot area.
56
5.5.2.2. Greenhouse
A greenhouse will be useful for the vegetable garden. However, it is not necessary to build up a
permanent greenhouse at the beginning, because of the unclear future of the garden and financial
limitation, and the regulation that it is not allowed to build up buildings higher than 2 m on the
location might also be a problem. It is possible to use a plastic tunnel instead. The greenhouse will
mainly be used to prepare seedlings in the garden, and also grow vegetables such as tomatoes and
cucumbers.
5.5.2.3. Herbs
It is suggested to build up a herb garden in the vegetable garden. Perennial herbs will be grown in
the herb garden because they need a separate place to grow. Annual herbs will be planted in
between the vegetable rows to attract beneficial insects. Furthermore, a herb garden contributes to
the landscape. Operational planner should decide what herbs will be grown based on the actual
situation.
5.5.3. Fertilizer plan
Rotted farm yard manure is more recommended than fresh manure, liquid manure or slurry. Spring
is the most suitable season to fertilize the garden. It is suggested to apply rotted farm yard manure
once a year in spring, and harrow the manure into the ploughed soils immediately after spreading.
This action can be combined with the annual soil tillage.
Annual soil tests are important, especially on newly developed bogs. Newly developed peat soils are
highly acidic and very low in most nutrients. Thus a complete soil analysis for the macronutrients is a
good investment. Based on the result of the soil test, the amount of fertilizer needed can be
calculated as:
(Crop nutrient requirement for yield goal - nutrient in the soil that is available to the crop prior to
seeding) / nutrient content in fertilizer.
If soil tests are not be done, about 30 ton/ha farm yard manure is suggested to be applied. This
estimated number is based on the calculation considering the following points:
• The crop requiring maximum amount of nitrogen was selected. Here taking the crops
from the example crop rotation, tomato was the highest nitrogen demanding crop.
• The soil containing minimum amount of available nitrogen was considered.
• Amount of Nitrogen content in the manure was considered 1.5 kg/ton as in Table 14.
• Amount nitrogen fixed by the grass clover (here 50 kg/ha) was deducted from the total
amount of nitrogen to be applied.
Grasses harvested from the pasture in the rest area, and the crop residues can be made into
compost and applied as fertilizer to the plots.
5.5.4. Irrigation plan
Because the average precipitation is relatively high, the surround underground water source is
abundant, and the peaty soil holds water very well, water management won’t cost much effort in
the vegetable garden Sliedrecht. However, good irrigation is still important because the tops layer of
peat soil is easy to get dried out, and must be kept wet by watering (see 5.4.1).
57
Setting rain Barrels in the garden is recommended. If an irrigation system is wanted in the garden,
sprinkler irrigation and soaker hose are both good choices. However, at the beginning, the garden
can be run successfully also without an irrigation system, since the size of the garden is not quite big.
In this case watering cans are needed to irrigate the vegetables. Even if the garden has an irrigation
system, water cans are still recommended because they are small enough for the elderly and disable
people.
5.5.5. Pest, disease and weeds management plan
Pest and pathogen prevention consists of bio-genetic and agro-technical measures. First of all,
certified sowing or planting material and resistant or tolerant vegetable varieties need to be chosen
for the organic garden in Sliedrecht whenever this is possible.
Annual soil tests for pH and at least main nutrients are recommended each spring and adequate
action has to be taken to ensure optimal growing conditions for the crops (see 5.5.1 and 5.5.3). Both
tests can be done by any person with commercially available kits, but for accurate results at least
fertility tests should be conducted by experts. Consideration of deep rooting crops in the crop
rotation as well as deep, but reasonable tillage operations can support drainage and aeration of the
soil (for detailed recommendations see 5.5.2.1 and 5.5.1). Particularly if the vegetable plot was
previously fallow land, it is suggested to clear and tillage soil before the end of September to
counteract damage due to crane fly larvae, which can feed on several different crops (Bleasdale and
Salter, 1991). Light tillage operations like rotovation or hoeing and removing weeds manually should
be preferred on peat soils whenever possible. We recommend to plough only once a year
(mechanically or manually) in spring especially to incorporate winter cover crops, weeds, manure or
lime and to prepare the soil for cultivation. Immediately after each harvest the respective plot needs
to be operated with rotary tiller and winter cover
crops can be sown. Different seed mixtures
containing different legumes and oat for instance
increase the soil nitrogen level and suppress weeds
(Brennan et al., 2009). Winter cover crops rye (Secale
cereale L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), crimson
clover (Trifolium incarnatum L.), and hairy vetch
(Vicia villosa Roth.) are competitive in mixtures,
survive the winter and can be easily killed by
mechanical operations besides suppressing weeds
and partially fixing aerial nitrogen (Creamer et al.,
1997).
An appropriate crop rotation is one of the most
important cultivation measures to prevent
infestations in organic vegetable production (see
5.5.2.1). Thus, the guideline and main criteria should
be met and a created crop rotation plan should be
followed.
Numerous combinations of simultaneous or relayed
grown crops (intercropping) are known that can
58
Figure 12: An example of an “Insect hotel”
(www.greenurbanliving.co.nz/imagelibrary/145.
jpg)
optionally be applied. Apart from its use as winter cover crop, clover can also be undersown to main
crops. Clover as cover crop of Brassicas for instance protects against the economically important
Small Cabbage White butterfly Pieris rapae (Shelton et al., 1994). Although clover species differ
considerably in their growth rate and height, all of them can still compete for light especially with
shallow or slow growing crops and can reduce their yield to a quite large extent (Den Hollander et al.,
2007 a/b). Therefore, clover as an undersown cover crop is particularly suitable for competitive and
fast growing crops like. Additional to nitrogen fixing properties cowpea as a summer cover crop
(grown for about 3 months) promotes beneficial nematodes and might be active against plantparasitic nematodes (Wang et al., 2004, 2006). Furthermore, intercropping early maturing
vegetables like lettuce, radish or onion with strawberries does not affect the quality negatively, but
may increase the productivity and efficiency of available resources (Karlidag and Yildirim, 2009).
Alliaceae like onion, leek or garlic are successful as intercrops in combination with Brassica crops like
cauliflower, broccoli or cabbage (Ünlü et al., 2010). When a certain decrease in lettuce yield can be
accepted, it can be intercropped with tomatoes produced in a greenhouse (Cecílio Filho et al., 2008).
During the cultivation period, crops need to be observed to ensure a quick recognition, removal and
destruction of infested material from fields. Also regular cleaning of garden tools and keeping plots
free of weeds is important for sanitary purposes, because many weeds are secondary hosts of
microbial pathogens, nematodes, insect pest larvae or viruses (Bleasdale and Salter, 1991). To
reduce the risk of microbial infections, appropriate plant densities for each crop must be kept
(Annex 11).
During flight periods of important pests (Annex 12) and in the first few weeks after sowing or
planting mulches or nets should be used to cover the crops.
In addition to winter cover crops, hedges, different berry shrubs, flowering plants, a bee hive or an
“insect hotel” will enhance the general biodiversity and the abundance of natural enemies and other
beneficial organisms of pests within the garden. An “insect hotel”, also implemented in a community
garden in Leiden, can be built of timber, pots, bricks, bamboo, straw, hay, cones and many others.
The inner parts need to be protected against wetness for instance by implementing a kind of roof or
ensuring that the numerous holes have a slight incline. The installation provides space to refuge or
overwinter and different sized breeding holes for several arthropod species (Figure 12). These
include many pollinators like solitary bees or bumblebees and natural enemies of pests like different
parasitoid wasp and fly species or predators like lacewings or ladybird beetles. Sunflowers grown
next to a crop attract predatory birds against pest arthropods and slugs (Jones and Sieving, 2006).
Providing nectar or pollen in any form gives predatory and parasitic insects a secondary food source
and facilitates their reproduction and performance (Venzon et al., 2006, Hogg et al., 2011). Certain
fly or lacewing larvae for example are predators whereas their adults feed on pollen or nectar (Krenn
et al., 2008). Most of those measures are low-budget, easily realisable, but can have a considerable
effect and therefore should be taken into account in the garden in Sliedrecht.
Environment-friendly traps can be useful to monitor or control certain pests. For instance beer traps
can be set up against slugs (Bleasdale and Salter, 1991) or pheromone traps against insect pests.
However, collecting and killing visible pests like slugs, caterpillars, beetles or aphid colonies is
probably the most trivial control method with no input but labour.
59
In organic field production, promoting beneficial insect and manual collection is most often more
effective than introducing natural enemies of certain pests to the garden. However, biological
control is a reasonable measure under controlled and self-contained conditions like in a greenhouse
or a tunnel. Several predatory or parasitic biological control agents like ladybird beetles, lacewings or
parasitoid wasps are commercially available and commonly applied in greenhouse crops.
Since the community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht will not be certified as organic for at least two
years, pesticides could optionally be used in extreme situations with very high pest or pathogen
pressure. Otherwise considerable or even complete losses of certain crop need to be accepted. To
avoid these scenarios describes prevention measures should be applied sufficiently and correctly.
5.5.6. Labour plan
In the community garden participants from Sliedrecht provide the required labour. Though most of
the labour for a community garden comes from the people who participate in the garden, there is a
need to hire some skilled labours for specific skill requiring tasks. A well planned working schedule
for the people working in the garden is very important. People who work in the garden can be well
managed through the enforcement of rules. For details see Business Plan.
5.5.7. Building and machine plan
A greenhouse might be built in the garden (See 5.5.2.2).
A store room is needed for putting all the gardening tools inside. Table 20 shows the tools that might
be necessary for implementing operational activities. The numbers of the tools are just estimations.
The Gardener should reconsider these numbers based on the real situation.
Table 20: Tools needed by a vegetable garden
Tool (Purpose)
Spade (hand plough)
Pitchfork(apply manure)
Pruning shear(cutting)
Lawn mower(mowing)
Knife(harvesting)
Rake(prepare seedbed, weeding)
Shovel (moving stuff)
Crates (move product to customer,
put seedlings)
Wheelbarrow (moving stuff)
Number
3-4
1
1
1
5
3-4
2
30
Watering can(irrigating)
Pump(irrigating)
Rain barrel(irrigating)
Other tools
3
1
3
several
3
60
6. References
Books and articles
Alaimo, K., Packnett, E., Miles, R. A., and Kruger, D. J. (2008). Fruit and vegetable intake among
urban community gardeners. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior. 40: 94–101.
Armstrong, D. (2000a). A community diabetes education and gardening project to improve diabetes
care in a northwest American Indian tribe. Diabetes Educator 26: 113–120.
Armstrong, D. (2000b). A survey of community gardens in upstate New York: Implication for health
promotion and community development. Health and Place 6: 319–327.
Bleasdale, J.K.A. and Salter, P.J. (1991). The complete know and grow vegetables. Oxford [etc.] :
Oxford University Press.
Brennan E.B, Boyd N.S, Smith R.F, Foster P. (2009). Seeding rate and planting arrangement effects on
growth and weed suppression of a legume-oat cover crop for organic vegetable systems. Agronomy
Journal 101 (4), pp. 979-988.
Buishand T. (1979). Groenten uit Eigen Hof. Zutphen : Terra. Pp.182-189.
Bullock, D.G. (1992). Crop rotation. Plant Sciences. 11: 309-326.
CBS, (2010). www.sliedrecht.sgp-christenunie.nl/standpunten. Retrieved on April 5, 2011.
Cecílio Filho, A.B., Rezende, B.L.A., Barbosa, J.C., Feltrim, A.L., Da Silva, G.S. and Grangeiro, L.C.
(2008). Interaction between lettuce and tomato plants, in intercropping cultivation, established at
different times, under protected cultivation. Horticultura Brasileira 26 (2), pp. 158-164.
Creamer, N.G., Bennett, M.A. and Stinner, B.R. (1997). Evaluation of cover crop mixtures for use in
vegetable production systems. HortScience 32 (5), pp. 866-870.
Den Hollander, N.G., Bastiaans, L. and Kropff, M.J. (2007a). Clover as a cover crop for weed
suppression in an intercropping design I. Characteristics of several clover species. Agronomy 26
(2007) 92–103.
Den Hollander, N.G., Bastiaans, L. and Kropff, M.J. (2007b). Clover as a cover crop for weed
suppression in an intercropping design II. Competitive ability of several clover species. Agronomy 26
(2007) 104–112.
Dibsdall, L.A., N Lambert, R.F. Bobbin and Frewer, L. J. (2002). Low-income consumers’ attitudes and
behaviour towards access, availability and motivation to eat fruit and vegetables. Public Health
Nutrition 6(2): 159–168.
Draper, C. and Freedman, D. (2010). Review and Analysis of the Benefits, Purposes, and Motivations
Associated with Community Gardening in the United States. Journal of Community Practice 18: 458–
492.
61
FAO, (1998). World reference base for soil resources. 84 World Soil Resources Report. Chapter 3.
Fisher, I. (1992). A blessing for gardens where green is so rare. New York Times 25 May.
Francis, M., Lindsey, P. and Rice, J.S. (1994). The Healing Dimensions of People-Plant Relations.
Proceedings of a Research Symposium. Center for Design Research, Department of Environmental
Design, UC Davis, CA.
Gemeente Sliedrecht (2010). In de Wijkkrant. Uitgave November 2010.
Gemeente Sliedrecht. (2010). Gezondheid inZicht, Gemeente Sliedrecht. The municipality of
Gemeente Sliedrecht.
Hobson, P.N. and Robertson, A.M. (1977). Waste Treatment in Agriculture. Applied Science
Publishers.
Hogg, B.N., Bugg, R.L. and Daane, K.M. (2011). Attractiveness of common insectary and harvestable
floral resources to beneficial insects. Biological Control 56 (1), pp. 76-84.
Hung, Y. (2004). East New York Farms: Youth participation in community development and urban
agriculture. Children, Youth and Environments 14(1): 56-85.
Irvine, S., Johnson, L. and Peters, K. (1999). Community gardens and sustainable land-use planning: a
case study of the Alex Wilson Community Garden. Local Environment 4(1): 34–45.
Jones, G.A. and Sieving, K.E. (2006). Intercropping sunflower in organic vegetables to augment bird
predators of arthropods. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 117 (2006) 171–177.
Karlidag, H. and Yildirim, E. (2009). Strawberry intercropping with vegetables for proper utilization of
space and resources. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 33 (1), pp. 107-116.
Kok F.J. and Kromhout D. (2004). Atherosclerosis- Epidemiological studies on the health effects of a
Mediterranean diet. European Journal of Nutrition 43: i2-i5.
Koyabashi, K., Cloutier, D. and Roth, M. (2009). Making meaningful connections: A profile of social
isolation and health among older adults in small town and small city, British Columbia. Journal of
aging and health 21 (2): 374-397.
Krenn, H.W., Gereben-Krenn, B.A., Steinwender, B.M. and Popov, A. (2008). Flower visiting
Neuroptera: Mouthparts and feeding behaviour of Nemoptera sinuata (Nemopteridae). European
Journal of Entomology 105 (2), pp. 267-277.
Lampkin, N. (2002a). Organic Farming. Ipswich : Old Pond, pp. 132.
Lampkin, N. (2002b). Organic Farming. Ipswich : Old Pond, pp. 108.
Lanza, E., Schatzkin, A., Daston, C., Corle, D., Freedman, L., Ballard-Barbash, R., Caan, B., Lance, P.,
Marshall, J., Iber, F., Shike, M., Weissfeld, J., Slattery, M., Paskett, E., Mateski, D. and Albert, P.
(2001). Implementation of a 4-y, high-fiber, high-fruit-and-vegetable, low-fat dietary intervention:
results of dietary changes in the Polyp Prevention Trial. Am J Clin Nutrition 74: 387-401.
62
Lawson, L. J. (2005). City Bountiful: A century of community gardening in America. Los Angeles, CA:
University of California Press.
Leigh, H. (2004). Diversity and connections in community gardens: A contribution to local
sustainability. Local Environment 9(3): 285–305.
Levkoe, C. Z. (2006). Learning democracy through food justice movements. Agriculture and Human
Values 23 (1): 89-98.
Lobb, D.A. (1997). Management and Conservation Practices for Vegetable Production on Peat Soils.
University of Moncton.
Locascio, S.J. (2005). Management of irrigation for vegetables: Past, present, and future.
HortTechnology 15 (3), pp. 482-485.
MAFF/ADAS Profitable utilisation of livestock manures. Booklet 2081, 1986. New edition with revised
data due 1990/91.
Marcus, C. C. and M. Barnes, M. (1999). Healing gardens: Therapeutic benefits and design
recommendations. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. pp. 27–86.
McAleese, J. D. and Rankin, L. L. (2007). Garden based nutrition education affects fruit and vegetable
consumption in six grade adolescents. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 107: 662-665.
McBey, M.A. (1985). The therapeutic aspects of gardens and gardening: an aspect of total patient
care. J. Advanced. Nursing 10: 591-595.
Milligan, C., Gatrell A. and Bingely, A. (2004). 'Cultivating health': therapeutic landscapes and older
people in northern England. Social Science and Medicine 58(9): 1781-1793.
Morris, J. and Zidenberg-Cherr, S. (2002). Garden-enhanced nutrition curriculum improves fourthgrade school children’s knowledge of nutrition and preference for vegetables. Journal of the
American Dietetic Association 102(1): 91-93.
Ott, P. (1986). Utilisation of farmyard manure and composted farmyard manure – a manuring
strategy. The Importance of Biological Agriculture in a World of Diminishing Resources.
Verlagsgruppe Witzenhausen.
Robinson, C. W. and Zajicek, J. M. (2005). Growing minds: The effects of a one-year school garden
program on six constructs of life skills of elementary school children. HortTechnology 15(3): 453-457.
Saldivar-Tanaka, L. and Krasny, M. E. (2004). Culturing community development, neighborhood open
space, and civic agriculture: The case of Latino community gardens in New York City. Agriculture and
Human Values 21 (4): 399-412.
Schwärzel, K., Renger, M., Sauerbrey, R. and Wessolek, G. (2002). Soil physical characteristics of peat
soils. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 165 (4), pp. 479-486.
Shell Better Britain Campaign. (1999). Community gardens. Campaign information. Birmingham. pp.
170.
63
Shelton, A.M., Theunissen, J. and Hoy, C.W. (1994). Efficiency of variable-intensity and sequential
sampling for insect control decisions in cole crops in the Netherlands. Entomologia Experimentalis et
Applicata 70 (3), pp. 209-215.
Sommer, R., Learey, F., Summitt, J. and Tirrell, M. (1994). Social benefits of resident involvement in
tree planting: comparison with developer-planted trees. Arboriculture 20 (6): 323-328.
Teig, E., Amulya, J., Bardwell, L., Buchenau, M., Marshall, J. A. and Litt, J. S. (2009). Collective efficacy
in Denver, Colorado: Strengthening neighbourhoods and health through community gardens. Health
& Place 15: 1115–1122.
Trichopoulou, A., Orfanos, P., Norat, T., Bueno-de-Mesquita, B., Ocke, M.C., Peeters, P.H.M., Van der
Schouw, Y.T., Boeing, H., Hoffmann, K., Boffetta, P., Nagel, G., Masala, G., Krogh, V., Panico, S.,
Tumino, R., Vineis, P., Bamia, C., Naska, A., Benetou, V., Ferrari, P., Slimani, N., Pera, G., MartinezGarcia, C., Navarro, C., Rodriguez-Barranco, M., Dorronsoro, M., Spencer, E.A., Key, T.J., Bingham, S.,
Khaw, K.T., Kesse, E., Clavel-Chapelon, F., Boutron-Ruault, M.C., Berglund, G., Wirfalt, E., Hallmans,
G., Johansson, I., Tjonneland, A., Olsen, A., Overvad, K., Hundborg, H.H., Riboli, E. and Trichopoulos,
D. (2005). Modified Mediterranean diet and survival: PICelderly prospective cohort study. BMJ.
330:991.
Ünlü, H., Sari, N. and Solmaz, I. (2010). Intercropping effect of different vegetables on yield and
some agronomic properties. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 8 (3-4 PART 1), pp. 723727.
Venzon, M., Rosado, M.C., Euzébio, D.E., Souza, B. and Schoereder, J.H. (2006). Suitability of
leguminous cover crop pollens as food source for the green lacewing Chrysoperla externa.
Neotropical Entomology 35 (3), pp. 371-376.
Wang, K.H., McGovern, R.J., McSorley, R. and Gallaher, R.N. (2004). Cowpea cover crop and
solarization for managing root-knot and other plant-parasitic nematodes in herb and vegetable crops.
Annual Proceedings Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida 63, pp. 99-104.
Wang, K.H., McGovern, R.J., McSorley, R. and Gallaher, R.N. (2006). Effects of cover cropping,
solarisation, and soil fumigation on nematode communities. Plant Soil 286: 229-243.
Wetenschapswinkel (2010). Van Voedselbank Naar Voedseltuin. Wageningen UR.
Whiren, A. P. (1995). Planning a garden from a child’s perspective. Children’s Environments 12(2):
250-255.
Zavadil, J. (2009). The effect of municipal wastewater irrigation on the yield and quality of vagetables
and crops. Soil and Water Research, 4 (3), pp. 91-103.
64
Website sources:
1. “ Google Maps.nl”. http://maps.google.nl/maps?rls=com.microsoft:en-us&oe=UTF8&startIndex=&startPage=1&redir_esc=&q=sliedrecht+map&um=1&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Sliedrecht&gl=nl&ei=Qo-VTbWLF4rqObLZoTI&sa=X&oi=geocode
_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ8gEwAA. Retrieved on 1April 2011.
2. “Knmi.nl” (in Dutch). http://www.knmi.nl/. Retrieved on 18 September 2010.
3. Agrikal, Website: www.agrikal.nl. Retrieved on 18 April, 2011.
4. Anbi, website, http://www.anbi.nl/anbi-info/. Retrieved on 19 April, 2011
5. Boels renting company, website: http://www.boels.nl/huren/tuinpark/frezen/grondfreesmachine-16-pk. Retrieved on 19 April, 2011.
6. CBS, website: http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/home/default.htm. Retrieved on 5 April, 2011
7. De 12 Ambachten, website: http://www.de12ambachten.nl/nonolet.html. Retrieved on 20
April, 2011.
8. De Batterijen, website: www.batterijen.nl. Retrieved on 19 April, 2011.
9. Estafette, website: http://www.estafettewinkel.nl. Retrieved on 16 April, 2011
10. Eurib, website: www.eurib.org. Retrieved on 14 April, 2011.
11. Finance Hub, website: http://www.financehub.org.uk/funding_
fundamentals/getting_help/default.aspa. Retrieved on 11 April, 2011
12. Google earth, possible location 1 and 2,
http://maps.google.nl/maps?hl=en&biw=1259&bih=871&q=badhuisstraat+arnhem&um=1&
ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Badhuisstraat,+Arnhem&gl=nl&ei=j-CvTar5DsSBOr _B7bAJ&sa=X
&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ8gEwAA. Retrieved on 13 April, 2011
13. Hervormd Sliedrecht, website http://www.hervormdsliedrecht.nl/ovzorganisaties.php?mi
=4&pid=0). Retrieved on 5 April, 2011
14. Home finance, website: http://www.homefinance.nl/economie/inflatie/inflatie-nederlandcpi.asp. Retrieved on 20 April, 2011.
15. http://drechtsteden.waxtrapp.com/dds/up/ZehcjjiHeC_29848_Eindrapportage_Sliedrecht_r
aad.pdf. Retrieved on 10 April, 2011.
16. http://gardenerstips.co.uk/blog/wpcontent/uploads/2009/04/ladybird.jpg. Retrieved on 19
April, 2011
17. http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=03759ned&D1=0,3,6,9,12&D2=1
29-132&D3=718&D4=22&VW=T. Retrieved on 13 April, 2011.
18. http://thailand.ipm-info.org/components/ intercropping.htm. Retrieved on 19 April, 2011.
19. http://www.cbs.nl/NR/rdonlyres/E502BD0A-CA5B-4273-BA27BF4058712361/ 0/ 2010b55
pub.pdf) Retrieved on 29 March, 2011.
20. http://www.duurzaamnieuws.nl/bericht.rxml?id=60239. Retrieved on 5 April, 2011
21. http://www.greenurbanliving.co.nz/imagelibrary/145.jpg. Retrieved on 12 April, 2011.
22. http://www.rotovator.eu/images/rotovator.jpg. Retrieved on 19 April, 2011
23. http://www.terborgse.nl/top-10-veel-gezocht/tweedehands-kantoormeubilair.html.
Retrieved on 19 April, 2011
24. Internet Gemeentegids Sliedrecht weasbite, http://www.sliedrecht.com/. Retrieved on 19
April, 2011
25. Marktplaats website: www.marktplaats.nl. Retrieved on 19 April, 2011.
65
26. Rijksoverheid, website: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/vragen-enantwoorden/wat-zijn-de-verschillen-en-overeenkomsten-tussen-een-vereniging-en-eenstichting.html. Retrieved on 5 April, 2011
27. Rijksoverheid, website: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/nieuws/2010/01/15/maatschappelijkestage-vanaf-2011-op-middelbare-school.html. Retrieved on 15 April, 2011
28. Starting a Community Vegetable Garden. Guide H-246. Revised by Ron Walser, Urban Small
Farm Specialist. Cooperative Extension Service • College of Agriculture and Home
Economics, NM state University. Retrieved on 12 April, 2011 from
http://aces.nmsu.edu/pubs/_h/H-246.pdf
29. Steenbergen, Food Inspiration Yearbook 2011, published 2010, website:
http://www.foodinspiration.nl/. Retrieved on 9 April, 2011
30. Stuurgroep, Groene Hart, website: http://www.groene-hart.nl/default.aspx. Retrieved on
13 April, 2011
31. Tunnel greenhouse, website: http://www.mholf.nl/tuinkassen.html?cat=114. Retrieved on
19 April, 2011.
32. Vrijwilligerspunt Sliedrecht, website http://www.sliedrecht.com/. Retrieved on 9 April, 2011
33. Water tank, website: http://www.postma-kunststof-tanks.nl/cv-300-13000-ltr/. Retrieved
on 18 April, 2011
34. Compost van Gemeente Sliedrecht, website:
http://www.sliedrecht.nl/sliedr/up1/ZmfnbflIC_20110407_kompas_week_14.pdf Retrieved
on April 21th 2011
Personal Interviews:
Annemarie van Dam, Tuin Leiden “Vrij Groen”
Martin Vos, chairman Stichting Moestuin Projecten, Utrecht
Pieter Jagtman, projectmanager Moestuin Utrecht
Joke Brouwer, Coördinator Vrijwilligersbank
Arjen Haak, Restaurant de Heeren van Slydregt
Lotte Storchart and Teamleader, Yulius
Ingrid Doomen, Vluchtelingenwerk
Begeleider activiteiten, Het Atelier
Sandria de Wildt, vrijwilliger voedselbank
Monique Breedijk, hoofd activiteiten begeleiding Waardeburgh
66
7. Annex
Annex 1: Case studies
Two example gardens: Leiden and Utrecht
Leiden: This garden is run by a foundation called Ideewinkel. The aim of the project is to create or
promote biodiversity, inspire people to produce part of their food in the city, to do more with nature,
to make people interested in sustainable living and let people see that they are a part of nature. The
garden exists because of the support from the municipality which provides the land for the garden.
Because of lack of transparency and democracy many enthusiastic people have withdrawn their
support. This clearly shows that the voice of the people participating in the garden has to be heard
and equally treated to make the garden successful. It has also been difficult to attract people to
participate in the garden because it is not located near the area where people live but in the
business area. This shows that it is important to have the location near the residential area so that it
is easy for people to participate.
Utrecht: The main purpose of the garden in Utrecht is to reduce the transport distances of food. It
also aims to provide reintegration, education to the young children about growing vegetables and to
maintain agro-biodiversity. The garden started with a good business plan which supported the fund
raising for the establishment of the garden. The business model consists of four pillars; vegetable
production, selling of vegetables, a restaurant and a day care for mentally disabled/reintegrating
people. The day care activity is the main source of income.
There are around 30 volunteers working in the garden. Their reason for being here is very different;
some people stay a volunteer here after they were a client for reintegration. Others just like being
active and have their hands in the dirt. The project had a difficult time in the beginning because of a
non-fitting project leader. this shows that it’s very important to have an inspiring, stable and
knowledgeable leader. Another important aspect is that the business cannot be based on greenery
alone to make good profit. There should be some other supporting income sources like a farm shop.
This garden has improved social cohesion by bringing people together at work in the garden.
67
Annex 2 :Demographic information
The demographic information on the population gives an impression on the citizens of Sliedrecht. It
discusses the relevant demographical numbers that could have a relation with social isolation , social
economic status and the population forecast.
Population and age distribution
In the community of Sliedrecht are currently 24.051 citizens, of which 12 265 are female and 11 786
are male. (CBS, 2010). Although the aim of the garden aims at specific target groups it is openly
accessible for all citizens of Sliedrecht. The community of Sliedrecht has the following age
distribution:
All
24051
0-19 years
5901
20-29 years
3045
30-39 years
3032
40-49 years
3370
50-64 years
4553
65-79 years
2967
80 years plus
1174*
(*CBS, 20101)
The percentage of people that were 65 years and older was 17,3 percentage on January 1, 2010. This
number is likely to rise in the coming years. According to Sliedrecht (2010) the group of people that
are 65 years and older is higher in Sliedrecht (29%, compared to the group of 20-64 year old) than in
the whole of the Netherlands (25%). The highest number within the population is people in the age
of 0-19 years and 50-64 years. Compared to the whole of the Netherlands (20-64 year old) this group
is higher in Sliedrecht 42% compared to 39% in the Netherlands.
Ethnicity and household size
The total number of immigrants was 2797 people of which 1129 people are western and 1668
people are from non-western origin (CBS, 2010). Relatively seen the number of immigrants is lower
In Sliedrecht 12%, then in the Netherlands 20%. The percentage of Turkish people is higher in
Sliedrecht 3%, compared to the average in the Netherlands which is 2% (Gemeente Sliedrecht, 2010).
Within Sliedrecht there are 10 039 household of which 13,7% are single households. The average
households contains of 2.34 persons. There are 580 people living in institutional households (CBS,
2010). The percentage of one person households In Sliedrecht (32%) is lower than in the
Netherlands(36%) (Gemeente Sliedrecht, 2010). In Sliedrecht of the 24051 citizens, 10 137 of the
people are unmarried, 11 171 people are married, a number 1496 people is widowed and 1247
people are divorced (CBS, 20101).
68
Socio Economic Status
Within Sliedrecht the percentage of citizens with a high education is lower than in the rest of the
Netherlands (18 against 24%) and there are on average more low educated people than Sliedrecht
compared to the region (50 to 45%) (Gemeente Sliedrecht, 2011).
In the period 2008 until 2010, the group of people between 15-65 years in Sliedrecht amounted 14
800 people. The total labour force was in total 10 200 people of which 9 900 people were in labour.
Total gross labour amounted 68.6 percentages for the period of 2008 until 2010.
In the Netherlands the state ensures social welfare for those who are according to the law incapable
of working. There were 300 people in December 2010 that received WIJ (law investment in youth)
and WBB (law employment and assistance) benefits. Additionally there were people that received
incapacity benefits, Arbeidsongeschiktheidsregelingen. There are 3 different kinds, WAO (incapacity
benefits), Wajong (benefits for young disabled) and WAZ (incapacity benefits). The total number of
incapacity benefits in the last quarter of 2009 in Sliedrecht was 1270 people (CBS, 2011).
According to the Gemeente Sliedrecht one of the eight adults receive social welfare, for the whole of
the Netherlands that is one of six. The average income of a household in Sliedrecht is 21.000 Euro,
compared to 21.600 euro in the whole of the Netherlands.
69
Annex 3: Questionnaire
Community Vegetable Garden Sliedrecht
Social feasibility Study
The community vegetable garden project aims to promote social cohesion in Sliedrecht community
by engaging participants from diverse socio- economic and cultural backgrounds. Additionally, it also
focuses on producing fresh local vegetables for the community, improving environment and
providing education for school children. We would like to know your opinion about establishing such
a community vegetable garden in Sliedrecht. Your opinion helps us to define the structure and
importance of the garden. So, your valuable opinion is highly appreciated.
It will take about 10 minutes to answer all the questions. We assure that your answers will be kept
confidential.
We would like to thank you for your time and effort.
70
Questionnaire
A. Vegetable Preferences
1. What are your favourite vegetables (top 5)?
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
2. Do you grow vegetables/herbs yourself?
a)
Yes
b) No
3. If no, why? (please tick one or more options)
a) I don’t know how to grow
b) I don’t have land
c) I don’t have spare time
d) I don’t have money to garden
e) I have no interest to grow vegetables
f) Other reasons, specify.....
B. Willingness to participate in the garden
1. Would you like to have such a garden in Sliedrecht?
a) Yes
b) No
2. Would you like to work/participate in such a garden?
a) Yes
b) No (if no, continue to question 6)
3. If yes, how would you like to be rewarded?
a. With vegetables
b. With money
c. I don’t need anything
d. Other (please specify).........
4.
How many hours per week would you like to work in the garden?
..........hours
5. What do you expect from the garden? (Please tick one or more options)
a) Fresh vegetables for own use
b) Gain/share knowledge about how to grow vegetables
c) Social contacts with friends and neighbours
71
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
Fun
Work outside
Routine in life (structuur in het leven, reden)
All of the above
Nothing
If any other reason, please specify.......
6. Which activities outside gardening do you expect in the garden?
a) cultural activities
b) playground for children
c) information about nature/food
d) art
e)social activities
f) other…
C. Social contact with people in Sliedrecht
Social activities are activities in which people from Sliedrecht meet each other like all kinds of
clubs and social events.
1. Do you participate in such activities ?
a)Yes b) No (if no, continue to question 4)
2. If yes, why?
a) for fun
b) to have more social contact
c) to relax
d) to fill my day
e)others (please specify) .........
3. In how many different activities do you participate every month ?
a)zero
b)one or two
c) two to four
d) more than four
4. How long have you been living in Sliedrecht?
a) Less than two years
b) Between two and ten years
c) Between ten and twenty years
d) whole life
5. How much contact do you have with people in Sliedrecht? (Please tick one or more options)
a) I have a lot of contacts with people in Sliedrecht
b) I have quite some contacts with people in Sliedrecht
c) I have very little contacts with people in Sliedrecht
d) I have no contacts with people in Sliedrecht
72
6. Are you satisfied with this?
a) Yes
b) No
7. Would you like to have more contact with people in Sliedrecht ?
a) Yes
b) No
8. Do you have any ideas to improve social cohesion in Sliedrecht ?
Demographic information
Age:
Gender:
Do you have a job?
Yes
If Yes : Full –time
No
part-time
Occupation/work:
Highest rounded of Education:
Master/Bachelor/MBO/LBO/High school/None
Marital status: Married
Unmarried
Divorced
Household size: With how many people do you live?
Nationality:
Thank you !
73
Widowed
74
B
C
B
A
A
B
C
A
A
B
B
A/B/C/D
A/C
3
A
B
D
D
A
A
A
A/C/E
A
B
Demographic information
age
39
41
gender
f
m
m
Job?
Yes
Yes
Yes
part time
Part-time
Full-time
Profession
executive secretary safety inspector Care
highest education MBO
MBO
HBO
marital status maried
maried
maried
size household
5
2
nationality
Dutch
Dutch
Dutch
C
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q4
Q5
Q6
A
A
A
3
50
1
A/B/C
A
B
Dutch
m
Yes
Full time
mechanic
LBO
maried
2
A/D/E
B
B
A
A/C
f
no
35
2
A
B
B
C
B
A
B
A/C/E
A
B
B/C
D
C
A
B
no
education
B
nothing
A
B
B/E
B
10
b
11
c
12
d
13
e
14
B
B
B
B
A
A
D help others A
C
A
C
B
A
B
A
A
A
A
See form
A
B/C
C
D
A
A
B
see form
A
A
A
A
A
A
A/B
A
A
50%A 50%B
5
10
G
A/C/F A/C/E
C
B
C
B
B
4
Dutch
m
yes
full-time
gardener
LBO
maried
D
A
A
A
see form
B
1//4
A/C/D
A
A
A
C
B
2
46
2
4
6
1
4
7
1
3
D
2
2
6
4
1
Dutch
2
2 HBO 7 MBO 4 LBO 1 none
10 maried 2 divorced2 unmarried
1
5
4
2
all Dutch
7
5
4
1
1
4
1
4
1
6
1
8
11
C
none
maried
9
14
7
8
3
1
7
4
13
8
8
1
3
B
47.30769
10 m 4 f
8 work 4 no work 2 pension
2 p-time 6 f-time
A
67
m
pensioned
A
A
B
A/D
C
A
B
E
B
endive cauliflower i eat
lettuce
lettuce
carrots green beans everything green beans snow peas
selery
tomato
endive
endive
green beans
brussels sprouts pears
chicory
chicory
green beans
8a
9
31
41
47
46
m
m
f
m
m
yes
yes
no
no
no
Full-time Full time
carer volunteer foreman A companion KDC
MBO
MBO MBO
MBO
LBO
MBO
maried
maried unmaried divorced divorced maried
2
5
2
3
3
3
Dutch
Dutch Dutch
Dutch
Dutch Dutch
78
A
B
Dknowledge transfer
D
D
C
A
B
A
A
A
B
Yes
A
D
A
A
A
51
f
m
Yes
pensioned
Full-time
injury expert
HBO
LBO
unmaried maried
4
1
Dutch
Dutch
43
A
A
A
A/B/C
C
C
C
D
A
A
A
A
A
B
do more with
together in
street/neighbours
G
E
A
A
A
A/B
B
A
B
B/C
A
B
Q1
Q2
Q3
E
A
B
B
Q3
B
B
A
B
7
8
Q2
1
7
lettuce
parsnip lettuce
cauliflower carrots beans
endive
spinach beetroot
cucumber carrots
rucola
2
6
quantitative interview
file name
_0407121636_001.pdf
5
4
3
6
forms
1
2
3
4
5
A
Q1
lettuce
endive
Brussels sprouts Brussels sprouts green beans bean strain
tomato
beetroot
chicory
kale
lettuce beans
cucumber
potatoes
spinach
asparagus endive lettuce
green beans
cauliflower lettuce
broccoli
spinach cabbage
carrots
onions
green beans green beans all cabbage beets
E
2
2
2
3
F
1
g
2
13
8
8
13
14
14
14
9
12
14
14
8
14
14
64%
100%
50%
62%
38%
13%
78%
33%
93%
57%
100%
7%
21%
total percentages
answereda
b
50%
38%
50%
13%
8%
29%
11%
33%
7%
43%
13%
57%
79%
c
25%
50%
46%
7%
44%
58%
13%
21%
d
25%
25%
46%
44%
8%
e
22%
17%
21%
f
11%
g
22%
Annex 4 : List of personal interviewee
Annex 5 : Qualitative interview
1. Monique Breedijk, head activity support at Waardeburgh
Question: What kind of people does your organisation target?
Waardeburgh is an elderly home in Sliedrecht. We have two living locations with about 130 people
living in the care home and about 30 people in nursery. These are people of roughly 55 and older.
Besides this, we have a daycentre which is opened three days per week, elderly people who live in
their own can come here to do activities. Furthermore, there is Waardeburgh-plus which is a kind
of association for people older than 55. This association organises all kinds of activities including the
transportation to the activities.
Question: Would this target group be interested to work in the garden do you think?
I think there are quite some people who would like to work in the garden. People from
Waardeburgh-plus are people who live on their own and who might not be able to run a garden by
themselves. For these people a garden like this is a great opportunity to still be able to work in a
garden. In our elderly homes we have all kinds of clubs like a cooking club and a walking club. We
could make a garden club, or we could go with the cooking club to the garden and pick the
vegetables which we then prepare in the home.
A way to find out if people like to work in a garden is a questionnaire. We regularly spread
questionnaires among the people who live here to see which activities they would like to do for
example. If the garden will be realized we can ask through the questionnaire whether people are
interested.
Question: Are there elderly people in this home which are lonely or socially isolated?
I think there are people who are socially isolated here, but we try everything possible to prevent this.
People are free to participate in the activities we provide. When people really don’t want to
participate it is their choice and we have to respect that.
Question: What are the needs of this target group in a garden?
There should someone in control of the garden. Most people have to be told what to do, so
someone who can organize this. It should also be someone who knows about group dynamics and
can work with a lot of different people.
The garden should be accessible by wheelchair and if there is a toilet it should also be wheelchair
accessible. There should be a place to get out of the sun when it is very sunny and a place to get out
of the rain when it rains. We can bring our own drinks etc. The distance of the garden is not really
important, we have a shuttle bus and a wheelchair bus so we can provide our own transportation.
When people from the nursery come we can always send one of our staff or participants to assist in
the garden.
75
The reward for these people will probably be working outside and the social interaction. When there
are for example strawberries it is nice if people can eat a few and we could cook with the cooking
club the vegetables from the garden once. I don’t think people need to be rewarded with vegetables.
2.
Sandria de Wildt, volunteer at the food bank
Question: What kind of people come to the food bank?
There are about 65 food packages distributed each week . These go to all kinds of people coming to
the food bank. When people have a disposable income less than a certain amount then they can get
food from the food bank. Some people have a job but they have had some troubles in their lives
which makes that they have almost no money to live from. There are also jobless people and
refugees getting food from the food bank.
This group of people are on average quite hard to motivate to do any voluntary work for example.
The response of the people to these kinds of initiative is usually quite low. When the food bank
wants to reach the clients they put a letter in the food packages. Once every three months the
clients of the food bank are visited, in these conversations the food bank can point that these
people can work in the garden.
The motivation of the people is two things Sandria thinks. Primary goal will probably be getting
vegetables from the garden. But this group of people is also socially isolated in a lot of cases. These
people will not say, I go to the garden for social contact but it is a very positive ‘side-effect’ which
can eventually be more important than the vegetables. To motivate this group of people it is best to
point them on their personal benefits. The group of people which come to the food bank will need
good help when working in the garden. Someone who has good overview of what needs to be done
and who can maybe listen to their stories.
If participants get vegetables as a reward for working in the garden, some vegetables , the dividing
of the vegetables will probably be problematic. Some people work less than others, some take more
than others. These things can be really problematic. I think it is most important that the rules are
very clear and are obeyed.
The food bank can also use vegetables from the garden to put in their packages. Now most
vegetables come from the vegetable auction in Barendrecht. The food bank gets all products for free.
This is in about 90% of the cases food which otherwise would have been destroyed.
The food bank gets its money from private sponsors and companies, the Rabobank is a major
sponsor.
The volunteers first came from different churches. These churches thought it would be good to also
help people who were not member of a church. Now the volunteers come are more divers, the food
bank is not related to a church because it must be open for everyone. To get new volunteers the
food bank places adds in the local newspaper also people just come to offer their help.
76
3. Arjen Haak, Restaurant de Heeren van Slydregt
Arjen mentions that the trend of Biological and seasonal food/products are important to him. He
likes to work with locale products and he works a lot with herbs.
The products will be used in the restaurant, because the demand of vegetables in the café (brasserie)
is too high. Trends that he sees are the so called “forgotten vegetables and Dutch vegetables”. What
he likes about the garden is that he can visit it and look what is growing there day by day and pick
the food himself. Regarding transport he said that he could easily arrange it himself. He reacted
enthusiastic about the proposed garden.
Arjen responded positively to work closely together on a planning scheme regarding the vegetables
of the garden. Another benefit he mentioned is that he could go with cooks to the garden to see
vegetables and how they grow (product knowledge). For him the most important aspect of the
garden were; the taste of the products, the marketing value and product knowledge. What he likes
was to work with seasonal products and the variety of vegetables and fruit.
He mentioned some cooks he was following, Niven Kunz (restaurant with garden), Martijn
Kajuiter(Cliff House hotel).
Arjen Haak mentioned some amounts of vegetables and herbs he uses for the restaurant and café:
•
5-6 kg tomatoes a day,
•
10-12 cucumber a day
•
Herbs per week: Thyme 2 bunches, rosemary 2 bunches, mint 20 bunches, chervil 4 bunches,
basil 8-10 bunches.
4. Joke Brouwer, Coordinator Vrijwilligerspunt en mantelzorgers (volunteer bank )
The goal of volunteer work is the wellbeing of the individual (volunteer) as well as the community.
Large part of the people that come to the volunteer bank are elderly people, people with a disability
(in the broad sense); people that need support/helping hand, people that don’t speak the language.
Socially isolated and unmotivated people can be reached via reintegration office, work district and a
contact person on the district/neighborhood is needed who can detect people that are
isolated/need help. Most of the time these people come via other organisations. Another target
group are female immigrants/refugees (cooperation Rivas).
Joke mentioned a questionnaire of the “ten store apartment building” which has 70% immigrants
and 30% native people living there. From this questionnaire it showed that 90% is willing to work
voluntarily but just doesn’t know what.
In Sliedrecht there are active churches, however they mostly work inside the (community group of
the) church only. According to Joke there is a decrease in number of people that do volunteer work.
77
The volunteer bank has a lot of different people that like to work for them. According to Joke people
with social welfare are unmotivated. Most of the people that are doing voluntary work now are the
“the young elderly”, people that have retired early.
Motivation of volunteer work: elderly that still want to do something, something they want do to for
themselves, own interest. Joke sees the tendency that people:
-
Don’t want to fix themselves too much (for instance every week, specific time)
Prefer project s of a couple of months
Last November she held a volunteer market which was very successful. This could be a nice
possibility to attract participants for the garden as well.
Needs of volunteers: need a higher goal, gratitude, recognition. Others’ need is a good
leader/management. People need someone where they can go to with problems, people need
support and structure and people need a contact person. Joke says if this is not the case too many
people will stand up as a “leader”. She says that it is no problem to have a paid force, unless it is
someone from outside.
Joke says that vegetables shouldn’t be given as a reward, she is afraid that people might misuse.
According to her there is a lot of competition between volunteers. So, the following questions
should be considered:
-
How much can people work, which days etc.
Good schedule; + management/leader should be present every day
Finance (citizen’s initiative, fund from the volunteer bank € 500,00)
Means of communication of the volunteer bank:
•
Page in compass (huis aan huis blad)
•
Newspaper (local press)
•
Sliedrecht TV
•
Library, A4 posters
•
Website
•
Practice of general practitioner, A4 posters
•
Municipality A4 posters
•
Reling, a4 posters
Description of the villageof Sliedrecht: Small town, we know each other, people like to hold on to
their own structure, difficult to change, volunteers are a close group- difficult for new people to
enter.
Tip: try to look for collaboration with other organisations!
78
5. Lotte Storchart and teamleader, Yulius
The group of people which come to this care centre are psychiatric patients with all different kinds
of problems. A lot of these people find it difficult to come out of their houses and to take part in
society.
Start: Short discussion within the group, about half of the target group showed interest in the
garden.
Both Lotte and her team leader were very enthusiastic about the idea of the garden. They liked it
that you could work there in a group, that you can meet friends there and that t is outside. They
would like it if their target group could work together with other groups of the society and be seen
as people instead of clients.
Motivation of this group: be active outside, social contacts, become part of society
Needs: Structure, somebody that can socially interact well with people, somebody in charge and a
contact person, close/nearby location (or facility of bus)
They said they could initially accompany people to the project but it would be great if people are
accepted by the group (within the garden) and could go there for themselves.
It should be Approachable! (laagdrempelig)
Suggestion for financing; sociale dients
6. Supervisor activities, Het Atelier
Target group: people with a physical disability or not innate restriction
They offer the target group structure and support so that the people can function.
The target group needs a lot of support because they don’t have the physical capacity. Target group
likes to meet other peers.
Activities that could be interesting is an outside space where they can have an exposition or a high
tea.
7. Ingrid Doomen, Refugee work
Size of the target group: about 3000 to 400, 20 new people per year. Refugees from India, Somalia,
Irak, Iran, Afghanistan etc. that received a permit to stay. A lot of people have social welfare and
have family with a lot of children.
Ingrid said that there are definitely people that would like to join a project like the social vegetable
garden. The motivation of this group would be to learn Dutch, social contacts, vegetables and to be
outside.
79
Woman are more difficult to reach, they can be reached always via the husband. Men don’t often
like it when woman work together with other men. Men have a positive stand towards volunteer
work.
The group of refugee might be hard to reach, because of language problems. Ingrid would like to be
kept posted about the project, since she could mention the existence of these projects to her clients.
Additional activities that the target group might like are cooking and food.
8. Maarten Kop
Within the conversation with Maarten Kop, a range of diverse sponsors was mentioned:
-
Kringloopwinkel; shares profit for (community)projects
Arie de Ruiter (voorziiter)
Tel: 0611496525
-
-
Rabobank
Arie in het veld (previous director)
Tel: 0184 417982
Gerrit Maat (has old cravans – coudl serve as a cantine)
Piest van Es (VSO), [email protected]
Interviewers: Annemoon Kentin and Jurriaan Visser
Thursday April 8th, 2011
Sliedrecht, The Netherlands
80
Annex 6: Picture of Sliedrecht
81
Annex 7. Amount of vegetable available for different groups
Crop
Total
Amount of
estimated vegetables
for the
Yield
restaurant
(kg)
(65% of the
yield)
(kg.)
( Amount of
vegetable for
the
participants
of the garden
(20 % of the
yield)
(Amount of
vegetable for
the volunteer
bank (10 % of
the yield)
Amount of
vegetable for
the visitors (5%
of the yield)
(kg.)
(kg.)
(kg.)
Beetroot
1090.7
709
218.1
109.1
54.5
Onion
1107.6
720
221.52
110.7
115.3
Beans
420
273
84
42
21
Cauliflower
(summer)-
500
325
100
50
25
Parsnip
714.8
464.6
143
71.5
35.7
Grass clover
82
Annex 8: Photo impression
Tunnel greenhouse
Material storage
www.mholf.nl/tuinkassen.html?cat=114
www.marktplaats.nl
Nonolettoilet
Water tank
www.de12ambachten.nl/producten.html
www.postma-kunststof-tanks.nl/cv-300-13000ltr/
83
Annex 9: Climate data
The following table is based on mean measurements by the KNMI weather station between 1971
and 2000:
Climate data for De Bilt (1971–2000 averages), all KNMI locations (1901–2010 extremes).
Month
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year
Average high °C (°F)
5.2 6.1
(41.4) (43)
Daily mean °C (°F)
2.8
(37)
3.0 5.8 8.3 12.7 15.2 17.4 17.2 14.2 10.3 6.2 4.0 9.8
(37.4) (42.4) (46.9) (54.9) (59.4) (63.3) (63) (57.6) (50.5) (43.2) (39.2) (49.6)
Average low °C (°F)
0.0
(32)
-0.1 2.0 3.5 7.5 10.2 12.5 12.0 9.6 6.5 3.2 1.4 5.7
(31.8) (35.6) (38.3) (45.5) (50.4) (54.5) (53.6) (49.3) (43.7) (37.8) (34.5) (42.3)
9.6 12.9 17.6 19.8 22.1 22.3 18.7 14.2 9.1 6.4 13.7
(49.3) (55.2) (63.7) (67.6) (71.8) (72.1) (65.7) (57.6) (48.4) (43.5) (56.7)
Precipitation
mm 67 48 65 44 62 71
(inches)
(2.64) (1.89) (2.56) (1.73) (2.44) (2.8)
Sunshine hours/month 52 79 114 158 204 186
Average wind speed
3
3
3
3
2
2
(Beaufort)
Source: Knmi.nl
84
70
58
72
77
81
77
793
(2.76) (2.28) (2.83) (3.03) (3.19) (3.03) (31.22)
196
192
133
106
60
44
1,524
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
Annex 10: Vegetable category table
Vegetable category table with preferred vegetables by Slieldrecht community (Buishand, 1979)
Family
Root depth
Alliaceae
deep
middle
shallow
Apiaceae
deep
middle
shallow
Asparagaceae
deep
middle
shallow
Asteraceae
deep
middle
shallow
Brassicaceae
deep
middle
Chenopodiaceae
shallow
deep
middle
shallow
Cucurbitaceae
deep
middle
shallow
Fabaceae
deep
middle
shallow
Solanaceae
deep
middle
shallow
Crops
Nirogen demand
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
high
low
N fixing
Spring onion
Onion
Leek
Shallot
Garlic
Parsnip
Carrot
Celeriac
Asparagus
Endive
Lettuce
Kale
Turnip
Pointed cabbage
Radish
White cabbage
Black radish
Beetroot
Swies chard
Red cabbage
Brussels sprauls
Savoy cabbage
Sugar pea
Snap bean/dwarf
Snap bean/ pole
Spinach
Pumpkin
Courgette
Cucumber
Brown marrowfat pea Pea
Tomato
Paprika
Chili pepper
Potato
85
Annex 11: Sowing calendar
Sowing calendar for the Netherlands (Buishand, 1979)
86
87
88
89
Annex 12: Periods for mulches/meshes
Appropriate periods to cover vegetable crops with mulches or meshes against certain pests
(modified from Bleasedale and Salter, 1991).
Crop
Months
Pest
All crops
May- September
Turnip moth Agrotis spp. (“Cutworm”)
Beans
April- October
Bean seed fly Delia platura/ black bean aphid
Aphis fabae
Brassicas
March- November
Cabbage root fly Delia radicum/
aphids/ caterpillars/ flea beetles
Carrots/ parsley
May- June
Carrot fly Chamaepsila rosae/ willow-carrot aphid
Cavariella aegopodii
Celery/celeriac
August- September
Carrot fly C. rosae
Cucumber/ pumpkin June- September
Aphids/ whitefly
Lettuce
June- October
Aphids
Onions/ shallots
May- September
Onion fly Delia antiqua/ bean seed fly D. platura
Parsley
June- August
Aphids
Peas
February- July
Birds
Peas
June- August
Aphids/ pea moth Cydia nigricana
Radish
March- September
Flea beetles
Sweet corn
May- June
Frit flies
Turnip/ swede
March- August
Flea beetles/ cabbage root fly D. radicum
90