Play it light: the role of gardens and gardening in the lives of latter-day urbanites

ABSTRACT

This paper aims to reveal what is the current position of gardening as a leisure activity for urbanites, in general and in competition with other hobbies, and how the space of the urban domestic garden is perceived in this regard. To gather data, a questionnaire survey of 302 urban domestic garden keepers was conducted. The survey took place between April 2019 and November 2019 in the capital city of Prague, Czechia, and in 8 locations in other Czech cities and towns as a control sample. The results show that the importance of outdoor relaxation in evaluating one’s garden prevails, but the possibility of creating something with one’s own hands, to produce own food, or to form a more beautiful place are also highly appreciated. In the perception of Czech gardeners, work and leisure often intertwine. Similarly, gardens act as a multifunctional environment, which can be changed in particular phases of the human life cycle. Since gardens were often declared as vital components for many people, it is probable that there is a future for gardening as a leisure activity, although it may be construed rather as a ‘light’ version of gardening, adapted to one’s busy schedule and other hobbies.

KEYWORDS:

• Urban gardens
• leisure
• work
• perception
• hobby
• gardeners

Introduction

All around the world, domestic gardens represent the most heavily used type of outdoor space and, for many people, they represent a first-hand opportunity for frequent and secure contact with the natural environment (Dunnett & Qasim, 2000). Nevertheless, among scientific publications on measuring connection to nature, studies of more ‘pristine’ sites prevail, such as parks, protected areas, and natural reserves (Adjei & Agyei, 2015, Wolf & Wolfhart, 2014). There are fewer studies on the natural environment which are immediately accessible (Freeman et al., 2012), although already in 1973, Kaplan argued that it is the home garden that constitutes a restorative environment based on its ability to fascinate, its status as a ‘break’ or ‘time out’ from typical daily activities, and its compatibility with the gardener’s values (Kaplan, 1973). Later, Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) stressed the psychological roles of nearby nature in contemporary society by introducing gardens as a spatial context for daydreaming, and recalling the biophilia hypothesis, which suggests that people need nature to realise their true humanity. Others have also suggested that urban gardens can increase biophilia potential across urban landscapes (Lin et al., 2018). Gardening, besides being an effective outdoor exercise, is known to regulate and enhance mental states and act as a natural means of relieving stress; it is a leisure activity with important therapeutic value added (Soga et al., 2017).

In 2000, Bhatti and Church suggested a number of trends in how gardens may develop in the future. They noticed first that, as plot sizes have contracted, the lawn and flowers have become the main features of gardens, with less space allocated to growing vegetables and fruit. Second, they acknowledged an increased role of gardens as ‘outdoor rooms’ where individuals seek to relax, children play, etc. And, third, they saw how gardening quickly involved low maintenance or ‘minimum’ garden traits – hard-surfaced areas for cars, patios and easy-care lawns in front yards plus back-gardens typically serving as places for recreation and gathering with family and friends. In between the lines in their, and similar ‘gardening and leisure’ works, it can be read that not all garden maintenance activities stem from an interest in gardening. The research presented in this paper was driven by the curiosity to find out what the situation of gardens is now. Are we witnessing a decline of gardens?

Yet, the concept of leisure is as dynamic as contemporary society, and it might be possible that today’s garden keepers just perceive their gardens and gardening in a different way than in the past. There are studies showing a shift to low maintenance gardens (Bhatti & Church, 2000), gardens as outdoor living rooms (Cook et al., 2012), and gardens serving mainly for passive recreation (Loram et al., 2011) rather than as a venue for production and maintenance chores (Longhurst, 2006). On the other hand, diverse new aspects of gardening have emerged within leisure research, showing new potential perceptions and forms of gardening – such as ‘eco-leisure’ (Jensen & Sørensen, 2020) – to align between gardening and environmental ideals. Another new term in the realm of leisure research related to gardening is ‘green leisure’ (Jeong et al., 2021), introducing urban greening as a leisure activity changing the landscape of neighbourhoods for the better and building a sense of engagement, stewardship and positive value while taking care of one’s yard or lot (Sampson et al., 2017). The research goals presented in this paper thus aim to reveal what is the current position of gardening as a leisure activity for urbanites, in general and in competition with other hobbies, and how the space of the urban domestic garden is perceived in this regard.

Theoretical background

Czechs usually like to label themselves as natural born gardeners and handymen, and there is a long-standing tradition of gardening in both residential and allotment gardens (Jehlička & Daněk, 2017, Sovová, 2020, Spilková & Vágner, 2018). However, there are many other nations who boast about being affectionate gardeners. In Europe, it is primarily Britain, which has more than 20 million private gardens, a number considered to be the highest per capita among the nations of Europe, and more than two-thirds of the adult population declare gardening as their hobby (Gross & Lane, 2007). Gardening is an important pastime for many Americans as well (Clayton, 2007), involving more than three-quarters of American households in some kind of garden activity (National Gardening Association, 2018). Domestic garden is also iconised in New Zealand, with New Zealanders being keen gardeners, inheriting the British gardening traditions through the colonisation process and taking it to a higher level with enough garden space (the quarter-acre section) available for all the social classes (Longhurst, 2006). Similarly, the Australian landscape transformation and gardening tradition thrives from the immigrant experience, often mixing European, South American, and Asian influences into a living negotiation of plantings, styles, attitudes, knowledge, and practices (Head et al., 2004). There is also a substantial literature on gardening in the Global South (Galhena et al., 2013), where gardens are more often presented as key for food security and food sovereignty of the family or whole communities (Boone & Taylor, 2016). However, even in this area, we may find strong evidence of the fact that home gardens can be more important in terms of cultural values and sense of place than for their contribution to the physical sustenance of the family (Christie, 2004) and often garden keepers put special stress on preserving the indigenous culture and knowledge, on native plants and their diversity (Ban & Coomes, 2004).

Paradoxes of gardens and gardening

Gardens and gardening, however, may have multiple roles and meanings. Longhurst (2006, p. 589) presents contemporary home gardens as ‘paradoxical, ambivalent and equivocal spaces that reflect and embody a fusion of possibilities realised by different people at different times’. The following paragraphs develop some of these paradoxes, focusing on the gardens’ ambiguities of leisure and work; private and public or individual and social; and nature and culture.

Gardening is by no means a hobby that consumes considerable time and resources. There is usually creative, financial, physical, and emotional investment required (Bhatti, 2006) and all the restorative and mostly positive experiences mentioned above are compromised by the need to work in the garden. This places gardening on the fragile divide between work and leisure, and the famous Stebbins’s categorisation of leisure (into serious, casual and project-based leisure) applies well here too (Stebbins, 1997, Stebbins, 2005, Stebbins, 2007). Various concepts of gardening place it on a continuum, from casual to serious leisure (Cheng et al., 2017), more likely than labelling it as project-based (characterised as a rather short term, infrequent undertaking, Stebbins, 2005). However, some studies remind us that there is no unique perception of gardening as a leisure activity and there might be variations in the approach to gardening activity in terms of gender, age, family cycle, and social class (Bhatti & Church, 2000; Jensen & Sørensen, 2020; Šiftová, 2021). Garden and gardening may play completely different roles for young professionals lured by the exciting possibilities offered by city life (Šiftová, 2021) trying to avoid hard gardening chores, whereas young families use the garden as a space for learning (Kortright & Wakefield, 2011, Longhurst, 2006); completely distinctive is the role of gardening for the elderly and for experienced gardeners (Bhatti & Church, 2000), often perceiving the hard work as a necessary part of the gardening ‘project’. Thus, in our study, first the activities related to urban gardens are investigated, together with a comparison of gardening as a hobby with other leisure activities.

Lewis (1990) notes that gardening is an activity that occurs in a publicly visible setting with publicly visible results. A garden can be used to construct and manifest even a certain amount of place attachment in terms of residential settings and respecting neighbourhood rules (Clayton, 2007). As such, the form and maintenance of a garden may be frequently perceived as an indicator of property investment and value, leading to community cohesiveness (Cook et al., 2012). On the other hand, gardening may become an intimate and passionate act of engaging with the soil, grass, plants, and trees that take root there (Lorimer, 2005). There are numerous studies depicting how gardens may reflect the personal, social, cultural, environmental, or ecological identities (Bhatti, 2006, Clayton, 2007, Kiesling & Manning, 2010, Thomashow, 1995) and aesthetic preferences (Pearsall et al., 2017) of their keepers. Gardening also appears to be successfully associated with ‘lifestyle’ (in newspapers and magazines, in TV and social media) along with other uses for disposable income like fashion, travel, and gourmet cooking (Cadieux, 2013). Nevertheless, the gardens are often kept by the whole family, promoting intergenerational communication and reproduction of familial and cultural traditions (Taylor & Lovell, 2014). As such a family ‘issue’, the garden and its maintenance is a crucial part of the process of ‘home-making’ as an active process, capturing the role of individual agency and household practices in constructing the meaning and value of home (Bhatti & Church, 2004, Putnam, 1993). To elaborate on the function of garden and gardening (and its public × private/individual × social divides), the question on perception of gardening was incorporated to this study.

A garden is a unique space, because it is where individuals encounter nature in a direct manner, which is not possible elsewhere in the home. It is the garden where people can enjoy opportunities for an embodied and sensual engagement with nature (Bhatti & Church, 2004). Home gardens are especially significant in the development of a personal relationship with the natural environment (Gross & Lane, 2007) and, as Brook (2008, p. 114) puts it, ‘(t)he land becomes something to explore … the fruits of this kind of engagement are psychological, such as peace for the soul, respite from the tiring concerns of society … ’. Often, however, gardens are viewed as efforts to display control of nature (Freeman et al., 2012), to commodify nature and shape it through different garden practices, to manicure the wild, to organise the ‘primordial’ disorder. This places the domestic garden on the threshold between dominance and affection, between ascendancy and pleasure (Longhurst, 2006, p. 585). Gardens can be constructed as human achievements and can be read as reflection of the cultures and understandings of their owners (Power, 2005), but at the same time, there is a myriad of works that highlight the non-human presence. These works document how a spectrum of non-human actors interact with each other and with the gardener, together forming both the appearance of the garden and how gardeners understand and engage with the space of their gardens (Head & Muir, 2006, Lorimer, 2005, Power, 2005). Non-representational theory (Hitchings, 2003) has an irreplaceable role in this strand of research to better cope with more-than-human actors within the garden. That is why, in our research, a space was also given to interrogate on nonmaterial elements in the garden, and the multi sensual aspects of gardens.

Data and methods

To gather data for the research presented in this paper, firstly a questionnaire survey of 302 urban domestic garden keepers was conducted. The survey took place between April 2019 and November 2019 as part of a larger project on home gardens. The focus was on the capital city of Prague (more than 1.3 million inhabitants in 2019), where 8 model locations were selected to represent a variation of the most typical examples of urban residential landscapes with residential gardens (old suburbs, newly established suburbs, traditional neighbourhoods with villa houses, and inner-city locations) across the largest Czech city (n = 132). To allow a comparison with smaller cities, eight locations including residential gardens in other Czech cities and towns were surveyed as a control sample (n = 119). Settlements with more than 5 000 inhabitants were considered for this sample – min = 7 312, max = 89 934 inhabitants in 2019 – as well as comparable types of housing inner-city locations, new suburbs, traditional villa houses, terraced housing, etc.). Each locality was represented by a similar number of respondents (in average 16.5 respondents per locality in Prague and 15 respondents per locality in the control sample). Almost 90% of our respondents were owning their houses and gardens and about 10% were renting them. The average size of the urban garden in our sample was 466 m² (363 m² for Prague and 630 m² for other cities).

An availability sampling method (Reichel, 2009) was applied and the presence of a home garden, defined as a space other than a dwelling within a residential parcel or subdivision (Loram et al., 2008), was a condition. Gardeners who were present at home or directly in the garden were interviewed first. To reinforce the randomness of the sampling, interviewers approached every fifth house with a garden on a street within the model location. If an adult gardener was present and agreed to be interviewed, the interview took place and the interviewer then moved down the street, visiting the next fifth house with a home garden. The ethic approval was granted by the Czech Science Foundation as ethic checks are included in the grant evaluation system.

A standardised questionnaire was designed to comprise both closed and open questions and was implemented with a PAPI method (paper and pen interview) by one of the authors and trained students of geography from the Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, who all volunteered to take part in this research. After a short introduction with the presentation of the research purpose, the survey started with a question about the activities usually performed in the home garden: ‘Could you, please, name the activities do you usually perform on your garden?’ (possible answers: passive relax; active relax; home food production; ornamental flowers production; small husbandry; others. The first question served to mapping of activities performed in the gardens, to show the variability and colourful spectra of uses. We collected mere frequencies of the activities mentioned and every gardener could name as many activities as they liked, based on the self-perception and feeling of how the garden is used. Second question concerned the number of hours usually spent weekly caring for their garden (‘How many hours do you spend by working on your garden – in hours/week’). Next, the garden keepers were asked to evaluate the benefits of gardening which matter to them (‘How important to you are the following benefits of gardening?’) followed by a list of 12 items based on previous work (Clayton, 2007) (relaxation; spending time outdoors; controlling the appearance of the garden; beautification, creating something nice; producing food or herbs; observing nature and natural processes at work; working with my hands; producing ornamental flowers; meeting friends and neighbours; novelty, trying new plants; demonstrating my gardening experience; demonstrating my effort) and they were challenged to compare the importance of gardening as a leisure activity with other hobbies (‘Please indicate how important gardening is for you in comparison with other leisure activities?’). Both questions – the one on gardening benefits and the one comparing gardening to other leisure activities – were evaluated on a scale from one to five, with a higher score indicating greater importance. In the open questions, respondents were invited to express their feelings about their garden and gardening (‘What do you like the most about your garden and gardening?’ and ‘What is the favourite part/element of your garden?’). The final section of the survey included the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondent – gender, age, education, occupation, household size, number of children up to 15 years, and ownership of the garden. Information about location, time, duration of the interview, and the interviewer was also encoded for each questionnaire.

The basic characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1 and compared to the general population of Czechia. Our sample deviated from the general population in several aspects: women were more strongly represented in our survey, as well as middle-aged respondents. In our sample there was also more professionals, lower management representatives and administrative support workers than in general population and less pensioners and persons on maternity leave.

Table 1. Basic characteristics of the sample (in brackets the percentages for the general population of Czechia as of 31 December 2021 are displayed).

gender	%	occupation	%
men	41.1 (49.3)	top professionals	6.3 (2.7)
women	58.9 (50.7)	intermediary professionals	25.8 (17.8)
age		administrative support	20.2 (11.9)
up to 25	11.6 (25.4)	skilled manual workers	10.6 (14.8)
25-34	15.6 (12.0)	unskilled manual workers	4.6 (2.8)
35-44	17.2 (14.7)	maternity leave	3.6 (12.1)
45-54	27.2 (15.2)	students	9.3 (8.2)
55-64	10.6 (12.1)	pensioners	18.5 (27.2)
65 and over	17.9 (20.6)	unemployed	1.0 (2.5)

Source: own survey; Czech Statistical Office (2022).

The responses were analysed through a simple response analysis (Freeman et al., 2012). For associations between characteristics of gardens, demographic variables, and gardening preferences, the data were analysed by basic descriptive statistics calculation of contingency coefficients (CC) to reveal some associations between the gardening meanings and characteristics of the gardeners. To reveal the hidden factors behind the values attributed to gardening, a principal component analysis with a Varimax rotation was applied. To sketch the characteristics of resulting groups of gardeners based on the previous principal component analysis, we used K-means cluster analysis. All the analyses were performed in SPSS, statistical software ver. 20.0. In order to analyse open questions, the interviewers completed the questionnaires by writing in detail verbatim the participants´ responses, which allowed a more nuanced assessment of responses to emerge. To detect diverse ways of feeling about the garden and about respondents´ attitudes and emotions, multiple categories were created and text coded at those categories where content, philosophy of gardening, and emotional reaction overlapped. We used Microsoft Word and its commenting and macro functions, which allow commenting diverse extracts from the transcribed text and subsequent extraction of comments to new document for further analysis of categories (Fredborg, 2013). For enumerating the favourite elements of the urban gardens, the comments were copied to Microsoft Excel for better qualification, sorting, and depiction.

Results and discussion

Using an urban residential garden for a passive relaxation was the most mentioned among the garden functions in total for the surveyed residential gardens (Figure 1). This was, however, very closely followed by the use of the garden for vegetable and herb production as well as planting of ornamental flowers for beautification. Nevertheless, the importance differs slightly between Prague and other cities. In Prague, it was the recreational function, which was the most important (followed by planting of ornamental flowers and production of herbs and vegetables).

Figure 1. The most common functions of urban/residential gardens.

Source: Own survey.

Note: The numbers indicate the frequency of mentions.

In this regard, the results of this survey are in accordance with similar studies evidencing that the space of an urban home garden often represents a functional extension of the home, designed and managed to meet the aesthetic and recreational preferences of the family (Cook et al., 2012, Loram et al., 2011) and there is a fluent, reciprocal integration between the living areas of the house and the garden outdoors (Head & Muir, 2006).

In smaller cities and towns, people most commonly mentioned home production of vegetables and herbs; the other reasons, such as relaxation and other garden production, followed but without significant distinctions in the frequencies of mentions. These results confirm first that self-provisioning is truly a widely present phenomenon within Czech society (Jehlička et al., 2013, Šiftová, 2021) and, second, since other types of recreative and productive activities received almost equal number of responses, garden keepers in smaller cities often perceive garden production as an inherent part of the garden and gardening as a kind of relaxing activity (Sovová, 2020, Vávra et al., 2018). Keeping small (productive) animals was the least mentioned function and, not surprisingly, it was more common in smaller cities and towns than in Prague.

The average time spent caring for a garden was 8.56 h a week. There was a significant difference between Prague (7.98 h/week) and other urban areas (9.45 h/week, independent samples median test, p < 0.05). This might seem a lot, but there are clear associations between garden use and the character of their management. As the majority of Prague respondents used their gardens for relaxation, they are, of course, involved in some landscaping and garden management; however, this did not always result from an affection for gardening (for similar result see also Loram et al., 2011). The higher number of hours spent taking care of a garden in the smaller towns and cities meets the need of labour input in the garden when used for food, herb, or flower production. As mentioned above, domestic gardening stands on the edge between leisure and work, involving significant time, costs, and labour, not only in the creation of the garden, but also during maintenance (Bhatti & Church, 2000, Longhurst, 2006), which are not always perceived as pleasing and positive. This might also be one of the reasons why, when comparing gardening with other leisure-time activities, the mean score on the scale of importance (from 1 to 5) was 2.97, showing that gardening is neither the most nor the least attractive hobby. Again, there is a statistically significant difference (independent samples test, p < 0.05) between Prague (mean of 2.86), and other cities and towns, where gardening scored higher when compared to other hobbies (3.14). The big city offers more hobby opportunities and potential leisure activity, which in this case obviously competes with gardening, especially among younger respondents (Kortright & Wakefield, 2011, Spilková & Rypáčková, 2019).

The key question was focused on the important benefits of gardening in one’s home garden (Table 2). Quite surprisingly, in this regard, there were no significant differences between Prague and other urban areas (with the exception of the importance of garden for meeting friends and neighbours and for showing garden keeper’s experience, both were understood as more relevant by the respondents from other cities than Prague). In general, the most important benefits of gardening, according to their evaluation by garden keepers, were: relaxation and spending time outdoors (above the average value of 4), followed by having the possibility to control the appearance of the garden. Next in the ranking were the beautification aims and home production of food and herbs (the order of the least was switched for smaller cities and towns). In this vein, the results of this survey accord with previous studies (e.g. Clayton, 2007, Freeman et al., 2012, Kortright & Wakefield, 2011, Soga et al., 2017) showing how gardens can be used to construct a positive identity and meaning of life via the duty of caring, when being satisfied by nurturing plants and flowers. On the contrary, in total, the lowest evaluated benefits were those of demonstrating effort or expertise, trying novelties, and the social aspect of gardens – meeting friends and neighbours. These results resonate with more general conclusions from social science literature, namely that broader societal processes are leading to home-centred lives for both men and women and leisure is becoming increasingly individualised and home based (Allan & Crow, 1989, Bhatti & Church, 2000). Also, the results show that an urban garden (especially in bigger cities) is rather a ‘family issue’ than a community asset, compared to, for example, USA, where gardens within one neighbourhood often share similar characteristics and normative views about how people should manage their gardens apply (Cook et al., 2012, Hunter & Brown, 2012, Nassauer et al., 2009). Gardens may differ significantly within one neighbourhood, or even one street, without being influenced by normative views about the look of one’s garden, influence of community groups, social contagion, or the neighbourhood norms.

Table 2. Evaluation of perceived benefits of gardening in a residential garden (mean scores; scale 1–5, higher score indicating a greater importance).

	Total	Prague	Other cities and towns
Relaxation	4.09	4.12	4.05
Spending time outdoors	4.06	4.10	3.98
Controlling the appearance of the garden	3.69	3.72	3.65
Beautification, creating something nice	3.60	3.67	3.49
Producing food or herbs	3.58	3.59	3.56
Observing nature and natural processes at work	3.36	3.39	3.32
Working with my hands	3.34	3.45	3.17
Producing ornamental flowers	3.32	3.43	3.17
Meeting friends and neighbours*	2.62	2.49	2.82
Novelty, trying new plants	2.58	2.47	2.74
Demonstrating my gardening expertise*	2.18	2.08	2.34
Demonstrating my effort	2.01	1.95	2.10

Source: Own survey.

* statistically significant difference between Prague and other cities (Mann-Whitney U test, p < 0.5).

We found almost no significant associations between the expressed evaluation of gardening benefits and socio-demographic characteristics of gardeners. This shows that garden care is a phenomenon very similarly perceived across the social and demographical strata of urban dwellers. In fact, there were three exceptions: significantly higher importance of ornamental flower production for women (CC = 0.27, p < 0.001), respondents older than 65 years (CC = 0.33, p < 0.05), and significantly higher importance of working with your hands for respondents older than 65 years (CC = 0.327, p < 0.05). These emotional and social benefits of caring for plants, complemented by physical benefits associated with being active for older people are well known and documented (Bhatti, 2006, Cameron et al., 2012, Freeman et al., 2012, Gross & Lane, 2007). There was also no correlation found between the size of the garden and the time spent by working in the garden. The only significant difference, as regards the garden characteristics, was that the larger gardens are, not surprisingly, to be found in the smaller cities in this survey (CC = 0.192, p < 0.05).

The ambivalent position of gardening as an activity between the categories of work and leisure is also evident from the results of principal component analysis with Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalisation. This analysis clearly revealed three distinctive components (with eigenvalues higher than 1) behind the perceptions of gardening among the surveyed urban gardeners, which together explain more than 60% of the variation in the perceived benefits of gardening (KMO = 0.792, p < 0.001). Table 3 depicts the loadings on these three components: (i) ‘prolific’ component accenting the productive functions of gardens – food, herbs, flowers – and the labour element – working, creating, controlling; (ii) ‘idle’ component – based on relaxation, spending time outdoors, and contact with nature; and (iii) ‘diligent’ component, closer to the community or allotment perception of gardening – demonstrating one’s knowledge and effort and developing social connections through gardening.

Table 3. Loadings on the three resulting components – prolific, idle, and diligent gardening.

	Component
	“prolific”	“idle”	“diligent”
Spending time outdoors		0.825
Observing nature and natural processes at work		0.556
Beautification, creating something nice	0.618
Relaxation		0.824
Controlling the appearance of the garden	0.537
Working with my hands	0.628
Novelty, trying new plants	0.696
Producing food or herbs	0.701
Producing ornamental flowers	0.719
Meeting friends and neighbours			0.683
Demonstrating my effort			0.891
Demonstrating my gardening expertise			0.864

Source: Own survey.

We can cluster the respondents into groups according to their approach to gardening (based on the respective component scores on each of the extracted components above). After applying K-means cluster analysis for three clusters, it is possible to roughly depict the three resulting groups of urban gardeners. The ‘prolific’ gardeners are mostly middle-aged, with the highest number of children per household (and the larger households, in general), of active working age, employed, often being owners of their houses and gardens, and with the largest gardens in our sample. The ‘idle’ gardeners are younger, with the smallest households and lowest number of children up to 15 years within our sample, employed or on maternity leave, more prone to be renting their house and garden, and with gardens on average smaller. The ‘diligent’ gardeners are the oldest group in our survey, more women are in this group, they tend to be from smaller households with a lower number of children, often owners of their residential property, and the size of garden is in the middle range within the sample.

The relaxation and beautification function of a residential garden has also been articulated in the replies to the first of the open questions – what the favourite part of the garden is. Here, the ‘dwelling’ components and aesthetic elements of a residential garden clearly prevailed (Figure 2) – outside seating area for family get-togethers and flowerbed with ornamental flowers are the winners, followed by a mix of residential and beautifying elements with a lesser number of mentions (such as terrasses, greenhouses, rock gardens, and swimming pools).

Figure 2. Favourite elements of the residential garden.

Source: Own survey.

Note: The numbers indicate the frequency of mentions.

Finally, these results can be easily depicted by analysis of the responses to the second open question. Here, the majority of respondents stated that what they like the most about their garden was that it provides them with space to relax, to be outdoors, in the fresh air. ‘I like to sit there with a cup of coffee after work and just … just be’ (resp. 93). This, and many similar replies in our sample, clearly validate the connection between garden and escapism (Freeman et al., 2012; Gross & Lane, 2007; Kiesling & Manning, 2010 etc.). Many respondents also held strong memories of gardens from their childhood or more recent past (similarly, Bhatti & Church, 2000). ‘I come from a small town and we were always outdoors as children, our family had a large garden and some chickens, that is why I rented this house, I simply needed a piece of greenery around me’ (resp. 16). The opportunity to observe a growing garden, especially during spring, was among the more significant nodes of responses. ‘I love to watch everything grow, when everything wakes up, in bloom … I feel I’m waking up too’ (resp. 138). In accordance with the biophilia hypothesis, this research can also confirm a relationship between well-being and contact with nature in gardens (Freeman et al., 2012 etc.).

In the open questions, the possibility of producing one’s own food was, however, also often mentioned as an important quality of a residential garden. ‘Usually, I do not plant too many plants, not a huge variety. As I am getting older, I realise that a small herb patch and some zucchini and tomatoes are usually enough, just for the sheer joy of growing’ (resp. 71). Manual work has been often praised as highly welcomed exercise in contrast to mostly sitting at work or other static leisure-time activities. ‘I don´t even think about gardening in terms of work, I simply clean up my head when taking care of the garden, … that is such a relief’ (resp. 221). A significant node of results was also represented by the joy of harvesting. ‘Well, I like gardening, but honestly, the best moment is when the harvest comes’ (resp. 270). ‘My friends never believe me that these delicious berries are grown here, in the city, they often call me a cheater and think I bought them in a shop (laughs)’. (resp. 145). In fact, this pure joy is mentioned as an important resource within a novel understanding of social metabolism (Jehlička et al., 2021). More, the notion of joy gains an important place also in the medical literature as a beneficial result of public health or nutrition interventions (Eng et al., 2019, Kim & Thompson, 2020).

The current study had several limitations. First, the sample is not representative of the general Czech population. In this study, the representativeness was not a goal. Instead, by using the above described sampling method it aimed to depict home gardens in diverse urban settings, in Prague as well as in the smaller cities. Second, there is a limitation as regards the results of the statistical analyses based on the demographic characteristics and the perception of gardens. The management and maintenance of the garden is often the concern of the whole family; however, the survey was only completed by one representative, giving his/her characteristics. The results of the respective statistical analysis should thus be interpreted with caution and assigned a rather auxiliary role in the explanation. Third, this study does not investigate on rural gardening, as there are other works focused on rural gardens in Czechia (e.g. Svobodová et al., 2021, Vávra et al., 2018, Vávra et al., 2021), which clearly show that understanding of food production as a part of rural identity and tradition is a crucial element of the perception of gardening.

Conclusions

The results show that the importance of outdoor relaxation slightly prevails in evaluating a residential garden’s meaning. But the possibility of creating something with one’s own hands, to produce one’s own food, or to form a more beautiful place are also highly appreciated. In the perception of Czech urban gardeners, work and leisure often intertwine. The dividing line between these two is blurred, sometimes leisure turns to work (maintenance, landscaping, spring preparations), another time work becomes a leisurely joy (like harvesting). What is noteworthy about the findings of this study is, that in our urban sample, for the majority of surveyed gardeners the cultivation of at least a small quantity of vegetables, fruits, or herbs comes as a natural component of having a backyard, albeit in the city. It comes as an automatic endeavour now they are caring for the garden, even if the quantity of the produce tends to be small (Šiftová, 2021).

Gardening is thus perceived by Czechs as a hybrid form of activity, nicely placed between a work and a hobby. Equally, gardens represent truly hybrid spaces; they are variable, they can be modified according to family demographics (or even economic – from lawns and flower beds, when there is enough money in the household, to a productive garden in times of crisis or shortage; Niňez, 1984). Home garden is thus a multifunctional environment, which can be changed in particular phases of the human life cycle – an easy-maintenance garden with a lawn and recreational elements for yuppies; a playground and teaching garden for families with children; a fruitful yard full of flowers and herbs for active pensioners. In this aspect, the home garden – as a unique natural setting attached to one’s own home – differs significantly from other green spaces such as parks, forests, and community gardens (Gross & Lane, 2007).

What can thus be inferred from this study’s results for the future of gardens and gardening? It seems that the continuum ‘idle’ – ‘prolific’ – ‘diligent’ correlates with the age continuum of garden keepers ‘younger – middle aged – older’. If we are about to lose the oldest generation of traditional, diligent, ‘serious’ gardeners, it is possible that the younger generations will pass to larger homes on smaller plots, associated with less of garden space, combined with trends towards hard landscaping and easy-care gardens – thus rather a ‘maintenance’ concept of gardening and relaxation function of gardens. It is also possible that the ‘now-idle’ gardeners can later turn to ‘prolific’ or ‘diligent’ as they grow older, as they found their time and enjoy the experience.

Garden keepers in our study have never completely renounced the ‘work’ of gardening and productive facet of their gardens. Since gardens were often declared as vital components for many people in urban society, it is probable that there is a future for gardening as a leisure activity, although it may be construed rather as a ‘light’ version of gardening (adapted to one’s busy schedule and other hobbies), casual or even more relaxed (in Stebbins’s terms).

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the [Czech Science Foundation] under Gant [number 17-03796S].

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Czech Science Foundation [17-03796S].