Journal of Landscape Architecture

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjla20

The aesthetic dimension of productive green

community spaces

Tal Alon-Mozes & Avigail Heller

To cite this article: Tal Alon-Mozes & Avigail Heller (2022) The aesthetic dimension of
productive green community spaces, Journal of Landscape Architecture, 17:3, 58-69, DOI:
10.1080/18626033.2022.2195244

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2022.2195244

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group

Published online: 17 May 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 228

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjla20
The aesthetic dimension of
productive green community spaces
Tal Alon-Mozes Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, Israel
Avigail Heller Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Israel
Abstract
Productive green community spaces are currently the subject of extensive
academic discussion. Scholars from diverse fields explore this phenomenon
from social, economic, political and planning perspectives. Yet, the aesthetic
dimension of such sites has remained outside the academic purview, while
giving rise to public debate and critique. This paper addresses the lacuna
by examining productive green community spaces in Israel to contrib-
ute to the contemporary discourse on aesthetics and community gardens.
Three theoretical frameworks for aesthetics serve as the basis of our
investigation: the intrinsic value of nature, experience beyond the visual
towards the ethical and cues of care. Our analysis regards fourteen pro-
ductive green community spaces, established in 2017 and 2018, that seem
messy and unordered at first sight. We identified six constituents to estab-
lish the aesthetic merits of the gardens: expressions of social and cultural
characteristics, cues of care through organization of space, presence of
nonhuman lives, embodied experience, change over time (dynamics) and
ethical expressions.
productive green community space / aesthetics / cues of care /
embodied experience / sustainability
58 Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022
Introduction
In 2012, the American Society of Landscape Architects bestowed its prestig-
ious Honor Award in the category ‘general design’ upon Kenneth Weikal for
the design of Lafayette Greens in Detroit, Michigan (Fig. 1).1 In his explana-
tion of the plan, Weikal defined the Greens as ‘urban agriculture’, a sustain-
able way of gardening or farming in the city. Indeed, urban agriculture is
rarely acknowledged in landscape architecture as part of the regular design
portfolio, let alone in the prestigious landscape architecture prize circuit.
As the jury describes, the ‘designed’ status of Lafayette Greens was consid-
ered an exception because it is aesthetically and precisely constructed of
fashionable materials, boasting creative solutions to common needs and
to environmental concerns, while the site integrates the vocabulary of sus-
tainable design and classical beauty.2 Most productive green community
spaces can be regarded as not or less ‘designed’ and seem therefore not as
aesthetically attractive as Lafayette Greens. They are often characterized
by recycled materials, shabby handmade structures and scattered heaps of
compost, as can be seen in one of the veteran community gardens of Israel,
established in the early 2000s (Fig. 2). Generally, it would seem that aes-
thetic values are not prioritized by the organizers of such sites and their
communities. However, a careful observation reveals aesthetic values in
the performance and appearance of these sites that are not necessarily rec-
ognized as such by ‘nonprofessionals’ like the users.3 Therefore, the paper
aims to distil the aesthetic components from fourteen productive green
community spaces established in Israel in 2017 and 2018.
 TA L A L O N -M O Z E S
TA L A L O N -M O Z E S

Figure 1 Lafayette Greens. Figure 2 Productive green community space in Rishon

Le-Zion, Israel, a successful productive community space
that was established in the early 2000s.

A spatial-aesthetic framework for productive green

community spaces
The term productive green community space pertains to the overlapping mal planning and governmentality.8 In her conclusion she points to the
arenas of (sub)urban agriculture (farming and/or gardening) and commu- need to explore the actual production of these spaces as a microcosm of
nity gardens, emphasizing productivity (growing vegetables, fruits, flowers), various actors in the urban planning sphere.
community (the participation of the public, building a community, ‘cultivat- In the field of spatial planning, especially landscape architecture, design-
ing’ friendships) and the production of a defined space with vegetative and ing productive green community spaces is not a common practice and aca-
artificial materials in a sustainable way. The definition of the term produc- demic research on the topic is also limited.9 Its history was explored by
tive green community space used in this paper is similar to that of produc- professor of landscape architecture Laura Lawson,10 and at two interna-
tive community gardens by the American Community Garden Association: tional conferences: Food and the City (Dumbarton Oaks, 2012) and The Cul-
ture of Cultivation: Designing with Agriculture (School of Design, University
Urban, suburban, or rural. It can grow flowers, vegetables, or com- of Pennsylvania, 2017).11 The spatial dimensions of community gardens
munity. It can be one community plot or can be many individual are discussed in some descriptive reviews, without explaining the mean-
plots. It can be at a school, a hospital, or in a neighbourhood. It can ing of the design,12 or as part of the broader theme of urban agriculture.13
also be a series of plots dedicated to ‘urban agriculture’ where the In 2019, geographers Amanda Rees and Bertram Melix explored commu-
produce is grown for a market.4 nity gardens in a city in the south of the United States, in the context of
ten common landscape discourses.14 The authors related the aesthetics of
This topic has been intensively researched by various scholars and from these gardens to the spatial dimensions of raised beds versus raised rows
diverse perspectives.5 In their widely cited article, environmental research- and planting in a grid versus more organic modes of place arrangement.
ers Daniela Guitart, Catherine Pickering and Jason Byrne found that most They emphasized the importance of the work of landscape architect and
of the research on community gardens is focused on social concerns, cul- scholar Ann Whiston Spirn and her students with the Hispanic commu-
tural issues, environment and planning, health, economics, education nity of Philadelphia in collectively establishing a community garden.15
and policy.6 Among the 87 academic articles published between 1985 and Based on Spirn, they argue that as many community gardeners do not own
2011 that they surveyed, only a few discussed communal garden typolo- the land that they cultivate, they avoid investing in professional design.16
gies, aesthetics or bodily experience. Moreover, while pointing to the gaps That the aesthetics of productive community spaces deserves further
in knowledge and directions for future research, the authors themselves exploration is indicated by the professional appreciation of the spatial-
ignored the spatial dimension of these sites. More than a decade since the aesthetic aspects of Lafayette Greens and other productive green spaces
publication of Guitart, Pickering and Byrne, the number of articles con- designed by landscape architects, such as the oval allotment gardens of
cerned with community gardens and urban agriculture has increased, but Carl Sørensen in Copenhagen,17 the Vienna community gardens as sur-
the spatial-aesthetic dimension of these sites continues to be overlooked. veyed by political ecologists Andreas Exner and Isabelle Schützenberger,18
Another, more recent survey, by environmental researcher Efrat Eizen- and the gardens integrated in a public park in Perth.19
berg, found that the literature on community gardens is divided between In the following section, we will situate the productive green com-
two discrete, diametrically opposed approaches: enthusiastic and positive munity space in three conceptual frameworks that relate to the notion
versus critical and negative.7 Eizenberg classified these approaches in four of landscape aesthetics: the common notion that perceives nature as aes-
broad themes: human experience, politics, economy and physical environ- thetically pleasing, the complex relationships between performance and
ment. This last theme, however, did not cover spatial-aesthetical aspects appearance in contemporary landscape design that lead to aesthetic expe-
of the gardens but focused on the contribution of the physical environ- riences beyond the visual and toward the ethical, and manifestations of
ment to urban diversity, environmental awareness and protection, infor- aesthetics in cues of care.

Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022 59

The aesthetic dimension of productive green community spaces Tal Alon-Mozes, Avigail Heller

Aesthetics as an intrinsic value of nature

Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder, states geographer Emily Brady.20 A year earlier in 2015, Meyer expanded her 2008 manifesto to include the
She argues for the objective aesthetic merit of nature as a basis for ethical notion of aesthetic experience: ‘In landscape terms, aesthetics is not a syn-
behaviour. To answer the question of which nature is aesthetically pleasing, onym for that which is seen, or the surface appearance of things. Aesthetic
philosopher Isis Brook suggests that in the Western world, since the eight- experience occurs within an affective world that implicates bodies, objects,
eenth century ‘we currently tend to appreciate landscape under three dis- spaces, values, experiences, and networks.’31 She argues that the core of the
tinct aesthetic categories: the beautiful, the sublime and the picturesque’.21 discussion shifts from the aesthetic of the object to the aesthetic experi-
The beautiful consists of regularity, smoothness, tranquillity and unity, and ence that evolves through the interaction of human beings with the world
in general the pastoral equates with the beautiful. The sublime relates to around them. Meyer situates landscape aesthetics in the emerging field
the grandeur of the wild and the pristine nature and, according to Brook, of affect theory. An aesthetics attentive to affect, according to landscape
‘the picturesque as a specific aesthetic category arises out of a blending of architect Barbara Prezelj and architecture researcher Heidi Sohn, calls for
the pastoral and the sublime’.22 It is composed of variety, intricacy, wild- a design approach that induces responsiveness:
ness and decay. In contemporary designed landscapes one can identify the
aesthetic categories and combinations of the three. For example, in post- In this way, the question is not primarily what we experience or how
industrial landscapes, landscape architect and scholar Susan Herrington the experienced landscape (or design representation) looks like, but
found an expression of picturesque aesthetics,23 and cultural geographer rather what this encounter does, how it reshapes our capacities to
Mathew Gandy noticed in marginal wasteland areas a representation of act, to what degree it influences our perception, offering us more
‘ecological aesthetic’.24 than simple beauty or meaning.32

Performance and appearance: Aesthetic experience beyond
the visual and towards the ethical
Since the environmental turn of the 1960s, in landscape architecture envi-
ronmental and social aspects are considered to be as important as spatial
and aesthetic facets.25 Landscape is perceived as a process rather than an
object, and therefore planners and designers regarded historical conven-
tions of artistic, visual beauty as less fundamental to the profession. How-
ever, the application of more ‘scientific approaches’, started at the time
by planners like Ian McHarg, encountered a growing criticism from the
professional field. Later, landscape architects and scholars such as James
Corner, Elizabeth Meyer and Werner Nohl called for creativity and a new
approach for the sustainable era.26 Meyer’s 2008 manifesto on the role of
beauty is the most relevant to our discussion. In it, she called for an aes-
thetics that is particular, dynamic, ephemeral and regenerative. As a tool
for a sustainable design, she is:
. . . recalling somatic, sensory experiences of places that lead to new
awareness of the rhythms and cycles necessary to sustain and regen-
erate life. These depend on the immediate apprehension of new,
unexpected forms, spaces and sequences, and the simultaneous
memory of former experiences, and conceptions, of landscape space
and form.27
The first part of her manifesto emphasizes the connection between land-
scape and culture and the role of design to ‘translate cultural values into
memorable landscape forms and spaces that often challenge, expand, and
later alter our conceptions of beauty’.28 Meyer’s manifesto provoked many
reactions among landscape architecture scholars, including in this jour-
nal, which dedicated a special issue to the topic.29 In 2016, landscape archi-
tects and philosophers Rudi van Etteger and Ian Thompson and landscape
architect Vera Vicenzotti summarized the current state of the art by argu-
ing that contemporary approaches to landscape aesthetics are complex,
escaping rigid definitions.30
Such an approach is tightly connected to the sphere of everyday aesthetics,
which is characterized by its experiential, embodied nature.33 As argued
by professor of philosophy Yuriko Saito, this kind of aesthetic experience
can lead to ‘environmentally active citizenry’,34 fostering a more respect-
ful attitude towards nature on a day-to-day basis. Within the broad frame-
work of everyday aesthetics, art historian and philosopher Mateusz Salwa
defines a subcategory relevant to the current study—namely, everyday green
aesthetics. Gardening, he argues, is a venue for environmental literacy and
an ethical obligation.35
Embodiment and affect are among the core values of permaculture, a
worldview and a design and gardening practice popular among many prac-
titioners in productive green community spaces.36 Yet, in the community
of permaculturalists, there is little attention for aesthetic considerations.
As argued by permaculturalist Assaf Chertkoff, one of the leaders of the
movement in Israel: ‘The philosophical essence of permaculture is imi-
tation of nature both in its function and in its aesthetics. That function-
ality is beautiful, is an overt belief.’37 A more sophisticated argument is
presented by cultural researcher Andressa Schröder, who argues that heli-
cal permaculture processes and plans reflect three main, unconventional
aesthetic categories: embodiment, kinesthesia and affect. In this context,
aesthetics is not connected to an object with a fixed and specific form, but
with the intricate, constantly changing material and imaginary relations
between human beings and the environment, and with the perception of
‘human beings as immersed in the relational rhythms of ecosystems and
the environment’, says Schröder.38
The connection between environmental aesthetics, ecological action
and social justice is discussed by environmental researcher Jennifer Fos-
ter, who differentiates between ‘engagement interpretations’ and ‘cogni-
tive interpretations’. Engagement interpretations are primarily concerned
with the immediate sensory experiences of individuals, while cognitive
interpretations are focused on socially guided or value-driven interpreta-
tions. Together, they shape the way we interpret and respond to our sur-
roundings.39

60 Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022


In summary, this conceptual framework of recent developments in envi-
ronmental philosophy, ethics, aesthetics and related fields generated the
categories of embodied experience, dynamics, aesthetic experience and
ethical expression as constituents to assess the aesthetics of productive
green community spaces.
Manifestations of aesthetics in cues of care
Rather than with the classic notion of the beautiful, everyday aesthetics
of performance and appearance can be affiliated with the idea of ‘cues of
care’. This idea was developed by landscape architect and scholar Joan Iver-
son Nassauer, who argues in favour of a construct of aesthetics that is not a
‘superficial gloss’, but a fundamental medium to protect ecosystems and to
promote ecological services, exhibited in different forms in different local
conditions.40 In a recent article, landscape architect and researcher Jiayang
Li and Nassauer address the cues to care that Nassauer detected during
more than thirty years of research, and expand on her earlier definition
of cues as a certain action that also include concrete elements, such as:
Mown turf, flowering plants and trees, visible and crisp edges of
different patch types, bold patterns, foundation planting, trimmed
shrubs, plants in rows, neatness and order (no litter, things are put
away, no weeds), fences, architectural details, lawn ornaments, and
structures painted and in good repair, wildlife feeders and houses,
and signs that label environmental benefits or caretakers of the
land.41
A view from the field: The aesthetics of contemporary
productive green community spaces in Israel
In the 2020s, productive green community spaces are a popular land use in
urban and rural Israel. They flourish in affluent communities, in immi-
grant neighbourhoods, in Arab communities that developed from villages
into larger towns and in communal agricultural settlements (kibbutzim).
Since the emergence of this phenomenon in Israel in the 2000s,42 hundreds
of sites have been established, with the intensive support of municipali-
ties and local councils, environmental and social NGOs, non-institutional
organizations and enthusiastic residents.43 While fostering sustainability
is a proclaimed goal of these initiatives, many of the sites are abandoned
after several years of practice, and others are kept alive only by the inten-
sive external support of state authorities, local establishments and envi-
ronmental organizations.44 Israel’s productive green community spaces
are mainly a product of top-down initiatives rather than bottom-up enter-
prises. As such, they stand in contrast to European and American initia-
tives that give expression to public protest, bottom-up processes and an
alternative counterculture.45 The latter are missing from the Israeli arena.
The aesthetics of productive green community spaces is diverse and
rich in its expression. Also, it differs greatly from the common, pastoral
image of Israeli public parks: relatively neat, gently sloping landscapes
with carefully placed trees and shrubs and an abundance of lawns. While
the aesthetics of these gardens was never discussed in any of the articles
on Israeli productive green community spaces, it seems that the subject is
important for the amateur gardeners who cultivate these gardens, as well
as for the supporting municipalities and for the Ministry of Agriculture,
which promotes the initiative.46

For the third aesthetic framework, and based on Nassauer and Li’s defini- Methods
tion, we adopt the concept of cues of care as both concrete garden elements In the following, we will explore the aesthetics of fourteen productive green
and ways of treating these elements: caring as an antithesis to or correction community spaces that were established in Israel with the financial sup-
of a (general) messy appearance. They reflect DIY (Do It Yourself) practices port of the Israel Ministry of Agriculture between 2017 and 2018. The min-
and are therefore representations of personal engagement and creativity, istry chose to support diverse communities (Jews, Arabs, ultra-Orthodox,
and of aesthetic considerations that are embedded in the process rather secular, new immigrants and veteran residents) (Fig. 3), diverse types of
than solely in the final object. For example, cues of care can be wooden signs settlements (communal-agricultural-kibbutz, former Arab villages, new
that people decorate and scatter all over the garden as an act of personal- towns, veteran neighbourhoods) and modes of practice (personal or com-
ization, adding some hints of attention to the garden. These cues can be munal, permaculture, organic or ordinary), distributed across the coun-
revealed from the common, seemingly messy surface appearance of these try, with a concentration in the north (Fig. 4). The ministry nominated a
gardens, as will be discussed in the following section. coordinator for each garden, supported its establishment and additional
In summary, the aesthetic-spatial dimension of productive green com- various activities according to the wishes of the community. In return, it
munity spaces is a composite experience that involves personal, commu- asked for a detailed report for each site twice a year. These reports, as an
nal and social processes related to the sites. The aesthetics of such places is extensive body of data, have served as our primary source of information.
connected to the overall appearance of the gardens and their components In addition, we visited the gardens, documented them mainly by photo-
and to the general appreciation of nature as beautiful, and even more to graphs, and had informal conversations with the gardeners and the coor-
the process of the establishment and maintenance of productive commu- dinators. Table 1 presents a concise overview of the location of the gardens,
nal spaces. In most cases, the aesthetic of such places is not only predicated including the size of community and its socioeconomic status, the size
upon visual appreciation, but rather on the pleasure of DIY practices, on of each garden and its mode of practice. The extensive data are organized
embodied experiences that are constantly changing over time, and on the under the following categories: organization of space and built elements,
commitment to a sustainable future. cultural expressions, cues of care, embodied experience and specific char-
acteristics. Finally, and based on the abovementioned three theoretical
frameworks, we have identified six constituents that are connected to the
aesthetics of each site (either to its natural or artificial components) and
to the relationship between the gardeners and the site.

Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022 61

 The aesthetic dimension of productive green community spaces Tal Alon-Mozes, Avigail Heller

1 Yokneam
1 Yokneam
LEBANON
LEBANON SYRIA 2 Charish
SYRIA 2 Charish
8
8 5 3 Baqa al-Ghrbiyye
5 3 Baqa al-Ghrbiyye
Haifa 7 4 Netanya
Haifa 1 7 4 Netanya
1
13
13 5 Maale Gamla
10 5 Maale Gamla
12
2 10 6 Ramat HaKovesh
9 2 12
9 6 Ramat HaKovesh
4 3
4 3 7 Ilaniya
6
7 Ilaniya
6
8 Yiron
Tel Aviv 8 Yiron
Tel Aviv
9 Pardes Channa
9 Pardes Channa
AVIGAIL HELLER

Jerusalem 10 Adirim
11
Jerusalem 10 Adirim
11
11 Gedera
11 Gedera
12 Kfar Kara
12 Kfar Kara
Figure 3 Various communities of gardeners. From top
J O R DA N 13 Yifat
left and clockwise: religious community in the agricul- Beer Sheva J O R DA N 13 Yifat
tural settlement of Adirim, Ethiopian immigrants in Beer Sheva 14 Yerucham
the town of Netanya, Arab woman in the town of 14 14 Yerucham
Baqa al-Ghrbiyye. 14

E GY P T Figure 4 Location of the

E GY P T
fourteen case studies for
productive green com-
munity spaces in Israel.

The aesthetics of productive green community spaces

The aesthetic constituents of the fourteen community spaces discussed cultural practices of the kibbutz (Fig. 5), and in Gedera members of the
below include: aesthetic reflection of social and cultural characteristics, community promote its ecological worldview by digging a winter pool to
aesthetics in cues of care, exposing the aesthetic of natural processes and preserve stormwater. All these gardens are showcases for the communi-
nonhuman lives, embodied aesthetic experience, the aesthetic of change ties’ cultural values, presenting them to themselves and to the passers-by.
over time (dynamics), from aesthetic experience to ethical expression. Furthermore, aesthetic considerations are culturally based, as exempli-
Although none can measure up to the professional aesthetical stand- fied by the different practices of the various communities. While in the Arab
ard of Lafayette Greens, each of the fourteen productive green commu- towns Kfar Kara and Baqa al-Ghrbiyye, the community agreed to join the
nity spaces is unique, dynamic, ephemeral and regenerative. The design- project only after the municipality built wooden beds, covered the ground
ers prioritize natural processes of germination, growth, flowering and with mulch and prevented weeds from germinating. Other communities,
withering over an ordered, manicured appearance, while recognizing the such as the ones in Yokneam or Pardes Channa, attached less importance
role of art, culture and society. Based on the constituents, we discuss their to visual order, and the ‘messy’ appearance of their gardens seems con-
unique aesthetic merits. sciously accepted (Fig. 6). Similarly, one can note an emphasis on social
activities among affluent communities, versus productivity in less afflu-
1. An aesthetic reflection of social and cultural characteristics ent ones, as reflecting the social and cultural needs and characteristics of
All selected Israeli productive green community spaces express the social the community. In general, cultural expressions are apparent in all aspects
and cultural characteristics of the community and their needs. For exam- of the projects, from the shape of the planting beds to the construction
ple, immigrants from Ethiopia cultivate a field of corn inside the densely materials, the selection of plants, the mode of practice (individual or com-
built city of Netanya, reviving their home-based practice of food grow- munal) and more. As such, they reflect the first claim of Meyer’s manifesto
ing. Members of Kibbutz Yifat revive the old communal life and the agri- on ‘sustaining beauty’, which is sustaining culture through landscapes.47

62 Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022

 Site Organization of space / Cultural expressions Cues of care Embodied experience Further remarks
(x) social economic status 1-10 Built elements

Yokneam Grid, planting beds The “creative-class” char- Outdoor kitchen made “Labour days” for families, Permaculture aesthetics.
City of 24,000 (7) made of recycled wood, acter of the community is by an artist, signs made various workshops,
7,000 sqm garden on the outskirts of town for greenhouse composed expressed in the richness of old pans. wildseeds collecting.
families and kindergarten children cultivating of a metal structure and of materials, degree of
family and communal beds. plastic sheeting, gather- organization and
ing place made of used general appearance.
tires and cement, fence
made of found materials.

Charish Spiral, planting beds Few personal charac- Well-maintained garden. Communal planting, Numerous participants.
New town of 8,000 (3) made of new wood, teristics. rescue tubers of geophytes.
600 sqm garden in the centre of town for nesting boxes, and birds’
families cultivating communal beds. feeding boxes.

Baqa al-Ghrbiyye Grid and spiral, wood None. Very ordered site, draw- Working days for women, Numerous participants.
Arab town of 30,000 (3) and stone beds, ground ings on wooden planters. for volunteers, and for
1,000 sqm garden in school yard for pupils, covered with mulch. middle school classes.
college students, kindergarten children and
women cultivating communal beds.

Netanya Grid, raised rows. An expression of agri- Rich array of produce. Once a week, intensive Rotation of produce
Town of 220,000 (6) cultural culture amidst a cultivation for several hours. throughout the year.
250 sqm garden in the centre of the city for crowded town.
senior citizens (immigrants from Ethiopia) who
cultivate it together.

Maale Gamla, Golan Heights Grid, beds made of stones Expression of the “laws” Almost none. Mud workshop, preparing
Private agricultural settlement of 550 (6) and paving. of permaculture. oven made of mud.
2,000 sqm garden for families and kindergarten
children cultivating familial and communal beds.

Ramat HaKovesh Diverse, edible forest, Communal values Pergola, signs, seeding Experiential activities Permaculture as a way
kibbutz of 1,100 (8) large wooden pergola are expressed by the annuals. for children. of land cultivation.
1,500 sm edible forest for families and kinder- fireplace. large pergola and
garten children cultivating it together. the fireplace.

Ilaniya Diverse, stone beds. Productivity. Decorative pool, Communal planting, seed
Private agricultural settlement of 500 (7) wildflowers. germination workshops.
3,000 sqm garden for families and kindergarten
children cultivating familial and communal beds.

Yiron Circle, stone planting Expression of the “laws” Plantings. Collecting edible herbs, Permaculture.
Kibbutz of 400 (6) beds, mud wood-burning of permaculture. building nesting boxes.
9,000 sqm garden for families cultivating familial oven, nesting boxes.
and communal beds.

Pardes Channa Mixed grid and recycled- The “creative-class” char- Succulents garden. Mud workshop, building Permaculture and more.
Town of 43,000 (7) wood beds, metal dome, acter of the community is sitting area from tiers and
3,000 sqm garden in the centre of a neighbour- nesting boxes. expressed in the richness cement.
hood for families and kindergarten children of materials, degree of
cultivating it together. organization and general
appearance.

Adirim Wood beds, geodesic Modesty, emphasis solely Well-maintained. Preparing toys from natural
Religious Jewish agricultural settlement of 270 (5) metal dome, nesting on productivity. materials. Educational
1,500 sqm plot for families and kindergarten boxes. activities: watching nature.
children cultivating familial and communal beds.

Gedera Diverse, ecological pool, Expression of the “laws” Building an ecological pool. Communal edible forest,
Town of 28,000 (7) musical instruments. of permaculture. permaculture.
3,500 sqm plot for families cultivating it together.

Kfar Kara Diverse, commercial An example of mancured Very ordered site, Limited.
Arab town of 19,000 (4) metal fence, wooden garden which reflects statues made of recycled
500 sqm garden mainly for the disabled, pergola. the abilities of the materials.
who attend a nearby day care. community and the
dedication of the
professional gardener.

Yifat According to a designer’s Communal values are New materials. Communal meals prepara- High maintenance.
Kibbutz of 1,200 (8) scheme, new wood beds expressed by the build- tion, planting, sowing.
750 sqm garden for families and kindergarten ing process and activ-
children cultivating familial and communal beds. ities.

Yerucham Diverse, fiber tent. None. Planting, cooking in nature The hard conditions of
Town of 10,300 (3) workshops. Educational the desert made practice
5,000 sqm garden for city residents and nearby activities: watching nature. impossible.
Bedouin tribes. Families and kindergarten
children cultivating familial and communal beds.

Table 1
Findings from the analysis of fourteen community gardens.

Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022 63

 The aesthetic dimension of productive green community spaces Tal Alon-Mozes, Avigail Heller
TA L A L O N -M O Z E S
NOA ZEHAVI
Figure 5 Communal gathering in Kibbutz Yifat.
R A C H E L I K AT Z I R A N D TA L A L O N -M O Z E S
AV I G A I L H E L L E R A N D TA L A L O N -M O Z E S
Figure 7 Cues of care. From top left and clockwise: earth mandala in
the garden of the town of Yokneam; welcoming sign and gate made of
irrigation pipe, wood and a climber in the garden of the agricultural
settlement of Ilaniya; a planting bed bordered by recycled bottles in
Yokneam; and a mosaic decoration for a bench in the garden of town
of Pardes Channa.
2. Aesthetics in cues of care
Cues of care can easily be noticed in all observed productive green com-
munity spaces. They express focused intention to make the gardens more
aesthetically pleasing by minute and more substantial acts and artifacts
(Fig. 7). We have identified and divided the cues of care into five aspects:
organization of space, use of various materials, choice of planting, signs
of personal or communal expressions and marketing.
Organization of space: in most of the gardens, space was organized accord-
ing to a certain, intentional pattern—a grid, a circle, or a spiral (Fig. 8).
The patterns express different worldviews and intentions. The grid, for
64 Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022
Figure 6 Messy appearance of the garden in the town of Pardes
Channa (left) and manicured appearance in the Arab town of
Kfar Kara (right). Notice the differences in the ground cover,
its bordering elements and the vegetation in each garden.
Figure 8 Organization of space. From left and clockwise: agricultural
order in the Ethiopian garden of Netanya, rectangular planting beds in
Yokneam, spiral planting beds in Kibbutz Yiron.
example, is meant to convey efficiency in the use of land, resembling the
agricultural plot. The Ethiopian immigrant community in Netanya has
planted dense rows of corn in order to achieve a greater yield, similar to
productive fields in Ethiopia. The circular and spiral beds are indicators
of the permaculture practice and worldview.48 More than once, these pat-
terns are enhanced by natural or industrial materials such as local stones
or sawed wooden beams.
Use of various materials: when financially possible, structures are built
from new materials and according to professional schemes. When found
 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE ARCHIVE
AVIGAIL HELLER
Figure 9 Decorated planting beds and scarecrows in Kibbutz Yifat.
AVIGAIL HELLER AND MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE ARCHIVE
R ACHELI K ATZIR
Figure 11 Interactions with animals and plants.
resources are used as the main building components, they are intention-
ally processed in order to look aesthetically pleasing; beams are colourized,
and stones are arranged in a creative manner. Some communities recruit
professional artists to build a sitting area or an outdoor kitchen as a com-
munal building project.
The choice of planting also contributes to a cared-for appearance by
adding decorative wildflowers to the edible garden or mixing plants in
order to create diversity and sustainability, according to the principles of
permaculture. In other cases, cues of care are evident in clearing the area
of weeds, which are perceived as a sign of neglect.
Signs of personal and communal expressions communicate care and contrib-
ute to the aesthetic of the sites. In many of the gardens, the site’s coordi-
Figure 10 Marketing the gardens’ activities. Kibbutz Yifat (left),
Pardes Channa (right).
Figure 12 Embodied experience. From top left and clockwise: planting
in Pardes Channa, a child hoeing in Yifat, women working in Netanya.
nator called children and adults to add a personal touch to the garden by
painting the built beds and creating a big welcome sign for the garden
and small ones for each tree, vegetable patch and family bed (Fig. 9). Per-
sonal expressions are also manifested in the organization of plants in each
family bed. While the visual merit of any of these elements can be nego-
tiated and criticized, together they form a shared space of collective care
and ownership. In Pardes Channa and Yokneam, for example, each family
created a sign with its family name out of old frying pans. Each sign was
different, but together they represented a shared community. We found
no signs of personal identity in the Ethiopian garden of Netanya, limited
expressions in the permaculture plots, and great emphasis in places where
families were the main participants.
Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022 65
 The aesthetic dimension of productive green community spaces Tal Alon-Mozes, Avigail Heller

ZIV DEKEL AND AVIGAIL HELLER

Figure 14 From aesthetic experience to ethical expression
R ACHELI K ATZIR

in Kibbutz Yiron.

Figure 13 Changes over time: different generations garden-

ing in autumn, in the agricultural settlement of Ilaniya.

Marketing: cues of care are also manifest in the various ways of marketing terms of their appearance, in the financial investment in their design, the
the project, and in the efforts to encourage community participation (Fig. 10). chosen materials and the diversity of built structures. The layout of the
They are noticeable in many of the gardens’ Facebook posts and public sites was planned by professional designers, and professionals were also
calls for action. Photos accompanying the reports and the sites’ web pages responsible for making the planting beds from new wood, rather than the
present the gardens at their best, including those that were photographed recycled wood used in many other gardens. The use of productive green
during times of no growth, dryness or withering. community spaces as a marketing tool for diverse social goals dictated the
In the marketing of productive green community spaces, cues of care appearance of the sites in their early phase. Rather than emerging slowly,
play a double role. On the one hand, they are extremely important for local such sites are complete from the very start, and they reflect the care of the
activists, enabling them to enjoy the fruits of their labour. On the other, municipality or the Kibbutz and not the individual gardener.
they are essential in publicizing the project among potential new activists, In general, cues of care are connected to aesthetics as intentional per-
among municipal bureaucrats and among members of the community at sonal or communal efforts to make the site and the whole project more
large. In general, the well-maintained community spaces become a means visually pleasing. The cues are very diverse and might even be contradict-
to achieving broader goals beyond serving the needs of a community’s par- ing: the agricultural order of the Ethiopian garden differs from the ‘free’
ticipants. In Charish, a new town in central Israel, communal life is a cen- appearance of the gardens composed of annuals. However, all these gar-
tral value designed to attract young families to the developing, densely dens bear the signs of caring hands of either individuals or groups that
populated town. In place of the alienation often characteristic of urban found these cues essential for the community of participants and for the
life, the city suggests vibrant community activities, including productive community at large.
green community spaces as perfect sites for gathering. Consequently, and
in contrast to the common practice in other sites, the gardens in Charish 3. Exposing the aesthetic of natural processes and
were part of the preliminary design of neighbourhoods, ready for the use nonhuman lives
of new residents. Similarly, in Kibbutz Yifat (Fig. 5), the garden was estab- As argued in the introduction on the theoretical framework, aesthetics are
lished in order to promote community activities among all members of the an intrinsic value of nature: of its living and nonliving components, of the
kibbutz, and not solely among the designated gardeners. Compared with natural processes and of life cycles of germination, growth, blooming, flow-
the other examples, the gardens in both Charish and Yifat are distinct in ering, fruit-bearing and withering, and of the relationships between the

66 Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022

nonhuman components of the garden (flora and fauna). Productive green Perceiving the garden as a process rather than a fixed object expresses a
community spaces expose organisms and natural processes (Fig. 11) and dynamic approach. Like the embodied experience, such an approach is pro-
even promote them. In Charish, Yiron, Gedera, Yokneam, Pardes Channa moted by the schedule of activities and the availability of space to facili-
and Adirim we found that nectar-producing plants had been intentionally tate various changes and depends on the organizer and the community.
planted and that bird feeders and nesting boxes had been built to attract
nonhuman species to be part of the garden and to enrich the aesthetic 6. From aesthetic experience to ethical expression
experience. These practices, which reflect the background of the organiz- Aesthetic experience connects people to place and supports the health of
ers and their professional training, took place in gardens where ecology is individuals, communities and environments.52 Already in the late 1990s,
prioritized through permaculture and through educational activities or Nassauer argued that: ‘Bringing aesthetic expectations into play in a way
social gatherings. that benefits landscape ecology requires designing strategies, landscapes,
and policy with an awareness of what people enjoy and value in the appear-
4. Embodied aesthetic experience ance of the landscape.’53
The pleasure of gardening is an embodied experience that involves all the Productive green community spaces are sites of environmental aware-
senses: sight, smell, touch and taste (Fig. 12). Exploring the pleasure of ness and environmental stewardship. The connection between aesthetic
growing flowers, Ephrat Huss, Kfir Bar Josef and Michele Zaccai, schol- experience, health and values in community gardens was examined by the
ars from the fields of art therapy and botany, argued that while the main health research group of James Hale. They argue that:
motivation for growing flowers is aesthetic:
Cognitively, the gardeners’ aesthetic experiences encourage and
This goes beyond perceptual levels, as flowers are a multi-sensory support the expression of their values. For example, they share food,
experience that includes smell, texture, and color and an embod- trust one another, hold each other accountable, and express a sense
ied experience, in that one has to actively search for flowers with of beauty to passersby. These values influence, and are mediated by,
his/her body, to tend them, and to bend over them to smell them.49 personal histories, worldviews, and social experiences of contexts
and places that have evolved over time.54
Productive green community spaces involve embodied experience by diverse
levels of intensity: in the Ethiopian garden of Netanya, gardeners worked The garden of Kibbutz Yiron demonstrates the connection between aesthet-
hard year-round to achieve a high yield. In other gardens, such as Yokneam ics and ethics as explained by Nassauer and Hale. Based on permaculture
and Pardes Channa, gardeners practice intensive construction more peri- ideas, it is composed of two large, concentric raised planting beds made of
odically, followed by relaxed periods of time due to the season and their big local stones (Fig. 14). It is often photographed from the air, to empha-
motivations. There, as well as in Baqa al-Ghrbiyye, they were occasionally size its seemingly archaic or ancient origin. On the ground, it is clear that
recruited for ‘working days’. In Charish, passive enjoyment is the main it is carefully built of layers of natural materials to ensure healthy growth.
use. However, even there, gardening involves bodily engagement by walk- The activity surrounding the garden is rich and diverse, including educa-
ing and kneeling to get close to the objects of enjoyment. As argued pre- tional activities on site and visits to other gardens, experimentation with
viously, in current research these embodied experiences are connected to children and families and outreach activities to involve the entire kibbutz
everyday aesthetics.50 community. The text under the photograph of the garden’s pool, as dis-
played on the site’s Facebook page, demonstrates this vision: ‘Ecological
5. The aesthetic of change over time (dynamics) agriculture is our ability, consumers and farmers, to understand that we
Productive green community spaces change over time as they display linear are not alone in the world, there is fauna and flora around us and it has
and circular processes, natural phenomena such as germination, growth, needs that are no less essential than us, humans.’55
blooming, fruit bearing and death, which relate to human maturity and
aging as exemplified in Figure 13. Changes can be slow, noticed during rou- Conclusion
tine daily visits, and usually perceived only by the gardeners who follow The fourteen productive green community spaces, supported by the Israeli
them, or they can be as drastic as the clearance of the garden by the end of governmental programme, embody an aesthetic that is culturally depend-
summer. In some of the gardens, as in Kibbutz Yiron, stability is sought ent, unique, and ephemeral as exemplified in the six constituents discussed
for edible forests based on permaculture, aiming for ecological equilib- above. It is not solely inherent in the discrete components of the gardens,
rium. In other gardens, especially in those lacking a steady community or but also resides in the relationship between the gardeners and the site,
a consistent organizer, changes are inevitable. between the human and non-human components of the garden. It is an
Yet, alongside the time of the garden, the time spent by people in the experience that emerges over time, and is both embodied and personal. The
garden is also crucial. In her reflection on sustainable beauty, Meyer argues aesthetic merit is present in the form of cues of care, which do not stand
that aesthetic experience ‘requires duration, and exists in the exchange on their own. They are perceived as part of an ongoing process of manual
between what ones [sic] sees/experiences and what one knows’.51 It evolves labour, and of daily routines of interaction between people and their envi-
along time and practice. ronment, in an attempt to create a sustainable future.

Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022 67

The aesthetic dimension of productive green community spaces Tal Alon-Mozes, Avigail Heller
Finally, to relate the spatial-aesthetic merit of the fourteen gardens to Lafay-
ette Greens, we should refer to the role of landscape architects in making
productive green community spaces. As almost none of the discussed gar-
dens were created by landscape architects, and the construction of only
a small number of them was preceded by the preparation of any plan or
design, we wonder if it is time for the profession to become more involved
in such initiatives, making productive green community spaces part of
communities’ small-scale parks or larger green structures. In order to do
so, landscape architects should become mediators between the commu-
nity’s wishes and the municipality’s regulations. They should be respon-
sible for the location of the gardens according to community needs, and
for creating a general design that is flexible enough to include sustaina-
ble future initiatives.56 Instead of mainly shaping spaces, landscape archi-
tects should build bridges between community expectations and munici-
pal demands for well-maintained spaces and professional standards. Some
recent projects, in which productive green community spaces are linked to
more conventional parks, seem to represent such an initiative—the Kiryat
Sefer Park in Tel Aviv, for instance, which received EDRA’s 2018 Best Places
Award.57 This way, productive green community spaces can become one
of the future types of sustainable (sub)urban green spaces.
68 Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022
NOTES
1 Honor Award, Lafayette Greens: Urban Agriculture,
Urban Fabric, Urban Sustainability, asla.org/2012awards/
073.html, accessed 10 May 2022.
2 Ibid.
3 Following Marc Treib’s argument that (environmental)
ethics and aesthetics should be combined, both for profes-
sionals and users, to me ‘beauty’ involves a pleasure or inspi-
ration derived from spaces and forms, perhaps supported by
light, thermal properties, colour, fragrance, and supporting
factors. Marc Treib, ‘Ethics ≠ Aesthetics’, Journal of Landscape
Architecture 13/2 (2018), 30–41.
4 American Community Garden Association, About ACGA,
communitygarden.org/about, accessed 10 May 2022.
5 Examples of the extensive literature are: Viljoen André et al.,
‘Agriculture in Urban Design and Spatial Planning’, in:
Henk de Zeeuw and Pay Drechsel (eds.), Cities and Agriculture:
Developing Resilient Urban Food Systems (London/New York:
Routledge, 2015), 106–138; Frank Lohrberg et al. (eds.), Urban
Agriculture Europe (Berlin: Jovis, 2015); TjeerdDeelstra and Her-
bert Girardet, ‘Urban Agriculture and Sustainable Cities’,
Thematic Paper 2 Urban Agriculture and Sustainable Cities,
s.d. [2000], urban.agroeco.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/
urban-ag-and-sustainable-cities-1.pdf, accessed 18 June 2021.
6 Daniela Guitart, Catherine Pickering and Jason Byrne, ‘Past
Results and Future Directions in Urban Community Gardens
Research’, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11/4 (2012), 364–373:
366. The authors searched for the keywords: ‘community
garden’, ‘space’, ‘green’, ‘gardening’, ‘school’, ‘urban food
production’, ‘land use’, ‘place’, ‘planning’, ‘agriculture’ and
‘people’ in the following electronic databases: Google Scholar,
Geo Base, ISI Web of Knowledge, Pro Quest and Bio Med,
from December 2010 to December 2011.
7 Efrat Eizenberg, ‘One Landscape, Multiple Meanings:
Revisiting Contemporary Discourses on Urban Community
Gardens’, Built Environment 44/3 (2018), 326–338: 328.
8 Ibid., 329, 333.
9 This observation is based on the authors’ experience in the
field in Israel and a review of prominent landscape architec-
ture firms’ websites abroad, like: Michael Van Valkenburg
Associates, mvvainc.com/projects, and West 8, west8.com/
projects/, both accessed 10 November 2022.
10 Laura Lawson, ‘The Planner in the Garden: A Historical
View into the Relationship between Planning and Commu-
nity Gardens’, Journal of Planning History 3/2 (2004), 151–176.
11 The conferences were followed by two books, Dorothee
Imbert, Food and the City: Histories of Culture and Cultivation
(Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Colloquia on the History
of Landscape Architecture, 2015), and Raffaella Giannetto Fabi-
ani, The Culture of Cultivation: Recovering the Roots of Landscape
Architecture (London/New York: Routledge, 2020).
12 Lucy Kennedy Bradley et al., ‘Design Matters in Commu-
nity Gardens’, Journal of Extension 52/1 (2014), 1–15; Andrew
Walter, A Pattern Language for Community Gardens (Master’s
Thesis, University of Georgia, 2003), cityfarmer.org/pattern.
html, accessed 2 April 2021.
13 Lohrberg et al., Urban Agriculture Europe, op. cit. (note 5).
14 Amanda Rees and Bertram Melix, ‘Landscape Discourses
and Community Garden Design: Creating Community
Gardens in One Mid-sized Southern US City’, Studies in the
History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes 39/1 (2019), 90–104.
The ten landscape discourses are: reciprocity, child health,
neighbourhood social engagement, food systems, landscape
architecture and design, raised bed, raised row, grid, historic
preservation, and rest and respite.
15 Ibid., 93.
16 Ibid., 94.
17 Ann Whiston Spirn, The Language of Landscape
(New Haven, CT/London: Yale University Press, 1998), 74–75.
18 Andreas Exner and Isabelle Schützenberger, ‘Creative
Natures: Community Gardening, Social Class and City
Development in Vienna’, Geoforum 92, (2018), 181–195.
19 Isaac Middle et al., ‘Integrating Community Gardens into
Public Parks: An Innovative Approach for Providing Ecosys-
tem Services in Urban Areas’, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening
13/4 (2014), 638–645.
20 Emily Brady, ‘Aesthetics in Practice: Valuing the Natural
World’, Environmental Values 15/3 (2006), 277–291.
21 Isis Brook, ‘Aesthetic Appreciation of Landscape’, in:
Peter Howard, Ian Thompson and Emma Waterton (eds.),
The Routledge Companion to Landscape Studies (London/New
York: Routledge, 2013), 108–118: 110.
22 Ibid. 111.
23 Susan Herrington, ‘Framed Again: The Picturesque
Aesthetics of Contemporary Landscapes’, Landscape Journal 25/1
(2006), 22–37.
24 Mathew Gandy, ‘Marginalia: Aesthetics, Ecology,
and Urban Wastelands’, Annals of the Association of American
Geographers 103/6 (2013), 1301–1316.
25 Randolph T. Hester, Design for Ecological Democracy
(Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press, 2010).
26 James Corner, ‘Ecology and Landscape as Agents of
Creativity’, in: George Thompson and Frederick Steiner (eds.),
Ecological Design and Planning (New York: John Wiley & Sons,
1997), 81–108; Elizabeth K. Meyer, ‘Sustaining Beauty:
The Performance of Appearance’, Journal of Landscape Archi-
tecture 3/1 (2008), 6–23; Werner Nohl, ‘Sustainable Landscape
Use and Aesthetic Perception: Preliminary Reflections on
Future Landscape Aesthetics’, Landscape and Urban Planning
54/1–4 (2001), 223–237.
27 Meyer, ‘Sustaining Beauty’, op. cit. (note 26), 15.
28 Ibid., 15.
29 Journal of Landscape Architecture, 13/2 (2018).
30 Rudi van Etteger, Ian H. Thompson and Vera Vicenzotti,
‘Aesthetic Creation Theory and Landscape Architecture’,
Journal of Landscape Architecture 11/1 (2016), 80–91.
31 Elizabeth K. Meyer, ‘Beyond “Sustaining Beauty”: Musings
on a Manifesto’, in: Elen Deming (ed.), Values in Landscape
Architecture and Environmental Design: Finding Center in
Theory and Practice (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University
Press, 2015), 30–53: 35.
32 Barbara Prezelj and Heidi Sohn, ‘Towards an Aesthetic
of Affect for Landscape Architecture/Urbanism’, in: Caroline
Dahl et al. (eds.), Beyond Ism: The Landscape of Landscape Urban-
ism: Conference Proceedings (Alnarp: Swedish University of
Agricultural Sciences, 2016), 28–33, 30.
33 ‘Aesthetics of the Everyday’, plato.stanford.edu/entries/
aesthetics-of-everyday/, accessed 15 July 2022.
34 Yuriko Saito, Everyday Aesthetics
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 203.
35 Mateusz Salwa, ‘Everyday Green Aesthetics’, in:
Oiva Kuisma, Sanna Lehtinen and Harri Mäcklin (eds.),
Paths from the Philosophy of Art to Everyday Aesthetics
(Helsinki: Finnish Society for Aesthetics, 2019), 167–179.
36 Permaculture is a consciously designed landscape that
mimics the patterns and relationships found in nature, while
yielding an abundance of food, fibre and energy for the pro-
vision of local needs. Permaculture was established by David
Holmgren and Bill Mollison in the mid-1970s. David Holm-
gren, Essence of Permaculture: A Summary of Permaculture Con-
cepts and Principles Taken from Permaculture Principles & Pathways
beyond Sustainability, 2, holmgren.com.au, accessed 13 July 2022.
37 Authors’ interview with Assaf Chertkoff, 20 July 2020.
38 Andressa Schröder, ‘A Poetic Reading of Permaculture in
Three Helical Aesthetic Plans’, On Culture: The Open Journal
for the Study of Culture 1 (2016), 1–11: 6.
39 Jennifer Foster, ‘Environmental Aesthetics, Ecological
Action and Social Justice’, in: Mick Smith, Liz Bondi and Joyce
Davidson (eds.), Emotion, Place and Culture (Burlington, VT:
Ashgate, 2009), 97–114.
40 Joan Iverson Nassauer, ‘Care and Stewardship: From Home
to Planet’, Landscape and Urban Planning 100/4 (2011), 321–323.
41 Jiayang Li and Joan Iverson Nassauer, ‘Cues to Care:
A Systematic Analytical Review’, Landscape and Urban Planning
201 (2020), 103–21.
42 Efrat Eizenberg and Tovi Fenster, ‘Reframing Urban
Controlled Spaces: Community Gardens in Jerusalem and
Tel Aviv-Jaffa’, ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical
Geographies 14/4 (2015), 1132–1160; Ina Filkobski, Yodan Rofè
and Tal Alon, ‘Community Gardens in Israel: Characteristics
and Perceived Functions’, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 17
(2016), 148–157.
43 Adam De Lange, Meta Communal Gardening in Israel:
An Emerging Phenomenon: Characteristics, Actors and Results
in the Field (Thesis in Public Policy, Hebrew University
Jerusalem, 2015).
44 Avigail Heller, Ministry of Agriculture, was in charge of
gathering information on local sites for this paper.
45 Nathan McClintock, ‘Radical, Reformist, and Garden-
Variety Neoliberal: Coming to Terms with Urban Agricul-
ture’s Contradictions’, Local Environment 19/2 (2014), 147–171;
Pierpaolo Mudu and Alessia Marini, ‘Radical Urban Horticul-
ture for Food Autonomy: Beyond the Community Gardens
Experience’, Antipode 50/2 (2018), 549–573.
46 This information is based on many site visits and conver-
sations with the gardeners who complain about the appear-
ance of their gardens. In addition, it was mentioned by
professionals who visited the gardens during some meetings
that were organized by the Ministry of Agriculture.
No documentation was left from these meetings.
47 Meyer, ‘Beyond “Sustaining Beauty”’, op. cit. (note 31), 15.
48 Schröder, ‘A Poetic Reading of Permaculture’,
op. cit. (note 38), 6.
49 Ephrat Huss, Kfir Bar Yosef and Michele Zaccai, ‘Humans’
Relationship to Flowers as an Example of the Multiple
Components of Embodied Aesthetics’, Behavioral Sciences 8/3
(2018), 1–10.
50 See notes 32–33.
51 Meyer, ‘Beyond “Sustaining Beauty”’, op. cit. (note 31), 36.
52 James Hale et al., ‘Connecting Food Environments and
Health through the Relational Nature of Aesthetics: Gain-
ing Insight through the Community Gardening Experience’,
Social Science & Medicine 72/11 (2011), 1853–1863: 1854.
53 Joan Iverson Nassauer, ‘Cultural Sustainability: Aligning
Aesthetics and Ecology’, in: Joan Iverson Nassauer (ed.),
Placing Nature: Culture and Landscape Ecology (Washington, DC:
Island Press, 1997), 67–83: 73.
54 Hale et al., ‘Connecting’, op. cit. (note 52), 1860.
55 Yiron-Peace Garden Facebook, accessed 15 December 2020.
56 Tal Alon-Mozes, ‘Productive Green Community Space:
A Challenge for the Contemporary Israeli City’, in: Raffaella
Fabiani Giannetto, The Culture of Cultivation: Recovering the
Roots of Landscape Architecture (Abingdon: Routledge, 2020),
110–126.
57 reed.co.il/kiryatsefer, accessed 18 June 2021.
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Tal Alon-Mozes is a landscape architect and a professor at the
faculty of Architecture and Town Planning of the Technion,
Institute of Technology, Haifa. She has an MLA degree from
UC Berkeley and a PhD from the Technion. For more than a
decade, she served as the chair of the Landscape Architecture
programme and established its graduate degree. Her scopes
of interest include historical, current and future designed
landscapes of Israel, and landscape architecture pedagogy.
She published in various journals and edited two books on
Israel’s modern landscape architects (in Hebrew): Gardens Are
for People (2017) and Gardens of her own: landscape architect Ruth
Enis (2019).
Avigail Heller is an agronomist and the head of the Botanical
Gardens and Urban Agriculture Branch, Forest and Trees
Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,
State of Israel. She has a MSc in Agriculture from the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem (with distinction). Her scopes of
interest include: ancient trees and urban forestry, urban
agriculture, and botanical gardens. She publishes extensively,
mainly in professional magazines in Hebrew, and served
as representative of Israel in two COST actions on urban
allotments and urban agriculture.
CO N TAC T
Tal Alon Mozes
Technion Institute of technology
Faculty of Architecture
Technion City Haifa
Haifa
Israel 32000
Phone: 972-522 492 970
artal@technion.ac.il
Avigail Heller
Head of Botanical Gardens and Urban Agriculture Branch
Forest and Trees Department
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development State of Israel
Beit Dagan
Center 50250
Israel
Phone: 972-506 241 535
avigailheller1@gmail.com
Journal of Landscape Architecture / 3-2022 69