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

1

Disclaimer

This report (product) is produced by students of Wageningen University as part of their MSc-

programme.

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.

2

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

3

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

4

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

5

6

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.

7

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.

8

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.

9

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).

10

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

11

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 Zidenberg-

cherr, 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

12

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).

13

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

14

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.

15

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.

16

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

17

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.

18

Table 1: Pros and Cons of a foundation and Association Legal Entity

Type Foundation Association

Characteristics • 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

19

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: j.brouwer@welzijnswerksliedrecht.nl

“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

20

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

21

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

22

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.

23

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

24

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.

25

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.

26

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 3: Example of a money box Figure 2: Example of box of vegetables

from which customers can buy

27

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

28

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.

29

Table 7: Target group, motivation and needs

Target

group

Elderly People Primary and

Secondary

students

Psychiatric

Clients

People

with a low

income

Refugees and

Immigrants

Motivation Do something

after

retirement,

Social contacts

Learn how to

grow

vegetables,

Social

internship,

Interact and

socialize with

other people

Be active

outside,

Social

contacts,

Become part

of society

Receiving

vegetables,

Personal

benefits,

Social

contacts

Receiving

vegetables,

Learn Dutch,

Social

contacts,

Work outside

Needs Strong leader,

clear tasks,

Wheelchair

accessible garden and

toilet, Shelter

for rain and

shadow,

Transport

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)

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

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.

30

Table 8: List of type of sponsors

Type of sponsors Type of funding Possible incentives

Companies/organisations Financial or in Material (one

time sponsoring)

Advertisement, activities

in the garden, Altruism (doing good)

Private sponsors Financial or in Material Activities in the garden,

Altruism (doing good)

Governmental bodies (Gemeente,

Provincie)

Financial or in Material (land) Societal benefits

Friends of the garden Yearly amount of 50€ (private)

or 100€ (companies) (or an

equal amount in material)

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 Visitors of the

garden

Food bank

Motivation Buy fresh, organic and

local vegetables;

marketing value; Seasonal vegetables;

learn how to grow

vegetables

Leisure time

(activities), learn

how vegetables grow, fresh organic

and local vegetables

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

31

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.

32

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.

33

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

34

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.

35

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.

36

4.7. Financial plan

One of the objectives for the social vegetable garden in Sliedrecht is that the garden should be self-

sufficient 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

37

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.

38

4.7.3. Set-up costs

Table 10: Onetime expenses for the garden

Set-up costs Buying price (2nd

hand) Potential sponsor

Essential costs

Working materials €500,- Garden shop, 2nd hand store

Prepare the land( ploughing,

harrowing)

€300,- Farmer, professional gardener

Manure/compost €300,- Farmer, municipality, petting

zoo (kinderboerderij)

Essential costs €1100,-

Important costs

Lime €440,- Farmer/contractor

Greenhouse €600,- Garden materials supplier

Garden furniture €400,- Garden shop, 2nd hand store

Fencing €250,- Garden shop, municipality

Material storage €300,- Construction company

Canteen €1000,- ‘Maat’ caravans

Nonolet

Toilet building + wheelchair

proof

€830,-

€1000,-

Construction company

Water tank €130,- Manufacturer

Lawn mower €200,- Garden shop

Additional cost €500,-

Important costs €5650,-

Extra costs

Irrigation system €800,- Garden shop

Fruit trees/bushes €230,- Grower

Playground €500,- Garden shop, toy shop

Garden kitchen €500,- Kitchen shop, garden shop

Signs €250,- Building materials shop

Market stall €200,- Building materials shop

Extra costs €2480,-

Investments

Rotovator(frees) €1500,- Garden shop

Paved paths €2200,- Construction company

Connection to utilities(water,

electric, gas, sewerage)

Municipality, construction

company

Investments €3700,-

Financial buffer €2860,-

39

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.

40

4.7.4. Yearly costs

Table 11: Yearly costs for the garden

Yearly costs Buying price (2nd

hand) Potential sponsor

Essential yearly costs

Seed/seedlings €650,- Seed company, garden shop

Renting rotovator €340,- Renting company/ garden shop

Renting the ground €450,- assumed, to be provided Municipality

Subtotal €990,-

Important yearly costs

Lime €50,- Farmer/contractor

Soil samples €70,- Soil sampling company

Coffee/tea/drinks €1000,- Restaurant, supermarket

Fuel €250,- Pump station

Reservation €500,-

Additional cost €500,-

Subtotal €2370,-

Extra yearly costs

Website, brochures €200,- Webhost, printing company

Activities €500,-

Subtotal €700,-

Total yearly costs €4060,-

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.

41

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 €2700

Income from services €0,-

Income from friends of the garden €1360,-

Total turnover €4060,-

Essential costs €990,-

Important costs €2370,-

Extra costs €700,- Total costs €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 start-

up 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.

42

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,-

43

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

44

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.

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.

Location 1

Location 2

45

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 Fruit treesMaterial barn Berries CanteenToilet

Playground

Herb gardenGreenhouse

PathPath

Path

Tractor

path

Road side

Insect

hotel

= Raspberries and flowering plants

Herb garden

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.

46

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

Good water holding capacity

Good aeration

Good physical resistance

Very acid (about PH 3.5)

Innutritious

Saturated with water

Easy to be compacted

Adjusting PH with lime (see 5.5.1)

Fertilizing (see 5.4.4 and 5.5.3)

Irrigation (see 5.4.5 and 5.5.4)

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

47

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:

Figure 8: Soil horizons

(www.glogster.com/media/2/5/69/8/5690846.gif)

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.

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

preferred, when a rapid neutralization is wanted;

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.

48

Crop rotation is the

practice of growing a

series of dissimilar

types of crops in the

same area in

sequential seasons for

various benefits

(Bullock, 1992).

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

plants, supports the water infiltration and therefore the eluviation of

mobile plant nutrients from the top soil to the deeper horizons.

Furthermore, strong alteration between wet and dry periods influences

the soil structure; shrinking during draining and swelling during wetting

is typical for peat soils. This can decrease the gas exchange and water

capacity. Consequently, extremely dry topsoil should be avoided by

optimized irrigation during dry periods of the year, but particularly in

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

49

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.

50

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.

51

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 Advantage Disadvantage

Watering Cans - Easy

- Cheap

- High labour consuming;

- Only suitable for small garden

Sprinkler Irrigation - Readily available

- Commonly used

- Many types to choose

- Waste a lot of water to

evaporation

Rain Barrel - No cost

- Free of chemicals in tap water

- Depend on precipitation

- Attract insects (mosquitoes)

Soaker Hose - Commonly used - Cheap

- Waste water to evaporation - Encourage disease to settle on

the wet foliage

Drip Irrigation - Little or no water waste - Furrows remain dry to walk along

- Less weed growth

- 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

52

5.4.1). Therefore, light tillage operations like rotovation or hoeing and removing weeds

manually should be preferred whenever possible.

8. 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.

9. Crop rotation (see 5.5.2.1)

10. 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

often based on more effective

exploitation of the soil space/nutrients

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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

Figure 9: Intercropping cabbage with garlic

(www.thailand.ipm-info.org/components

/intercropping.htm)

53

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

mostly against aboveground pests. Furthermore, several

predatory or parasitic bio control agents are commercially

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.

It is suggested to do soil tillage once a year in spring before

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

Figure 11: Rotovator

(www.rotovator.eu/images/rotovator.j

pg)

Figure 10: Biological control

(www.gardenerstips.co.uk/blog/w

pcontent/uploads/2009/04/ladybi

rd.jpg)

54

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

Nitrogen

demand Crops

… …

deep

high

low … …

N fixing

middle

high

low

N fixing

shallow

high

low … …

N fixing

… …

deep

high

low

N fixing

middle

high

low … …

N fixing

shallow

high

low

N fixing

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.

55

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

Plot

Year

1 2 3 4 5 6

1

Grass clover

(SF) Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH)

Parsnip or

tomato (DL)

2 Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH)

Parsnip or

tomato (DL)

Grass clover

(SF)

3 Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH)

Parsnip or

tomato (DL)

Grass clover

(SF) Pumpkin(DH)

4

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH)

Parsnip or

tomato (DL)

Grass clover

(SF) Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)

5

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH)

Parsnip or

tomato (DL)

Grass clover

(SF) Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

6

Parsnip or

tomato (DL)

Grass clover

(SF) Pumpkin(DH) Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(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.

56

Table 19: Example of a crop rotation plan with an integrated consideration

Plot

Year

1 2 3 4 5 6

1

Grass clover (SF)

Beetroot(MH) Onion(SL)

Pea or bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower (SH) Parsnip(DL)

2

Beetroot(M

H) Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH) Parsnip(DL)

Grass clover

(SF)

3 Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH) Parsnip(DL)

Grass clover

(SF)

Beetroot(M

H)

4

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH) Parsnip(DL)

Grass clover

(SF)

Beetroot(M

H) Onion(SL)

5

cabbage or

cauliflower

(SH) Parsnip(DL)

Grass clover

(SF)

Beetroot(M

H) Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

6 Parsnip(DL)

Grass clover

(SF)

Beetroot(M

H) Onion(SL)

Pea or

bean(MF)

cabbage or

cauliflower

(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.

57

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).

58

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

Figure 12: An example of an “Insect hotel”

(www.greenurbanliving.co.nz/imagelibrary/145.

jpg)

59

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 plant-

parasitic 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.

60

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) Number

Spade (hand plough) 3-4

Pitchfork(apply manure) 1

Pruning shear(cutting) 1

Lawn mower(mowing) 1

Knife(harvesting) 5

Rake(prepare seedbed, weeding) 3-4

Shovel (moving stuff) 2

Crates (move product to customer,

put seedlings)

30

Wheelbarrow (moving stuff) 3

Watering can(irrigating) 3

Pump(irrigating) 1

Rain barrel(irrigating) 3

Other tools several

61

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.

62

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.

63

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 fourth-

grade 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.

64

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., Martinez-

Garcia, 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. 723-

727.

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.

65

Website sources:

1. “ Google Maps.nl”. http://maps.google.nl/maps?rls=com.microsoft:en-us&oe=UTF-

8&startIndex=&startPage=1&redir_esc=&q=sliedrecht+map&um=1&ie=UTF-

8&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/tuin-

park/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-nederland-

cpi.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.

66

26. Rijksoverheid, website: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/vragen-en-

antwoorden/wat-zijn-de-verschillen-en-overeenkomsten-tussen-een-vereniging-en-een-

stichting.html. Retrieved on 5 April, 2011

27. Rijksoverheid, website: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/nieuws/2010/01/15/maatschappelijke-

stage-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

67

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.

68

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).

69

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.

70

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.

71

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

72

d) Fun

e) Work outside

f) Routine in life (structuur in het leven, reden)

g) All of the above

h) Nothing

i) 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

73

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 No

If Yes : Full –time part-time

Occupation/work:

Highest rounded of Education:

Master/Bachelor/MBO/LBO/High school/None

Marital status: Married Unmarried Divorced Widowed

Household size: With how many people do you live?

Nationality:

Thank you !

74

Annex 4 : List of personal interviewee

quan

titativ

e inte

rview

AB

CD

EF

gtot

alpe

rcenta

ges

file na

me_04

071216

36_001

.pdf

54

36

21

78a

bc

de

answ

ereda

bc

de

fg

forms

1

23

45

67

89

1011

1213

14

A Q1let

tuce

endiv

eBru

ssels s

prouts

Brusse

ls spro

utsgre

en be

ans

bean

strain

lettuc

epa

rsnip

lettuc

een

dive

caulifl

ower

i eat

lettuc

elet

tuce

tomato

beetr

oot

chicor

ykal

elet

tuce

bean

scau

liflow

ercar

rots

bean

scar

rots

green

bean

seve

rythin

ggree

n bea

nssno

w pea

s

cucum

ber

potat

oes

spina

chasp

aragu

sen

dive

lettuc

een

dive

spina

chbe

etroo

tsel

ery

tomato

endiv

een

dive

green

bean

scau

liflow

erlet

tuce

brocco

lispi

nach

cabba

gecuc

umbe

rcarr

otsgre

en be

ans

brusse

ls spro

utspe

ars

carrot

son

ions

green

bean

sgre

en be

ans

all ca

bbage

beets

rucola

chicor

ychi

cory

green

bean

s

Q2B

AB

BA

AB

BB

BB

BB

B3

1114

21%79%

Q3B

EB/C

A/B

B/CB/E

BB

BC

E1

83

314

7%57%

21%21%

B Q1A

AA

AA

AB

AA

AA

AA

A13

114

93%7%

Q2B

AB

AB

AA

BB

AA

AA

B8

614

57%43%

Q3A

AA

A/C

A/B

AA

A8

11

8100

%13%

13%

50%A 5

0%B

Q43

12

25

101//

4

Q5A/

B/C/D

GA

A/D/

EG

A/C/F

A/C/E

A/C/D

A/D

71

44

21

29

78%11%

44%44%

22%11%

22%

Q6B

A/C

A/C/E

EA/

B/CD

BA/

C/Eno

thing

CB

CC

44

71

212

33%33%

58%8%

17%

C Q1B

BA

AA

AB

AB

AA

AB

85

1362%

38%

Q2B

AA/

B/CDk

nowl

edge

transf

erB

D help

othe

rsAB/C

34

22

838%

50%25%

25%

Q3D

CC

DB

CA

C1

14

28

13%13%

50%25%

Q4C

CD

CD

DC

CD

CB

DD

16

613

8%46%

46%

Q5A

BA

AA

AB

BC

AB

AA

A9

41

1464%

29%7%

Q6A

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

AA

A14

14100

%

Q7B

AA

AB

AB

BB

AA

BA

B7

714

50%50%

Q8do

more

with

Yes

noSe

e form

see fo

rmsee

form

togeth

er in

educa

tion

stree

t/neig

hbou

rs

Demo

graph

ic info

rmati

on

age39

4150

4351

7835

3141

4746

4667

47.307

69

gend

erf

mm

mf

mf

mm

fm

mm

m10

m4 f

Job?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

pensi

oned

no

yes

yes

nono

noye

spe

nsion

ed8 w

ork4 n

o work

2 pen

sion

part t

ime

Part-

time

Full-t

ime

Full t

ime

Full-t

ime

Full-t

ime

Full t

ime

full-ti

me2 p

-time

6 f-tim

e

Profes

sion

execu

tive s

ecreta

rysaf

ety in

specto

rCare

mecha

nicinj

ury ex

pert

carer

volun

teerf

orema

n Acom

panio

n KDC

garde

ner

highe

st edu

cation

MBO

MBO

HBO

LBOHB

OLBO

MBO

MBO

MBO

MBO

LBOMB

OLBO

none

2 HBO

7 MBO

4 LBO

1 non

e

marita

l statu

sma

ried

marie

dma

ried

marie

dun

marie

dma

ried

marie

dma

ried

unma

ried

divorc

eddiv

orced

marie

dma

ried

marie

d10

marie

d2 di

vorce

d2 un

marrie

d

size h

ouseh

old5

23

41

25

23

33

42

21

54

22

natio

nality

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

Dutch

all Du

tch

75

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.

76

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.

77

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.

78

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!

79

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.

80

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), piet@pietvanes.nl

Interviewers: Annemoon Kentin and Jurriaan Visser

Thursday April 8th, 2011

Sliedrecht, The Netherlands

81

Annex 6: Picture of Sliedrecht

82

Annex 7. Amount of vegetable available for different groups

Crop Total

estimated

Yield

(kg)

Amount of

vegetables

for the

restaurant

(65% of the

yield)

(kg.)

( Amount of

vegetable for

the

participants

of the garden

(20 % of the

yield)

(kg.)

(Amount of

vegetable for

the volunteer

bank (10 % of

the yield)

(kg.)

Amount of

vegetable for

the visitors (5%

of the yield)

(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

83

Annex 8: Photo impression

Tunnel greenhouse

www.mholf.nl/tuinkassen.html?cat=114

Material storage

www.marktplaats.nl

Nonolettoilet

www.de12ambachten.nl/producten.html

Water tank

www.postma-kunststof-tanks.nl/cv-300-13000-

ltr/

84

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 (41.4)

6.1 (43)

9.6 (49.3)

12.9 (55.2)

17.6 (63.7)

19.8 (67.6)

22.1 (71.8)

22.3 (72.1)

18.7 (65.7)

14.2 (57.6)

9.1 (48.4)

6.4 (43.5)

13.7 (56.7)

Daily mean °C (°F) 2.8 (37)

3.0 (37.4)

5.8 (42.4)

8.3 (46.9)

12.7 (54.9)

15.2 (59.4)

17.4 (63.3)

17.2 (63)

14.2 (57.6)

10.3 (50.5)

6.2 (43.2)

4.0 (39.2)

9.8 (49.6)

Average low °C (°F) 0.0 (32)

-0.1 (31.8)

2.0 (35.6)

3.5 (38.3)

7.5 (45.5)

10.2 (50.4)

12.5 (54.5)

12.0 (53.6)

9.6 (49.3)

6.5 (43.7)

3.2 (37.8)

1.4 (34.5)

5.7 (42.3)

Precipitation mm (inches)

67 (2.64)

48 (1.89)

65 (2.56)

44 (1.73)

62 (2.44)

71 (2.8)

70 (2.76)

58 (2.28)

72 (2.83)

77 (3.03)

81 (3.19)

77 (3.03)

793 (31.22)

Sunshine hours/month 52 79 114 158 204 186 196 192 133 106 60 44 1,524

Average wind speed (Beaufort)

3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3

Source: Knmi.nl

85

Annex 10: Vegetable category table

Vegetable category table with preferred vegetables by Slieldrecht community (Buishand, 1979)

Family Root depth Nirogen demand

high

low

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high Spring onion Leek

low Onion Shallot Garlic

N fixing

high

low Parsnip

N fixing

high Carrot Celeriac

low

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high

low Asparagus

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high Endive

low Lettuce

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high Kale Turnip

low

N fixing

high Pointed cabbage White cabbage Red cabbage Brussels sprauls Savoy cabbage

low Radish Black radish

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high Beetroot Swies chard

low

N fixing

high Spinach

low

N fixing

high Pumpkin

low

N fixing

high

low Courgette Cucumber

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high

low

N fixing

high

low

N fixing Brown marrowfat pea Pea Sugar pea Snap bean/dwarf Snap bean/ pole

high

low

N fixing

high

low Tomato

N fixing

high

low Paprika Chili pepper

N fixing

high Potato

low

N fixing

middle

shallow

Allia

ceae

Ap

iace

ae

deep

middle

shallow

deep

Asp

ara

gace

ae

deep

middle

shallow

Ast

era

ceae

deep

middle

shallow

shallow

Ch

en

op

od

iace

ae

deep

middle

shallow

Sola

nac

eae

deep

middle

shallow

Crops

Cu

curb

itace

ae

deep

middle

shallow

Fab

ace

ae

deep

middle

shallow

Bra

ssic

ace

ae

deep

middle

86

Annex 11: Sowing calendar

Sowing calendar for the Netherlands (Buishand, 1979)

87

88

89

90

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