The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need for individual and community resilience, particularly in densely populated urban areas. Access to urban green spaces, including gardens, is known to support resilience and well-being. This study focuses on urban box gardening in Turku, Finland, investigating how the pandemic altered gardeners' attitudes and the outcomes of their gardening activities. The researchers analyzed this small-scale social-ecological system before, during, and after the initial pandemic restrictions. The increasing global urbanization makes understanding the resilience of urban systems crucial. Urban green spaces, especially community gardens, provide multiple ecosystem services, promoting mental and physical health, social cohesion, and biodiversity. However, these spaces face threats of overuse and conflicts. The COVID-19 pandemic introduced social distancing, restrictions, and lockdowns, significantly impacting social, economic, and political settings, and thus influencing the outcomes derived from urban green spaces. While increased use of green spaces was reported globally, and a gardening boom occurred, limited research exists on the long-term changes in benefits from urban gardening following the initial pandemic lockdowns. This study addresses this gap by examining gardeners' perceptions and the evolution of their activities over three years.

Extensive research highlights the positive link between access to urban green spaces and improved resilience and well-being. Urban green commons, such as community gardens, are particularly important for building community resilience through social interaction, shared resource management, and collective learning. The COVID-19 pandemic significantly altered the relationship between people and urban green spaces. Studies showed increased use of parks and green areas, often driven by lockdown restrictions and the need for stress relief. However, factors like socioeconomic status and access influenced the extent of this increased use. A global ‘gardening boom’ was observed during the pandemic, with gardening providing a safe outdoor activity and promoting mental health benefits. However, challenges like supply shortages and overcrowding in urban spaces were reported. Despite this growing body of work, the long-term influence of the pandemic on urban gardening and its benefits remained unclear. This study aims to contribute to filling this knowledge gap.

This study employed a mixed-methods approach, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data collected in Turku, Finland, over three years (2019, 2020, and 2021). The study focused on the city's urban box gardening program, where participants are provided with garden boxes on public land. Data collection was informed by the Social-Ecological Systems (SES) framework, emphasizing the interplay between social and ecological factors. Ecological outcomes were assessed via field inventories conducted three times each summer (June, July, September) across all garden box locations. These inventories measured variables such as species richness, cultivated area, crop quality, economic value of produce, and weed cover. Self-perceived outcomes were measured using two electronic questionnaires administered each year (before and after the growing season), targeting 14 benefits (fresh vegetables, physical exercise, mental relaxation, beautification, educating children, self-sufficiency, friendship, community feeling, quality time, knowledge acquisition, happiness, social movement participation, nature experiences, and biodiversity creation). The questionnaires also collected data on gardeners’ characteristics (group size, family involvement, frequency of group meetings, gardening experience, box location characteristics, etc.). In 2020 and 2021, additional questions explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gardeners' attitudes, economic situation, and gardening practices. The study used principal component analysis (PCA) to reduce the dimensionality of the ecological and self-perceived outcome variables, followed by general linear mixed models to analyze differences between years (2019, 2020, 2021) in the resulting principal components, controlling for various factors like group size and location characteristics. Gardener ID was included as a random effect to account for repeated measures from the same gardeners across years.

The study revealed several key findings: **Changes in Attitudes:** In 2020 and 2021, approximately 20% and 30%, respectively, of respondents reported changes in their attitudes toward gardening due to the pandemic. These changes were predominantly positive, indicating increased importance assigned to gardening. Statistical analysis (two-tailed binomial probability test) confirmed that the changes in attitude were significantly more positive than negative (p < 0.001 for both years). **Changes in Economic Situation:** Around 20% of respondents reported changes in their economic situation due to the pandemic in both 2020 and 2021. The majority (p < 0.001 in 2020 and p = 0.013 in 2021) of these changes were negative. **Ecological Outcomes:** Principal component analysis identified two meaningful components: "Overall ecological outcome" and "Simpler strategy for quality". There were no significant differences in the "Overall ecological outcome" between 2019, 2020, and 2021. However, the "Simpler strategy for quality" showed a significant difference between 2019 and both 2020 and 2021 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively), suggesting that during the pandemic, gardeners focused on higher-quality produce but with fewer species and individuals. **Self-Perceived Outcomes:** Three meaningful principal components emerged from the PCA of self-perceived outcomes: "Overall self-perceived outcome," "High social, low practical outcomes," and "High family, low individual outcomes." A significant decrease was found in the "Overall self-perceived outcome" between 2019 and 2021 (p = 0.015), indicating fewer reported benefits in 2021 compared to the pre-pandemic year. A similar trend was observed between 2019 and 2020, though not statistically significant. In contrast, the "High social, low practical outcomes" component showed a significant increase in social benefits and a decrease in practical benefits from 2019 to 2021 (p = 0.031). No significant changes were observed in the "High family, low individual outcomes" component across the three years.

This study's findings highlight the complex and multifaceted impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on urban box gardening as a social-ecological system. While gardeners exhibited a significantly more positive attitude towards gardening during the pandemic, this was not reflected in a corresponding increase in self-perceived benefits. The observed decrease in self-perceived outcomes, despite increased importance attributed to gardening, suggests that the pandemic's negative impacts on well-being extended to this activity. The shift toward greater emphasis on social benefits, observed in the increase of the "High social, low practical outcomes" component, might reflect a heightened need for social connection during periods of isolation. The lack of significant change in overall ecological outcomes (such as crop yields and biodiversity) suggests that the pandemic did not dramatically alter gardeners’ ability to achieve ecological goals, although the “Simpler strategy for quality” component points to potential adaptive changes in gardening practices (e.g., focusing on fewer, higher-quality crops). These findings confirm the interdependence between social and ecological components of the social-ecological system. The resilience of the box gardening system appears to have been affected in unexpected ways, despite the increased importance placed on gardening by many participants, potentially due to stress resulting from the pandemic and restrictions, impacting gardeners' ability to reap the full benefits of their gardening efforts. Future research could explore how the program could be improved to better provide a resilient resource to society, taking into account the varying needs of urban gardeners.

This study demonstrates the significant influence of large-scale societal disturbances, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, on even small-scale social-ecological systems like urban box gardening. Although gardeners exhibited increased positive attitudes toward gardening and maintained consistent ecological outcomes, their self-perceived benefits decreased. This highlights the potential for negative spillover effects of societal crises on well-being, impacting activities generally associated with positive mental and physical health outcomes. The observed shift towards emphasizing social benefits suggests potential for strengthening community resilience through gardening initiatives. Future research should explore how urban gardening programs can be adapted to enhance resilience and mitigate the impact of future societal disruptions. Further research should also focus on comparing gardeners and non-gardeners in order to establish the true impact of gardening on well-being during times of stress.

The study's sample population consisted of urban box gardeners in Turku, which might not be fully representative of the broader population. The lack of detailed socioeconomic data on the gardeners limits the ability to analyze the influence of socioeconomic factors on the reported outcomes. The reliance on self-reported data for self-perceived outcomes introduces potential bias. The study’s focus on a specific type of urban gardening (box gardening) limits the generalizability of findings to other forms of urban gardening or green space use.