sustainability

Article
Fostering Multi-Functional Urban Agriculture:
Experiences from the Champions in a Revitalized
Farm Pond Community in Taoyuan, Taiwan
Rung-Jiun Chou 1, * ID
, Chen-Ting Wu 2 and Feng-Tzu Huang 3
1 Department of Landscape Architecture, Chung Yuan Christian University, 200 Chung-Pei Road, Chung-Li
District, Taoyuan City 32023, Taiwan
2 Department of Cultural and Creative Industries, Hung Kuang University, 1018 Sec. 6, Taiwan Boulevard,
Shalu District, Taichung City 43302, Taiwan; chentingwu0417@gmail.com
3 Liberal Arts Center/Department of Nursing, Da-Yeh University, 168 University Road, Dacun,
Changhua 51591, Taiwan; fzh@mail.dyu.edu.tw
* Correspondence: rungjiun@gmail.com

Received: 1 September 2017; Accepted: 13 November 2017; Published: 15 November 2017

Abstract: Urban agriculture (UA) with its multi-functional roles has recently become a globally
important topic, as it is considered as an approach to address the emerging challenges to societies
seeking greater sustainability. In Taiwan, the Hakka community of Gaoyuan in Taoyuan City, where
a traditional farm pond was recently transformed into a public, multi-functional UA resource,
is widely regarded as the first successful bottom-up, community-led, farm-pond-based UA in Taiwan,
yet its actual performance is rarely explored in any depth. Little work has been done to provide details
on the socio-ecological benefits of UA in the community redevelopment process. Through in-depth
interviews, fieldwork, and participant observation, this specific qualitative study aims to explore
the community champions’ experiences in the transformation leading to a revitalized community.
First, by linking nearby nature to people, a green network of diverse spaces, low-impact landscaping,
and an agricultural-community-like pondscape, the specific landscape character that makes UA in
Gaoyuan distinctive is formed. Second, through active engagement, participation, and the agency
of local people, the UA implementation process features cooperative working, mutual learning,
and experience-sharing. Third, UA plays a crucial role in building social cohesion that promotes
people’s participation in community affairs, and strengthens the community’s social network, which
involves agricultural life, crop production, the ecological environment, and community care. It is
revealed that the farm-pond-based UA with its multi-functional roles acts as a catalyst for the Gaoyuan
community’s progress toward sustainability. The desired end-state of the agricultural landscape,
as a synthesis of natural features and human interventions, is a more sustainable, characteristic,
well-maintained and united place to fulfill people’s needs and enhance people’s overall health
and well-being.

Keywords: agriculture landscape; green infrastructure; health; social cohesion; well-being

1. Introduction
Urban agriculture (UA) is a newly-emerging type of agriculture with the rapid growth of cities [1],
faced with challenges such as changing climate, the need for a secure food supply, and increased
urbanization [2]. UA is generally defined as “an industry located within (intra-urban) or on the fringe
(peri-urban) of a town, a city or a metropolis, which grows and raises, processes and distributes
a diversity of food and non-food products” ([3]; p. 10). These agricultural activities display in diverse
forms and scales in cities that reflect urban residents’ various needs and preferences [4], such as

Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097; doi:10.3390/su9112097 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 2 of 24

allotments, community gardens, leisure farms, educational farms, therapeutic farms, social farms, food
farms, and environmental farms, to offer services and products concerning cultivation, recreation,
learning, care, direct marketing, landscape management, and environmental measures [5]. It is implied
that UA, a typologically diverse phenomenon spatially embedded in the urban context, plays multiple
roles in urban life.
Growing evidence advocates UA’s potential for the sustainability of cities that involves,
for example, food supply [6], flood mitigation, employment [7], biodiversity, scenic values,
cultural landscape [8], human health and well-being [9], green infrastructure [10], and a sense
of community [11]. Public and private support for multi-functional UA is shown in increasing
international best practices. For example, how UA can innovate the design of urban spaces and
buildings is demonstrated through a range of U.S. and Canadian projects to facilitate the connections
among urban environments, food supply and community engagement [12]. In some European
cities, fostering UA is a vehicle for producing food, promoting biodiversity, developing attractive
cultural landscapes with high recreational values, and facilitating local participation and green
knowledge [13,14]. Various projects in developing countries in Africa, Latin America and Southeast
Asia as well as China are documented to show their experiences in improving livelihoods, tourism,
education, land use management, flood control, and social cohesion and integration [15,16]. UA offers
the potential for improvements in the food supply, health conditions, local economy, social integration,
and environmental sustainability in the developing world [17]. It indicates that, in both the global
North and South, UA is central to the sustainable development of cities due to the broad range of
services that it provides to cities and their dwellers.
A classification of UA based on policy dimensions is suggested: (1) the social dimension that
contributes to the development of an “inclusive” city region, where subsistence-oriented types of
UA (e.g., home gardening, community gardening, institutional gardens at schools and hospitals,
and open field farming with low levels of investment) are the main features which, although showing
little direct profitability, exert significant social influences on poverty alleviation, food security, social
inclusion, community building, and the creation of a social safety net; (2) the economic dimension
that supports the development of a “productive” city region, where market-oriented UA is key to
income and employment generation from food (e.g., vegetables) and non-food (e.g., herbs, flowers
and plants) production run by small-scale, family-based businesses and larger-scale, entrepreneurial
enterprises, whereby UA is reliant on enterprise development and marketing and has more economic
impact, profitability and externalities; and (3) the ecological dimension that fosters the development
of an “environmentally healthy” city region, where UA encompasses multiple roles such as flood
management [15], urban greening, the consideration of micro-climates, landscape management,
biodiversity, water storage, and waste management [15,18,19]. These UA frameworks can be
an approach to understanding, in whole or in part, its diverse phenomena and interests in practice
including their different emphases and stakeholders that may be collaborative or conflicting.
The objectives of UA often go beyond food production and supply and are frequently related to
social and environmental contributions to the urban system within the frame of sustainability [20].
As shown by Orsini et al. [21] and Specht et al. [22], social and environmental functions and benefits
are frequently stressed when addressing the multi-functionality of UA. Furthermore, UA’s social
roles may especially involve recreation, education, health, and social care and cohesion, where there
are three indicators representing its social added values, namely non-paid jobs (volunteers), social
services, and educational services, to support inclusion, integration, formation, and upgrading of the
community. As an example, the City Farm Schönbrunn, a bottom-up initiative in Vienna, Austria
highlights social and educational activities by offering garden workshops, staffed by volunteers,
for school groups, disadvantaged children, and children during holidays [23]. Being part of the urban
ecological system, UA also can play a significant role in managing the urban environment [19]. The
environmental added values emphasize the size of managed green areas and agrobiodiversity [23],
whereby the latter includes the variety and variability of animals, plants, and micro-organisms in
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 3 of 24

support of the agro-ecosystem, and fosters the human activity of agriculture where local knowledge
and culture are key [24,25]. In short, the society anticipates more from UA than ordinary agriculture,
in order to improve condensed city environments in different ways, such as aiding the empowerment
of local communities and the establishment of green infrastructure. UA, as a type of open landscape,
is strongly connected to the built environment, and thus UA’s spatial features (e.g., size, scale, and
proportion) have an impact on how visible UA is in the urban context, such as its promising potential
use of flowerbeds, balconies, abandoned buildings [26], open rooftops [27], vacant lots, open space,
and underutilized parks [28].
UA’s spatial conditions are strongly associated with the development of the built environment
and green infrastructure of the city [29]. UA can create green belts enclosing the urban area, green
wedges infiltrating the urban area, and individual green sites or networks patching the trans-urban
area; additionally, UA varies in size and shape including large-scale farmland patterns, medium-scale
collective patterns (e.g., allotments and community gardens) showing a system of combined single sites,
and small-scale individual spot patterns (e.g., family gardens and rooftops) [30]. For example, extensive
allotment sites, whereby grow-your-own/small-scale UA is viewed as one of the characteristics of
the foodscape, are essential for the spatial identity of the neighborhoods in Newcastle upon Tyne,
UK [31]. Community gardens are a crucial element of the UA landscape in the U.S. city of Sacramento,
where community gardens represent a system of public and private individual plots, and the open
spaces allow users to experience UA’s multiple benefits [32]. Overall, it indicates that the features
of production with its location, scale, and patterns have a great impact on how agriculture in urban
space is perceived, apart from massive agricultural buildings (e.g., greenhouses) that have a dominant
visible effect. At the planning level, it is important to integrate UA into the urban fabric and green
infrastructure for enhancing the cityscape, landscape quality, and living environment. It is necessary
to know how and to what extent UA could connect and unite with city components and dwellers [33].
In terms of Taiwan, promoting UA is currently one of the key agricultural policies of the
government for emphasizing its multi-functional values, such as food security, self-sustaining business,
community revitalization, and ecological services [34]. As an example, in response to the global
urban-farming fever, Taipei City Government has invested great time and effort in developing a garden
city plan, whereby a community agriculture promotion center was set up in 2015 to support civic groups
in their demand for implementing UA projects [35], such as land acquisition, project management,
and technical training [36]. Nevertheless, Taiwan’s UA development has been heavily reliant upon
top-down, policy-driven programs [36,37], with readily-available city locations including vacant
community lands and the rooftops of public buildings (e.g., schools and government offices) [38].
In a similar situation, Gaoyuan, a farm pond community situated in the special municipality of
Taoyuan, is a recent noteworthy case of advocating UA that intends to transform an abandoned,
hard-engineered, originally-agricultural-irrigation pond area into a multi-functional UA resource,
by improving landscape and water quality, reintroducing farming activities, and enhancing social
networks and well-being [39]. This currently on-going UA practice aims at replacing the infrastructure
established for traditional agriculture with a green, publicly-accessible place that is central to the
quality of life and structure of the community owing to the wide range of services that it provides to
the community and its residents.
While the Gaoyuan project is widely regarded as the first successful case of bottom-up,
community-led, farm-pond-based UA in Taiwan [40,41], little work has been done to provide details on
the socio-ecological benefits of UA in the community redevelopment process. The research asks: What
are the perspectives of leaders, who work in influential roles in the process of fostering the integration
of UA with community redevelopment, on: (1) what UA could be; (2) the various purposes of UA;
and (3) the socio-ecological influences of UA? Therefore, this qualitative study focuses on a specific
case to explore the community champions’ experiences with a traditional farm pond redeveloped
into a community resource for UA that has played a much-needed role in terms of connecting people
with each other, with the land, and with their traditional farming history. The significance of the
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 4 of 24

case study is to better-inform the practical aspects while conducting UA combined with community
revitalization in East Asian cities. Next, the paper will review the development of UA and farm ponds
in Taiwan and explain the methods of collecting and analyzing data, followed by an examination of
the UA implementation process in the Gaoyuan community. The important issues about fostering
multi-functional UA that integrates with the revitalization of a farm pond community will then be
discussed and conclusions will be presented.

2. Urban Agriculture Development in Taiwan

Farmers’ associations have played a vital role in promoting the development of UA in Taiwan [42].
Taiwan’s UA originated in the 1980s and the overall development has broadly fallen into four major
types [43], which are described in more detail below:

(1) Tourist farm: Sightseeing and fruit/tea/flower picking;

(2) Citizen farm: Farming experience;
(3) Leisure farm: A longer stay with diverse activities; and
(4) Educational farm: Agricultural/environmental education.

It is the tourist farm that began the evolution of UA in Taiwan [44]. With the initial
purposes of reducing labor costs and increasing economic benefits, Taipei Farmers’ Association
(TFA) started to promote the tourist farm in the district of Muzha in 1980, then gradually expanding
citywide [45], encouraged by the national policy entitled “Agritourism Development Demonstration
Plan” implemented in 1982 [46]. The agricultural products of tourist farms normally comprise
tea, oranges, strawberries, bell fruit, passion fruit, grapefruit, grapes, mushrooms, and Calla Lilies,
attracting a large number of people to enjoy sightseeing and fruit/tea/flower picking [47].
With economic growth and improved living standards, TFA initiated a plan in 1989 to develop
citizen farms whereby the first citizen farm was built in 1990 in the district of Beitou [48]. Due to
a manpower shortage for farming, farmers normally lease a citizen’s farmlands to cultivate agricultural
products (e.g., fruits, flowers, and vegetables) by themselves. This brings the benefits of increasing
farmers’ incomes, allowing citizens to experience farming activities and agricultural life, ensuring food
security, and facilitating the revitalization of local communities [49]. There has been a trend toward
the development of citizen farms [50], currently reaching over 80 nationwide [51].
The type of leisure farms, which usually integrate cultural landscapes, fruit/tea/flower picking,
sightseeing, recreation, farming, and accommodation, is considered as the typical representative of
UA in Taiwan [52]. Officially recognized in 1989 by the Central Council of Agriculture (CoA) for the
importance of agricultural transformation [45], the leisure farms have been flourishing since 2000,
and now number over 1000 nationwide [45,53].
Recently, the educational farm has played a key role in outdoor education in kindergartens and
elementary schools, as schoolchildren are encouraged to go out into the field to receive experiential
learning about ecology, agriculture, and the environment [43]. The educational farm is regarded
as a suitable site, because it can function as an extended, off-campus classroom, where learning
and experiential programs are provided based on the environmental resources of farms (e.g., plants,
animals, and facilities) [54].
In an endeavor to foster multi-functional UA, Taiwan has made good progress in social, economic,
and ecological aspects [53], yet there is still much room for improvement, such as the inability of
bottom-up, community-led, UA practices to sustain growth [51], and a lack of variety in the different
UA developments on offer [45]. This shows that promoting multi-functional UA is still a challenge for
Taiwan’s UA specialists.

3. Farm Ponds in Taiwan

Taiwan has an average annual rainfall of over 2500 mm, but it is unevenly distributed throughout
the year. In the rainy season (May to October), about 80% of the annual rainfall occurs but it
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 5 of 24

rapidly flows into the ocean owing to the topography with its radial network of narrow valleys.
During the Ching Dynasty (1684–1895) and the early period of Japanese rule (1896–1949), farmers
extensively dug farm ponds to store rainwater for agricultural uses, dealing with the uneven rainfall
and inadequate irrigation systems [55]. Farm ponds aimed to retain water resources and represented
a prominent, unique feature of the agricultural landscape in Taiwan, especially within the city of
Taoyuan. The number of farm ponds reached its peak of around 10,000 in the year 1913, giving
Taoyuan the reputation of “a thousand-pond township” [56]. However, the construction of the
Taoyuan Canal, Shimen Canal, Shimen Reservoir and other irrigation facilities since the 1920s has
resulted in a big change in agricultural development: from traditional farm-pond irrigation to multiple
water sources [57]. Due to the development of a water infrastructure (large-scale centralized water
storages and pipelines to supply farms) and urbanization, farm ponds have gradually vanished. Over
3290 farm ponds existed in Taoyuan City in the 1970s, but now fewer than 1800 remain [58].
Currently, the majority of the existing farm ponds have lost the original agricultural
functions [59], and many of them have been changed for recreational (e.g., parks), ecological
(e.g., bird refuges), environmental (e.g., flood prevention) and commercial (e.g., fishery) uses [56].
It shows that the multi-functionality of farm ponds in Taoyuan is an increasingly important issue,
with growing attention to agricultural development combined with green infrastructure, community
revitalization, and cultural landscapes [58]. This underpins the objectives of this paper that
examine the community champions’ experiences involved in the transformation of Gaoyuan, where
an abandoned, hard-engineered, originally-agricultural-irrigation pond area has been converted into
a multi-functional UA resource, and their effects on the implementation of a farm-pond-based UA
integrated with community revitalization. Through this qualitative case study, the development of the
UA pondscape can be better understood.

4. Methods

4.1. The Study Area

The research was conducted at Gaoyuan community with Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond (including the
upper and lower ponds) in Longtan District, Taoyuan City, Taiwan (Figure 1). As one of the six special
municipalities, Taoyuan City is located in the northwest of Taiwan, close to the capital city of Taipei.
The topography of this area is relatively flat, dominated by the Taoyuan Plateau. Farm ponds are
distributed broadly within the Plateau, owing to its special underlying geology and geomorphology.
The plateau is covered by soils of reddish-brown weathered, gravelly clay layers, and deposits of
well-rounded sandstone gravels from 10 to 50 m deep [57]. Supported by this, farm ponds are situated
in the relatively flat lowland areas that are suitable to store rainwater and collect surface runoff.
The primary land use in Taoyuan was farm-pond-based agriculture, but rapid urban sprawl,
economic development and population growth have resulted in the rapid decline of farm ponds
and extensive changes in landscape. The case of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond (Figures 2 and 3) represents
a remnant of the traditional pondscape. Divided into two parts (upper and lower), the area of
Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is roughly 5000 m2 in total, with a normal water depth of 1.2 m. While many
farm ponds are buried or abandoned, this pond has been developed by the Gaoyuan Community
Development Association (GCDA) as an environmental resource that fosters UA, ecological diversity,
environmental education and a healthy community. The farm pond is owned by a local entrepreneur,
who is also a long-term supporter of GCDA. Xia-Dian-Zi is voluntarily used by the community as
a public open space available to all [39].
Zi farm pond is roughly 5000 m in total, with a normal water depth of 1.2 m. While many farm ponds
are buried or abandoned, this pond has been developed by the Gaoyuan Community Development
Association (GCDA) as an environmental resource that fosters UA, ecological diversity,
environmental education and a healthy community. The farm pond is owned by a local entrepreneur,
who is also a long-term supporter of GCDA. Xia-Dian-Zi is voluntarily used by the community as a
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 6 of 24
public open space available to all [39].

Sustainability2017,
Sustainability 2017,9,9,2097
2097 66ofof23
23
Figure 1. Location of Gaoyuan community with Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond.
Figure1.1.Location
Figure LocationofofGaoyuan
Gaoyuancommunity
communitywith
withXia-Dian-Zi
Xia-Dian-Zifarm
farmpond.
pond.

Figure2.
Figure
Figure 2.2.Xia-Dian-Zi
Xia-Dian-Zifarm
Xia-Dian-Zi farmpond
farm pond(dashed
pond (dashedwhite
(dashed whitelines)
white lines)and
lines) andnearby
and nearbyGaoyuan
nearby Gaoyuancommunity:
Gaoyuan community:A:
community: A:wooden
A: wooden
wooden
deck;
deck; B: stone paved path; C: artificial floating island; D: wood-chip path; E: Mugwort field;
deck; B: stone paved path; C: artificial floating island; D: wood-chip path; E: Mugwort field; and
B: stone paved path; C: artificial floating island; D: wood-chip path; E: Mugwort field; andF:
and F:
F:
agricultural
agricultural field
agricultural field and
field and greenhouse.
greenhouse.
and greenhouse.

Figure
Figure Xia-Dian-Zi
Figure3.3.Xia-Dian-Zi farm
Xia-Dian-Zifarm pond,
farmpond, an
pond,an
anoblique
obliqueperspective
perspectiveview
viewfrom
fromnortheast
northeasttotosouthwest.
southwest.

Basedon
Based
Based onYin’s
on Yin’srationale
Yin’s rationale[60]
rationale [60]for
[60] foraaasingle-case
for single-casestudy
single-case studyas
study asthe
as theunique
the uniquecase,
unique case,the
case, theimportance
the importanceof
importance ofthe
of the
the
selected
selected case
case isis as
as follows.
follows. First,
First, Gaoyuan
Gaoyuan community
community with
with Xia-Dian-Zi
Xia-Dian-Zi farm
farm
selected case is as follows. First, Gaoyuan community with Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is a typical Hakka pond
pond is
is a a typical
typical Hakka
Hakka
settlementin
settlement
settlement inaaaperi-urban
in peri-urbanarea.
peri-urban area.Under
area. Underurbanization
Under urbanizationpressure
urbanization pressureand
pressure andsocio-economic
and socio-economicdevelopment,
socio-economic development,this
development, this
this
real-life
real-life instance
instance demonstrates
demonstrates how
how aa farm
farm pond
pond area
area could
could be
be redeveloped
redeveloped
real-life instance demonstrates how a farm pond area could be redeveloped by a local community byby aa local
local community
community as
as
anan
an
as ideal
ideal
idealstate
state
statewherein
wherein
wherein UAUA
UA isisintegrated
integrated
is integrated with
with green
green
with infrastructure,
infrastructure,
green community
community
infrastructure, community revitalization,
revitalization, and
and
revitalization,
cultural
cultural
and landscapes.
landscapes.
cultural TheHakkas,
The
landscapes. Hakkas,
The Hakkas, anethnic
an ethnic groupof
an group
ethnic ofHan
HanChinese,
group Chinese,
of migrated
migrated
Han Chinese, fromMainland
from
migrated Mainland Chinatoto
China
from Mainland
Taiwan
Taiwan
China during
toduring
Taiwan the
the Chingthe
Ching
during Dynasty
Dynasty (1684–1895)
Ching(1684–1895) totofind
Dynasty (1684–1895) findaabetter
better
to future
future
find forfuture
for
a better theirfamilies.
their families. Owing
for theirOwing toto
families.
migration, generation
migration, generation afterafter generation
generation facedfaced anan adverse
adverse environment,
environment, so so they
they learned
learned toto bebe
hardworking,persevering,
hardworking, persevering,and andunpretentious
unpretentious[61]. [61].Second,
Second,Xia-Dian-Zi
Xia-Dian-Zihas hasbecome
becomeaafarm-pond-
farm-pond-
based environmental
based environmental education
education site site that
that attracts
attracts visits
visits from
from more
more than
than 10 10 groups/organizations
groups/organizations
nationwideannually
nationwide annuallyas asaaresult
resultof ofits
itsreputation
reputationfor forestablishing
establishingUAUAfarming
farming(e.g.,
(e.g.,Mugwort
Mugwortand and
vegetables),ecological
vegetables), ecologicaldiversity
diversity(e.g.,
(e.g.,aquatic
aquaticplants
plantsand
andwaterbirds),
waterbirds),and
andaahealthy
healthycommunity
community(e.g.,
(e.g.,
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 7 of 24

Owing to migration, generation after generation faced an adverse environment, so they learned to be
hardworking, persevering, and unpretentious [61]. Second, Xia-Dian-Zi has become a farm-pond-based
environmental education site that attracts visits from more than 10 groups/organizations nationwide
annually as a result of its reputation for establishing UA farming (e.g., Mugwort and vegetables),
ecological diversity (e.g., aquatic plants and waterbirds), and a healthy community (e.g., food security
and lifestyle choices). There is no charge for the visitors.
Third, GCDA is a committed local grassroots organization, whose main role is to promote local
sustainability and community well-being in a proactive, localized and participatory manner. GCDA is
composed of local residents, generally grouped into: (1) community workers; (2) farm pond workers;
(3) farmers (Mugwort, the greenhouse (organic farming), pond-side farmlands and artificial floating
islands (non-toxic farming)); (4) community kitchen workers; and (5) environmental protection workers.
The area of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is managed according to this system. The GCDA-related works
(e.g., maintenance, management, and implementation) have been long-term financially supported by
local enterprises and some short-term government funding (e.g., Rural Revitalization Plan).
Fourth, the real-life context represents idyllic surroundings, showing traditional-agricultural
-community-like qualities, especially attracting an increasing number of retired and middle-aged
people as residents. However, the area of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is a public open space, and thus it is
important for GCDA, who randomly patrols the area, to ensure a safe environment. There has been no
crime associated with the farm pond area, but there is a concern about the farm pond water quality,
which can be affected by various sources of pollution, such as industrial waste and run-off.

4.2. Data Collection

The research was conducted from August 2015 to July 2016 with data coming from in-depth
interviews, fieldwork, and participant observation. This approach of data source triangulation is
a strength of case studies [60], and can enhance the trustworthiness and rigor of research findings [62].
Regarding interviews, purposive sampling was employed to ensure that the sample incorporated
a diversity of personal backgrounds with direct, long-term participation in local community affairs.
The inclusion criteria therefore were: (1) at least five years of active participation in community affairs;
(2) a leader who works in an influential role (also known as champions) in the process of fostering
the integration of UA with community redevelopment. With a response rate of 100%, a total of
seven in-depth interviews were conducted (Table 1): (1) IV1, the leader of Gaoyuan community who
has fostered UA, farm pond redevelopment, environmental sustainability and public participation;
(2) IV2 and IV3, two team leaders of farm pond workers and farmers who are retired and have
been involved in the professional construction and management of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond; (3) IV4,
a farmer and the greenhouse owner who is a middle-aged returnee to Gaoyuan, and has helped
the community to establish the farm pond and its surroundings as a site for UA and environmental
education (e.g., programs of agricultural experience); (4) IV5, a team leader of environmental protection
workers who is a retired school teacher and has been engaged in ecological conservation; (5) IV6,
a team leader of community workers and community kitchen workers who is a retired school teacher
and has participated in the care of elderly people and the tutoring for children in the community;
and (6) IV7, a senior local government official who is a policy decision-maker and has promoted
farm-pond-based community revitalization. Especially, these interviewees act as the community
champions who change a traditional farm pond into a community UA resource through the phases of
initiation, development, and implementation. In addition, some champions are retired and participate
in community affairs without being paid for it (as an indicator representing UA’s social added values
mentioned in the introduction).
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 8 of 24

Table 1. Demographic data of the participants.

ID Code Age Group Gender Role Participation Occupation

The coordinator of The leader of
IV1 50–59 Female 20 years
community affairs the community
A team leader of farm pond
IV2 60–69 Male 5 years Retired
workers and farmers
A team leader of farm pond
IV3 70–79 Male 5 years Retired
workers and farmers
A farmer and leading
The greenhouse
IV4 40–49 Male teacher of environmental 10 years
owner
education sessions
A team leader of
IV5 50–59 Female environmental protection 8 years Retired
workers
A team leader of community
IV6 50–59 Female workers and community 10 years Retired
kitchen workers
A decision-maker for local Government
IV7 50–59 Male 15 years
policy official

There were three central open questions asked in each interview (see below), with the intention of
stimulating follow-up questions and allowing the answers to be of greater depth, thus encouraging the
provision of further relevant information. All interviews were digitally recorded for later transcription,
coding and analysis. The analysis approach of thematic analysis was used in the qualitative study.
Thematic analysis is defined as “a method for identifying, analyzing and reporting patterns (themes)
within data” ([63]: p. 79). As an independent and a reliable qualitative analysis approach [64], thematic
analysis is to supply a detailed and nuanced account of a group of themes within the data [63].

(1) What are the resources that are unique to Gaoyuan for its future development?
(2) What are your experiences in participating in local community affairs?
(3) What are the challenges and opportunities as Gaoyuan evolves toward a farm-pond-based
UA community?

Fieldwork in the research included active looking, natural conversations, field notes, drawings
and photographs. These were combined with participant observation, which is a primary qualitative
research method to discover existing situations under study in the natural setting through observing
and participating in their activities [65]. Participant observation allowed the researchers to become
familiar with, and develop a deep understanding of, the setting of Gaoyuan and the people of
Gaoyuan, their experiences, values, beliefs, and way of life. During the research period, the researchers
joined the routine activities of the community, such as vegetable and Mugwort farming, community
lunches, educational programs, environmental cleanup, and farm pond facilities’ design, construction
and maintenance (e.g., artificial floating islands). Importantly, for the researchers becoming good
participant observers, it is necessary to preserve a critical self-reflection so as not to affect the field of
research and the data collected [66].
In the following, a series of analytic drawings is presented, with participants’ accounts providing
qualitative data and related photographs functioning as visual evidence. All quotations are verbatim
labeled with identification codes, and those marked * (e.g., IV1*) indicate paraphrased comments.
Several interesting findings were revealed from the data, yet this paper focuses on those relating
directly to the implementation of a farm-pond-based UA integrated with community revitalization.
These findings are grouped into three main themes: (1) landscape character; (2) active engagement,
participation, and the agency of local people; and (3) social cohesion and well-being.
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 9 of 24

5. Results

5.1. Landscape Character

Easy access to nature is a contributing factor affecting the UA development of Gaoyuan (Figure 4).
Gaoyuan was an agricultural community during the period from the Ching Dynasty to the 1970s,
located in the southern part of the Taoyuan Plateau without major rivers and natural lakes, and thus
the farm pond was necessary for agricultural irrigation. Tea was the main export crop during this
period, but afterwards the rapid industrialization in Taoyuan City caused the emigration of the local
population and the abandonment of farmland. Gaoyuan suffered from economic decline after the 1970s.
Currently, Gaoyuan community remains largely unchanged in terms of landscape. The Xia-Dian-Zi
farm pond, which consists of an upper pond and a lower pond, is near a road and surrounded by
farmland, vegetation, residences, and other farm ponds. The area of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is rich in
natural landscapes and ecological resources where the people, water, soil, plants and animals live in
harmony. The farm pond not only cultivates a natural ecosystem in the defined environment, but also
fits into the community and the wider green infrastructure.
The farm-pond-based green network provides diverse areas of natural, semi-natural, and
man-made space to create an interconnected spatial resource that supports UA practice and values
the accessibility of nature within the settlement (Figure 5). It shows that the pondscape represents
a collective memory of a typical farm-pond-based Hakka settlement (IV1*), where the well-maintained
green network is essential and fundamental to supply an attractive and healthy setting for daily life,
create distinctive landscape features for places, and establish UA with its multiple roles. Although
the original purpose of farm ponds has been lost and many of them have been abandoned or buried,
some people still cherish the memory of those days living around them and attach great importance to
their future roles, such as UA, in the local community. Interviewee IV2, a team leader of farm pond
workers, said:

“Farm ponds and the surroundings are the precious property left by our ancestors to us.
So we cannot let them disappear and must keep them well-maintained . . . to promote
their potential uses and values as a water and green resource . . . such as the production of
organic and non-toxic vegetables for our own community.”

To develop UA, low-impact materials, which allow water to infiltrate and recharge aquifers and
help reduce air temperatures, have been adopted to manage Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond, such as pond-side
wooden decks, and a mix of wood-chip and stone-paved paths nearby a Mugwort field (IV5*) (Figure 6).
It is shown that agricultural production is inextricably linked with our ecological systems, and it is
vital to access on-site natural and ecological features when implementing UA, in order to advance
environmental quality and landscape value. The importance of landscape character as a key part of UA
is indicated by the case study to develop healthy and sustainable communities. Especially, because the
farm pond area is highly accessible and close to the community center, its green spaces and farmlands
with opportunities for outdoor activities and natural services given by nature provide a wide range of
environmental and social benefits that positively contribute to people’s overall health and well-being.
Interviewee IV4, a farmer and the greenhouse owner, said:

“We usually walk around the farm pond . . . to see the changes of seasons, to see the
farmlands, to see the vegetables we grow, to see them grow up day by day ... or just walk
around to experience the nature . . . we feel happy, content with that.”

Regarding the source of irrigation water for farming, it is identified that pumped groundwater,
rather than Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond, is the main supply. As described earlier, there is still concern about
the water quality, because it can be affected by various sources of pollution, such as industrial waste
and run-off. Unfortunately, pumping water can bring about an increase in maintenance costs, energy
consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, how to improve and ensure the water quality
 farmlands, to see the vegetables we grow, to see them grow up day by day ... or just walk
around to experience the nature … we feel happy, content with that.”
Regarding the source of irrigation water for farming, it is identified that pumped groundwater,
rather than Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond, is the main supply. As described earlier, there is still concern
about the water
Sustainability quality,
2017, 9, 2097 because it can be affected by various sources of pollution, such as industrial
10 of 24
waste and run-off. Unfortunately, pumping water can bring about an increase in maintenance costs,
energy consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, how to improve and ensure the water
of theof
quality farm
thepond
farmsopondthat it
soisthat
suitable
it isfor agricultural
suitable uses remains
for agricultural a challenge
uses remains for the community
a challenge for theand
its target of sustainable development.
community and its target of sustainable development.

(A) (B)
Figure
Sustainability 2017, 4. The
9, 2097
Figure plans
4. The of Gaoyuan
plans community
of Gaoyuan (A);(A);
community andand
Xia-Dian-Zi farm
Xia-Dian-Zi pond
farm (B).(B).
pond 10 of 23

Figure
Figure5.5.Two
Twocross-sections
cross-sectionsof
ofXia-Dian-Zi
Xia-Dian-Zifarm
farmpond:
pond:(A)
(A)cross
crosssection;
section;and
and(B)
(B)longitudinal
longitudinalsection.
section.

A B
Figure 6. A low-impact landscaping approach: a combination of a wood-chip path and a stone-paved
path nearby a Mugwort field (A); and a pond-side wooden deck (B).
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 11 of 24
Figure 5. Two cross-sections of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond: (A) cross section; and (B) longitudinal section.

A B
Figure
Figure 6.
6. A
A low-impact
low-impact landscaping
landscaping approach:
approach: aa combination
combination of
of aa wood-chip
wood-chip path
path and
and aa stone-paved
stone-paved
path nearby a Mugwort field (A); and a pond-side wooden deck
path nearby a Mugwort field (A); and a pond-side wooden deck (B). (B).

Evidently, an agricultural-community-like pondscape occurring in the intra-urban fabric is a

Evidently, an agricultural-community-like pondscape occurring in the intra-urban fabric is
distinctive landscape character in terms of Gaoyuan’s transformation (Figure 7). Under the growing
a distinctive landscape character in terms of Gaoyuan’s transformation (Figure 7). Under the growing
pressure of rapid urbanization and social-economic development, Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is the first
pressure of rapid urbanization and social-economic development, Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is the first in
in the local area to demonstrate how a farm pond, as an important cultural landscape, could be
the local area to demonstrate how a farm pond, as an important cultural landscape, could be revitalized
revitalized to reconnect people, nature, and agriculture. Through restoring the farm pond area,
to reconnect people, nature, and agriculture. Through restoring the farm pond area, people recall the
people recall the pleasant past to re-experience the agricultural-community-like lifestyle and
pleasant past to re-experience the agricultural-community-like lifestyle and environment. Interviewee
environment. Interviewee IV1, the community leader, said:
IV1, the community leader, said:
“I“Iwas
was born
born herehere …
. . . why
why we
we still
still live
live here
here because of its
because of its air,
air, quietness,
quietness, environment,
environment,
atmosphere … but new developments, such as high-tech factories, raise
atmosphere . . . but new developments, such as high-tech factories, raise local concerns local concerns
about the impact on lifestyle and environment … thus we hope to maintain
about the impact on lifestyle and environment . . . thus we hope to maintain the original, the original,
desirable
desirablelandscape
landscapeof of Gaoyuan
Gaoyuan … . . . what
what we
we do is small-scale
do is small-scale community
community farming
farming andand
landscaping to bring back the agricultural-community-like pondscape that
landscaping to bring back the agricultural-community-like pondscape that is full of our is full of our
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 11 of 23
memories living
memories living here.”here.”

(A) (B)
Figure
Figure7.7.(A)
(A)An
Anagricultural-community-like
agricultural-community-likepondscape
pondscape as
as aadistinctive
distinctive character
character of
of Gaoyuan;(B)
Gaoyuan; (B)the
the
photo shows a perspective view from the lower pond to the upper pond.
photo shows a perspective view from the lower pond to the upper pond.

There is only a five-minute-walking-distance between the community center and Xia-Dian-Zi

There is only a five-minute-walking-distance between the community center and Xia-Dian-Zi
farm pond. Scattered trees, wide farmlands, grassy fields, bird sounds, natural breezes, fragrant
farm pond. Scattered trees, wide farmlands, grassy fields, bird sounds, natural breezes, fragrant plants
plants and visible wildlife constitute the in-between environmental experience. When arriving in the
farm pond area, there is a stone-paved path around the upper pond with wooden decks to access
water or look into the distance. To go further, the lower pond is in sight, with artificial floating islands
on top of the water and surrounded by a wood-chip path and agricultural and Mugwort fields.
Farmers and workers are talking to each other. This real-life scene shows an idyllic lifestyle and
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 12 of 24

and visible wildlife constitute the in-between environmental experience. When arriving in the farm
pond area, there is a stone-paved path around the upper pond with wooden decks to access water
or look into the distance. To go further, the lower pond is in sight, with artificial floating islands on
top of the water and surrounded by a wood-chip path and agricultural and Mugwort fields. Farmers
and workers are talking to each other. This real-life scene shows an idyllic lifestyle and environment
of traditional-agricultural-community-like qualities. Interviewee IV3, a team leader of farm pond
workers, said:
“We would say that accessing water is human nature. For an agricultural, farm-pond
community, coexistence with nature is the central value. We cannot live without it . . .
openness of view, clean water, fresh air, tall trees, good agricultural productivity, diverse
wildlife, feelings of relaxation, stress relief . . . to live a healthy life ... I desire this kind of
environment.”
To sum up, the analysis shows that the landscape character, involving linking nearby nature to
people, a green network of diverse spaces, low-impact landscaping, and an agricultural-community-
like pondscape, contributes to the implementation process of UA in Gaoyuan. The UA practice features
a revitalized farm pond as a site that possesses natural features, such as calm water, verdant plants,
spatial openness, natural sounds, fresh smells, and perceptible wildlife. This further corresponds to
the multi-functionality of UA, as a farm pond area can function as an important and favorable vehicle
in the community for fostering opportunities for relaxing and restorative experiences in an outdoor
setting, promoting the positive influences of UA on local residents’ health and well-being.

5.2. Active Engagement, Participation, and the Agency of People

The UA implementation in Gaoyuan is reliant upon an understanding of the importance of
people’s long-term involvement in, and experience of, farming activities, interpersonal interactions
and community services, and how these shape the character of the community (IV7*) (Figure 8).
The area of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is a private property but is managed by GCDA for public use by
focusing on working cooperatively, learning mutually, and sharing experience. Specifically, the team
of farmers takes care of the Mugwort field, the organic farming (i.e., the greenhouse), and non-toxic
farming on the pond-side farmlands and artificial floating islands. The team of farm pond workers
carries out the pond-related construction and management (e.g., artificial floating islands). The team of
environmental protection workers (15 people per group) is responsible for all the farm ponds and their
surrounding area’s regular maintenance (e.g., cleanup) (Figure 9), besides undertaking a long-term
ecological survey to build a database of the ponds’ natural environment and ecology. Especially,
the team of farm pond workers also plays a key role in the outdoor educational program for groups
of around 20 students. Because of the reputation of UA combined with ecological diversity and
community revitalization, the area of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond has been an environmental education
site that can accommodate groups of around 15 people every session (e.g., agricultural experience
activities) (Figure 10). Moreover, the organic agricultural products are certified periodically by organic
certification organizations authorized by CoA. Non-toxic farming focuses on the avoidance of chemical
fertilizers and the use of certified organic fertilizers made mainly from sawdust, bean dregs, and pulp.
It seems that UA acts as a catalyst for local people’s participation that encourages civic engagement
and active citizenship. Interviewee IV4, who is also a leading teacher of the environmental education
sessions, talked about his experience:
“What is the motivation for participating in the community affairs . . . I think because this
is my hometown. If we can do, we of course come together to help. We are happy for doing
this. Because this is true happiness, it can be naturally disseminated to other people.”
Through cooperative working, team members have a sense of achievement that is a key to pushing
themselves forward and toward emotional well-being. Interviewees IV2 and IV3, team leaders of farm
pond workers and farmers, respectively, talked about their feelings when seeing a wealth of UA:
 this. Because this is true happiness, it can be naturally disseminated to other people.”
Through cooperative working, team members have a sense of achievement that is a key to
pushing themselves forward and toward emotional well-being. Interviewees IV2 and IV3, team
leaders of farm pond workers and farmers, respectively, talked about their feelings when seeing a
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 13 of 24
wealth of UA:
“We can have such achievements, and these will encourage ourselves to go further … the
“We we
more canwork,
have such achievements,
the more inspired weand these
feel.” will encourage ourselves to go further . . . the
(IV2)
more we work, the more inspired we feel.” (IV2)
“The physical exhaustion is totally offset by the sense of achievement!” (IV3)
“The physical exhaustion is totally offset by the sense of achievement!” (IV3)

Sustainability 2017, 9, 20978. Cooperative working, mutual learning, and experience-sharing.

Figure 13 of 23
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097
Figure 8. Cooperative working, mutual learning, and experience-sharing. 13 of 23

Figure
Figure 9. An
9. An environmentalcleanup
environmental cleanup of the
ofthe upper
theupper
upperpond
pondof of
Xia-Dian-Zi.
Xia-Dian-Zi.
Figure 9. An environmental cleanup of pond of Xia-Dian-Zi.

Figure10.
Figure 10.10.
Figure AAA UA environmental
UA
UA environmental education
environmental education
educationworkshop.
workshop.
workshop.
Thecase
The caseofofXia-Dian-Zi
Xia-Dian-Zifarm
farm pond
pond is
is also
also an
an example
example of
of aa UA
UApractice
practicewhere
wheremutual
mutuallearning
learning
and experience-sharing are important contributors to realize bottom-up, community-ledUA
and experience-sharing are important contributors to realize bottom-up, community-led UA
initiatives.The
initiatives. Theworking
working locations
locations of
of all
all individuals
individuals and
and groups
groups are
are near
near each
eachother,
other,therefore
therefore
memberscan
members cansee
seeeach
each other,
other, conduct
conduct conversations
conversations with
with each
each other,
other, and
andlearn
learnwhat
whatothers
othersdo.
do.
Interviewee IV4, who is also an expert in organic farming, said:
Interviewee IV4, who is also an expert in organic farming, said:
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 14 of 24

The case of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond is also an example of a UA practice where mutual learning
and experience-sharing are important contributors to realize bottom-up, community-led UA initiatives.
The working locations of all individuals and groups are near each other, therefore members can see
each other, conduct conversations with each other, and learn what others do. Interviewee IV4, who is
also an expert in organic farming, said:
“I am good at organic farming, but when the farm pond workers are building bamboo rafts
and artificial floating islands, I have no idea about that, so I am willing to see what they are
doing, to learn from them . . . Sometimes we stop our work, take a rest, and maybe help
the Mugwort farmers with a little work, such as passing organic fertilizers to them. We
can chat to each other about what we do, the life, the community. This is very relaxing
with friends.”
The case of Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond shows that the presence of a pleasant environment to work,
learn, interact, and relax is important for developing UA. Bringing community members together
through UA is valuable to further help revitalize communities. Moreover, artificial floating islands
(Figure 11) represent a collective work from the bottom up rather than autocratically from the top down.
This process enhances people’s awareness of how UA can be developed multi-functionally. Especially,
the ways of improving the ecological environment have been an important aspect of Gaoyuan
community’s development [IV1*]. By an integration of growing non-toxic vegetables (e.g., lettuce
and spinach) and offering wildlife habitats, artificial floating islands are beneficial to the ecological
diversity of the2017,
Sustainability farm pond area. Interviewee IV5, who is a team leader of environmental 14
9, 2097 protection
of 23
workers and has been involved in ecological conservation, emphasized the multiple functions of
protection
artificial floating workers
islands: and has been involved in ecological conservation, emphasized the multiple
functions of artificial floating islands:
“No matter how the farm pond is redeveloped, we must preserve its ecology, even create
“No matter how the farm pond is redeveloped, we must preserve its ecology, even create
more ecological values within the area . . . the use of artificial floating islands is not just
more ecological values within the area … the use of artificial floating islands is not just for
for growing
growingnon-toxic
non-toxic vegetables,
vegetables, it can
it can also also
createcreate biodiversity
biodiversity and wildlife
and wildlife habitats habitats
that
thatattract
attract dragonflies,
dragonflies, turtles,
turtles, fishesfishes and others
and others … you. can
. . you
evencan
see even
turtlessee turtlesup
climbing climbing
the
up floating
the floating
islandisland to sunbathe
to sunbathe … it is .an
. . ecology,
it is an ecology, and a landscape,
and a landscape, too. Its
too. Its benefits benefits
expand
gradually.”
expand gradually.”

Figure 11. Two types of artificial floating islands.

Figure 11. Two types of artificial floating islands.
The utilization of artificial floating islands has multiple purposes: growing aquatic vegetables,
improving water quality, and enhancing ecological diversity. The soil used in artificial floating
islands is called peat soil. Technologically guided by external experts, the construction of the two
types of artificial floating islands requires collective work from the community. Particularly, it is
linked with an environmental education workshop recently offered by Taoyuan City Government
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 15 of 24

The utilization of artificial floating islands has multiple purposes: growing aquatic vegetables,
improving water quality, and enhancing ecological diversity. The soil used in artificial floating
islands is called peat soil. Technologically guided by external experts, the construction of the two
types of artificial floating islands requires collective work from the community. Particularly, it is
linked with an environmental education workshop recently offered by Taoyuan City Government
and the Department of Landscape Architecture, Chung Yuan Christian University. Every year,
approximately 20 undergraduate students work with community members to build artificial floating
islands (Figure 12). This process highlights UA’s potential to build a strong and healthy community.
Interviewee IV2, a teacher of the environmental education workshop, said:

“When we work together, especially students coming, I feel I am more cheerful, more
energetic. It seems that I am 10 years younger!”

In summary, the analysis indicates that UA has stimulated active, sustaining engagement,
participation, and agency of local people that enables farm-pond-based cooperative working, mutual
learning and experience-sharing, such as the work with artificial floating islands. The case shows
favorable outcomes of UA that require bottom-up, community-led action in the long term. Additionally,
it is aSustainability
collaboration between the community and the university that has created productive15results.
2017, 9, 2097 of 23

Figure 12. Students worked with the community members to build artificial floating islands.
Figure 12. Students worked with the community members to build artificial floating islands.
5.3. Social Cohesion and Well-Being
5.3. Social Cohesion and Well-Being
The case of Gaoyuan community shows not only a farm-pond-based UA implementation, but
also a cohesive
The case social community
of Gaoyuan network beyond
showsthatnot(Figure 13). Gaoyuan has UA
only a farm-pond-based actually experienced the
implementation, but also
evolution from traditional agriculture, through economic decline to the
a cohesive social network beyond that (Figure 13). Gaoyuan has actually experienced practicing of UA,the
andevolution
the
from current status is heavily dependent on the community’s awareness, support, and resources to
traditional agriculture, through economic decline to the practicing of UA, and the current status is
develop a social network incorporating UA into community revitalization. A key task of this is to
heavily dependent on the community’s awareness, support, and resources to develop a social network
engage more people in the process with everyone being well-suited to a particular job [IV1*].
incorporating UA into community revitalization. A key task of this is to engage more people in
Gaoyuan has been successful in performing the task, as a result of the nature of a typical farm-pond-
the process with everyone
based, agricultural Hakkabeing well-suited
settlement, where to close
a particular job [IV1*]. Gaoyuan
social relationships has community
help to bind been successful
in performing the task, as a result of the nature of a typical farm-pond-based,
members together. For example, the team of community kitchen workers, mainly composed of agricultural Hakka
settlement, where close social relationships help to bind community members together.
employed and retired women who know each other, has been effective in helping in a program that For example,
serves
the team meals for the
of community community
kitchen elderly
workers, as well
mainly as providing
composed after-school
of employed child women
and retired care services.
who know
each Interviewee IV6, aeffective
other, has been team leaderin of community
helping workers and
in a program community
that kitchen
serves meals forworkers, said:
the community elderly
as well as“Iproviding after-school
think we have child
done it very care
well! ... services.
not just forInterviewee
some groupsIV6, a teambut
of people, leader ofthe
for all community
workers and community
community kitchen
members, workers,
including thesaid:
elderly, middle-aged adults, and children … Our
activities arranged that we can take care of different people, everyone can gather together
“I think we have
at various done
events. Thisithelps
veryuswell! ... not just for some groups of people, but for all the
get united.”
community members, including the elderly, middle-aged adults, and children . . . Our
Making connections and empowering people are fundamental to the robustness of the social
activities arranged that we can take care of different people, everyone can gather together
network existing in the farm-pond-based community. Interviewee IV7, a senior local government
at various
official events.
who has beenThis helps
involved inus
theget united.”
change of Gaoyuan, said:
“In Gaoyuan, a range of working groups has been set up and operated individually for
promoting community affairs. This is the idea of empowerment ... The community is like a
center that links everyone, every group, who are working cooperatively and effectively ...
During the process, the role of government is to encourage community autonomy ... to
establish their own characters, like Gaoyuan.”
Apparently, this process allows people involved to get experience, a sense of achievement, and
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 16 of 24

Making connections and empowering people are fundamental to the robustness of the social
network existing in the farm-pond-based community. Interviewee IV7, a senior local government
official who has been involved in the change of Gaoyuan, said:
“In Gaoyuan, a range of working groups has been set up and operated individually for
promoting community affairs. This is the idea of empowerment ... The community is like a
center that links everyone, every group, who are working cooperatively and effectively
... During the process, the role of government is to encourage community autonomy ... to
establish their own characters, like Gaoyuan.”
Apparently, this process allows people involved to get experience, a sense of achievement,
and a sense of belonging, as Interviewee IV6 also said:
“There is a general consensus among us that we all work for the community . . . we are
given the power to do what we can do on our own positions ... we are working quite
happily, with good collaboration. If the community needs us, we definitely join in and
work together.”
It is noteworthy that UA plays an essential role in the formation of social cohesion and well-being.
The GCDA leads people to clean up farmlands, improve the soil, make up fertilizer, control pests and
plant diseases, improve eco-diversity, build up a greenhouse, and rehabilitate Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond,
whereby it 2017,
Sustainability shows the feature of UA, i.e., that clean, non-toxic and organic food and non-food16
9, 2097 crops
of 23
are produced. More importantly, using these UA products (e.g., harvested vegetables), community
community
kitchen workers kitchen workers
prepare meals prepare meals for elderly
for the community the community elderly
(lunches) and (lunches)
children andonchildren
(dinners) a daily
(dinners)
basis (IV3*, onIV6*)
a daily basis (IV3*,
(Figure IV6*)
14). This (Figure
has 14). This
developed has developed
a system a system
of combining UA of combining
with community UA with
care.
community care. When people understand whom the food is supplied to and
When people understand whom the food is supplied to and where the food is from, there will be where the food is from,
there community
more will be moreresidents
community residents
to join to join in the
in the voluntary voluntary
work. work.IV2,
Interviewee Interviewee IV2, aofteam
a team leader farmleader
pond
of farm pond
workers, said:workers, said:
“When
“Whenseeing
seeing the
the elderly
elderly are happy to
are happy to eat
eat the
thefood
foodwe
wegrow
grow. .… howto
. how tosay
say. .…
. IIam
amvery
very
happy, emotional … a sense of achievement … doesn’t feel it is hard work.”
happy, emotional . . . a sense of achievement . . . doesn’t feel it is hard work.”

Figure 13. The cohesive social network of Gaoyuan.

Figure 13. The cohesive social network of Gaoyuan.
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 17 of 24
Figure 13. The cohesive social network of Gaoyuan.

Figure
Figure 14.
14. University
University students
students having
having lunch
lunch with
with the
the community
community elderly.
elderly.

Evidently, social cohesion is influential in revitalizing the farm-pond-based community, as the

Evidently, social cohesion is influential in revitalizing the farm-pond-based community, as the
effects it brings about matter both for individuals and the community. At an individual level, social
effects it brings about matter both for individuals and the community. At an individual level,
social cohesion can strengthen active participation in community affairs such as farming activities.
At a community level, social cohesion can be an integral part of a strong and effective social network.
Their integrated effects on people’s health and well-being and the community’s sustainability obviously
can be significant. Following the above, important issues associated with the research findings will be
further discussed.

6. Discussions: The Function of UA in Place-Making for an Agricultural Landscape

The international literature contains many studies that have shown various roles, functions and
benefits supplied by UA, yet its potential as a development option in finding alternative ways of
handling social, economic, and ecological challenges in growing cities has been somewhat neglected in
Taiwan, rarely receiving the same level of attention and resources as other development approaches [67].
Based on the case study of Gaoyuan, this paper aims to explore the multi-functional UA resource as
a catalyst for the revitalization of Gaoyuan community. The findings indicate that UA is far more
than simply food production in the city. Spatially speaking, the nature of UA as quality-enhancing
and diversity-valuing on the community landscape is significant. UA can be elaborated as a valuable
contributor to green infrastructure in an urban fabric. Socially speaking, the farm-pond-based UA
displays the robustness of grassroots citizenship that encourages social cohesion and place-based
community revitalization. Ecologically speaking, UA, as part of the urban ecological system, plays
an important role in managing the farm pond that emphasizes green networks, agrobiodiversity,
and water resources. Economically speaking, the food and non-food products of UA aim to achieve
mostly social goals, such as community care, rather than economic profits. Overall, a cohesive social
network has been developed in Gaoyuan that involves agricultural life, crop production, an ecological
environment, and community care.
In Gaoyuan, the agricultural landscape today represents a synthesis of natural features (e.g., water,
plants, wildlife, openness, and sounds) and human interventions (e.g., facilities, fields, farming
activities, and artificial floating islands). This farm-pond-based practice has established the specific
landscape character of UA (i.e., linking nearby nature to people, a green network of diverse
spaces, low-impact landscaping, and an agricultural-community-like pondscape) to differentiate
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 18 of 24

its development from others. In line with Lovell [4] and Ives and Kendal [68] indicating various values
of UA, this study highlights a strong link between UA and nature, because of the farm pond’s capacity
to enable people to extensively and deeply perceive the beauties of nature in comparison with an urban
environment. Furthermore, the space of the farm-pond-based UA is distinctive, as people’s perception
changes over time due to seasonal changes and production cycles such as the colors, odors, and sounds
as well as the growth of crops. The results imply that the physical landscape can be clearly defined
by spatial units, yet the perceived size and scale of the agricultural landscape may be enlarged or
downsized, because of the landscape ambiance.
Corresponding to a recent study about UA typologies [69], the case study indicates that besides
the farming techniques and crops, environmental conditions (e.g., water body, landform and buildings)
play a central role in making the spatial forms and qualities of the farm-pond-based UA. This
circumstance further defines how people can access the space and how people are associated with
the space. The way that UA is amalgamated with the surrounding areas, as illustrated in the analytic
figures, has a deep influence on how UA can underpin community revitalization, such as at Xia-Dian-Zi
farm pond, functioning as the central place incorporating various community activities.
The implementation of UA in Gaoyuan shows a process of place-making for an agricultural
landscape. As such, not only the form and features of physical spaces are created, but also a great
possibility for different non-productive activities and amenities related to people’s quality of life is
provided. Underpinned by Tornaghi [70], who indicates the place-making role of UA, the findings
show that the implementation of the farm-pond-based UA features a creative, collaborative process
that contains design, development, and construction or rehabilitation of various places for farming,
leisure, recreation, social interaction, environmental education, and ecological services. The desired
end-state of these places is sustainable, distinguishing, well-maintained, and unified environments
that satisfy people’s needs and enhance their overall health and well-being.
It is revealed that the case study involves a group of individual sites, but developed as a united area
with public, open access that enables residents to interact and enhances social networking. As identified
by Zasada [71] who considers the social functions of UA, the study of Gaoyuan shows that the process
of UA implementation features cooperative working, mutual learning, and experience-sharing, such
as the production of artificial floating islands. This is a symbol of a cohesive social network mainly
resulting from solid relationships with family and friends from the tradition of Hakka, and the
empowerment of people who participate in community affairs. UA plays an essential role in the
formation of social cohesion, because a sense of belonging, a sense of identity, and a sense of community
are established through its implementation process, supporting Sowman [72] who points out that place
identity, place attachment, and rootedness constitute a crucial aspect of the relationship of place to
human well-being. Moreover, in accord with Souter-Brown [9] and Paradis et al. [30], the study findings
indicate that bottom-up, community-led, participatory projects should be encouraged for the success
of multi-functional UA. Indeed, the case study of Gaoyuan demonstrates the importance of social
cohesion formed by such an approach to UA practice, where the combined effects of an individual
level and a community level on fostering multi-functional UA and community revitalization can
be significant.
The strong links between UA, nature, health, and community are recognized in the study, implying
the potential of living environments for promoting healthy human lifestyles and well-being. This
relates to a range of research that has examined the health benefits of exposure to, and interaction
with, certain landscapes, typically featuring high levels of natural elements such as water, plants,
trees, and vegetation. As an example, Ulrich [73] suggests that people have an innate bond with
nature to respond positively to natural characteristics (e.g., scattered trees, moving water, grassy
fields, and wildlife) that should have stress-reducing benefits. Hartig and Staats [74] show that
people tend to prefer natural landscapes partly owing to their attention-restoration effects. Overall,
the experience from the farm-pond-based UA community provides us with a sense of how local
people live through the interaction with their environments, and a multifaceted understanding
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 19 of 24

that comprises physical landscape, place-human experiences and social relationships. Promoting
a landscape of UA with well-being is obviously an important topic, for both health and environmental
reasons. Such a landscape is context-dependent and varies from place to place. A local community is
therefore a suitable research context for better understanding the resources and locality that enable
UA, nature, people, and well-being to be connected, and how it could be developed to create a more
sustainable environment.

7. Conclusions
Evolving from the conventional role of farming activity mainly as food production, UA with its
multi-functional roles has recently become a globally important topic as it is regarded as a vehicle to
tackle critical issues of societal changes toward a sustainable future. The Hakka community of Gaoyuan
in Taoyuan City is a recent significant case of advocating UA combined with community revitalization,
through changing a traditional water infrastructure area (i.e., Xia-Dian-Zi farm pond) into a public,
multi-functional UA resource provided for the community and its residents. While Gaoyuan is widely
considered as the first successful case of bottom-up, community-led, farm-pond-based UA in Taiwan,
its actual performance is rarely explored in any depth. Few details are available on the socio-ecological
benefits of UA in the community redevelopment process. This qualitative study thus focuses on the
specific case to explore the community champions’ experiences in the transformation of Gaoyuan
toward a revitalized community.
Regarding methodological reflections, the qualitative research was based on a particular context
(Gaoyuan community) and a particular data-collection period (August 2015 to July 2016). In order
to better respond to the research aim and questions, this study depended mainly upon interview
evidence for a better understanding of the experiences that have taken place, rather than statistical
data for generalizable conclusions to better predict some phenomenon. Therefore, the recruitment of
interviewees was aimed at achieving diverse personal backgrounds with active, long-term participation
in local community affairs and with influential roles (i.e., champions) in the process of promoting
UA combined with community revitalization. As Bryman [62] and Trochim [75] indicate, a thorough
description of the research details is attempted in order to enhance the transferability of the qualitative
findings. Although the study has reached its objectives, there was an important limitation. The study
was only conducted on a small population who are the champions in the transformation process.
To generalize the results for larger groups, the research should have included more participants at
different levels or settings. Therefore, future research would benefit from a larger sample of UA
participants and from a comparison of Gaoyuan with other types of UA in Taiwan that also include
activities of civic engagement.
The key findings are:

1. The specific landscape character, which links nearby nature to people, a green network of diverse
spaces, low-impact landscaping, and an agricultural-community-like pondscape, makes UA in
Gaoyuan distinctive.
2. Through the contribution of active engagement, participation, and agency by the local people,
the process of implementing farm-pond-based UA features cooperative working, mutual learning,
and experience-sharing.
3. UA plays a vital role in shaping social cohesion, which encourages motivated, committed
participation in community affairs at an individual level, and contributes to a robust and effective
social network at a community level. Their combined effects on people’s health and well-being
and community revitalization can be considerable.
4. A cohesive social network has been developed in Gaoyuan that involves agricultural life, crop
production, ecological environment, and community care.

The findings indicate that the farm-pond-based UA with its multi-functional resources acts as
a catalyst for the sustainability of Gaoyuan community. In the spatial dimension, quality-enhancing
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 20 of 24

and diversity-valuing are identified as the main benefits of UA for the community landscape and
can contribute to green infrastructure in the wider scale of an urban fabric. The social dimension
highlights the importance of grassroots citizenship aided by the process of developing UA, actively
promoting social cohesion, and place-based community revitalization. In the ecological dimension,
UA features green networks, agrobiodiversity and water resources that are important for managing
the farm pond and the urban ecological system. The economic dimension shows that the food and
non-food production of UA intends to achieve mostly social objectives, such as community care, rather
than economic profits. Correspondingly, a UA study from Hanoi, Vietnam, also shows the potential of
ponds for a community UA resource such as food supply, agricultural biodiversity, environmental
protection, flood prevention, and recreating a cultural landscape [8].
Through exploring the community champions’ experiences, the paper intends to identify
a different form of UA existing in an East Asian city and to communicate the potential of UA from
a Taiwanese perspective. It is clear that the farm pond water quality is an important issue to be tackled,
especially when ways of developing the multi-functionality of farm ponds is attracting growing
attention nationwide. Moreover, the change of local political power may lead to a shift of emphasis
away from the current status, implying that a steady progress of implementing UA based on a local
consensus is a key response to local political conflict [IV7*]. In Taiwan, the case of Gaoyuan is a pioneer
in the practice of farm-pond-based UA integrated with fostering community revitalization and
preserving cultural landscapes, in comparison with similar farm-pond communities undergoing similar
social, economic, and environmental changes, wherein commonly recreation-oriented developments
(e.g., parks [76–78]) are favored, shaping a uniform pondscape and, simultaneously, contributing to
the loss of place attachment and place identity.
In terms of fostering multi-functional UA, the case study underpins the European Landscape
Convention, which stresses that the landscape contributes to the formation of local cultures,
the consolidation of local identity, and individual and social well-being, with the aim of promoting
landscape protection, quality, management, and planning [79]. Indeed, as the farm pond system is
a prominent feature of the landscape in Taoyuan, the farm-pond-based UA practice in Gaoyuan shows
an ongoing example that operates against the standardization and homogenization of landscape,
acknowledging that the agricultural landscape contributes to the formation of local cultures and acts
as an active component of the cultural and natural heritage of Taiwan.

Acknowledgments: This study was supported by a research grant from the Ministry of Science and Technology,
Taiwan (MOST 104-2410-H-033-049).
Author Contributions: Rung-Jiun Chou conceived and designed the study, analyzed the data, and wrote the
paper; Chen-Ting Wu collected and analyzed the data; Feng-Tzu Huang analyzed the data and wrote the paper.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. De Bon, H.; Parrot, L.; Moustier, P. Sustainable urban agriculture in developing countries: A review.
Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 30, 21–32. [CrossRef]
2. Vejre, H.; Simon-Rojo, M. Introduction. In Urban Agriculture Europe; Lohrberg, F., Licka, L., Scazzosi, L.,
Timpe, A., Eds.; Jovis: Berlin, Germany, 2016; pp. 16–17.
3. Mougeot, L.J.A. Urban agriculture: Definition, presence, potential and risks. In Growing Cities, Growing
Foods: Urban Agriculture on the Policy Agenda; Bakker, N., Dubbeling, M., Grundel, S., Sabel-Koschella, U.,
de Zeeuw, H., Eds.; DSE: Feldafing, Germany, 2000; pp. 1–42.
4. Lovell, S.T. Multifunctional urban agriculture for sustainable land use planning in the United States.
Sustainability 2010, 2, 2499–2522. [CrossRef]
5. Simon-Rojo, M.; Recasens, X.; Callau, S.; Duží, B.; Eiter, S.; Hernández Jiménez, V.; Kettle, P.; Laviscio, R.;
Lohrberg, F.; Pickard, D.; et al. From urban food gardening to urban farming. In Urban Agriculture Europe;
Lohrberg, F., Licka, L., Scazzosi, L., Timpe, A., Eds.; Jovis: Berlin, Germany, 2016; pp. 22–28.
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 21 of 24

6. Napawan, N.C.; Burke, E. Productive potential: Evaluating residential urban agriculture. Lands. Res. 2016,
41, 773–779. [CrossRef]
7. Aubry, C.; Ramamonjisoa, J.; Dabat, M.H.; Rakotoarisoa, J.; Rakotondraibe, J.; Rabeharisoa, L. Urban
agriculture and land use in cities: An approach with the multi-functionality and sustainability concepts in
the case of Antananarivo (Madagascar). Land Use Policy 2012, 29, 429–439. [CrossRef]
8. Ali, M.; de Bon, H.; Moustier, P. Promoting the multifunctionality of urban and periurban agriculture in
Hanoi. Urban Agric. Mag. 2005, 15, 11–13.
9. Souter-Brown, G. Landscape and Urban Design for Health and Well-Being: Using Healing, Sensory and Therapeutic
Gardens; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2015.
10. Sanesi, G.; Colangelo, G.; Lafortezza, R.; Calvo, E.; Davies, C. Urban green infrastructure and urban forests:
A case study of the Metropolitan Area of Milan. Landsc. Res. 2017, 42, 164–175. [CrossRef]
11. Hou, J.; Johnson, J.; Lawson, L. Green Cities, Growing Communities: Learning from Seattle’s Urban Community
Gardens; University of Washington Press: Seattle, WA, USA, 2009.
12. Gorgolewski, M.; Komisar, J.; Nasr, J. Carrot City: Creating Places for Urban Agriculture; Monacelli Press:
New York, NY, USA, 2011.
13. Lohrberg, F.; Licka, L.; Scazzosi, L.; Timpe, A. (Eds.) Urban Agriculture Europe; Jovis: Berlin, Germany, 2016.
14. Jahrl, I.; Schmid, O. Policies fostering multifunctional urban agriculture in the city of Zurich.
Urban Agric. Mag. 2015, 29, 30–31.
15. Renting, H.; Naneix, C.; Dubbeling, M.; Cai, J. Innovative Experiences with Multifunctional Urban and
Peri-urban Agriculture in City Regions in the Global South; SUPURBFOOD; RUAF Foundation: Leusden,
The Netherlands, 2013.
16. Redwood, M. Agriculture in Urban Planning: Generating Livelihoods and Food Security; Earthscan: London,
UK, 2009.
17. Orsini, F.; Kahane, R.; Nono-Womdim, R.; Gianquinto, G. Urban agriculture in the developing world:
A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2013, 33, 695–720. [CrossRef]
18. Van Veenhuizen, R. (Ed.) Introduction: Cities farming for the future. In Cities Farming for the Future: Urban
Agriculture for Green and Productive Cities; RUAF Foundation: Leusden, The Netherlands, 2006; pp. 1–17.
19. Van Veenhuizen, R.; Danso, G. Profitability and Sustainability of Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture; Agricultural
Management, Marketing and Finance Occasional Paper No. 19; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2007.
20. Campbell, M.C. Building a common table: The role for planning in community food systems. J. Plan.
Educ. Res. 2004, 23, 341–355. [CrossRef]
21. Orsini, F.; Gasperi, D.; Marchetti, L.; Piovene, C.; Draghetti, S.; Ramazzotti, S.; Bazzocchi, G.; Gianquinto, G.
Exploring the production capacity of rooftop gardens (RTGs) in urban agriculture: The potential impact
on food and nutrition security, biodiversity and other ecosystem services in the city of Bologna. Food Secur.
2014, 6, 781–792. [CrossRef]
22. Specht, K.; Siebert, R.; Hartmann, I.; Freisinger, U.B.; Sawicka, M.; Werner, A.; Thomaier, S.; Henckel, D.;
Walk, H.; Dierich, A. Urban agriculture of the future: An overview of sustainability aspects of food production
in and on buildings. Agric. Hum. Values 2014, 31, 33–51. [CrossRef]
23. Pölling, B.; Alfranca, Ó.; Alves, E.; Andersson, G.; Branduini, P.; Egloff, L.D.; Giacchè, G.; Heller, A.;
Herkströter, K.; Kemper, D.; et al. Creating added value: Societal benefits of urban agriculture. In Urban
Agriculture Europe; Lohrberg, F., Licka, L., Scazzosi, L., Timpe, A., Eds.; Jovis: Berlin, Germany, 2016;
pp. 92–100.
24. Food and Agriculture Organization. Background Paper 1: Agricultural Biodiversity. In Proceedings of
the Multifunctional Character of Agriculture and Land Conference, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 12–17
September 1999.
25. Food and Agriculture Organization. Building on Gender, Agrobiodiversity and Local Knowledge; FAO: Rome,
Italy, 2004.
26. Gasperi, D.; Pennisi, G.; Rizzati, N.; Magrefi, F.; Bazzocchi, G.; Mezzacapo, U.; Centrone Stefani, M.;
Sanyé-Mengual, E.; Orsini, F.; Gianquinto, G. Towards regenerated and productive vacant areas through
urban horticulture: Lessons from Bologna, Italy. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1347. [CrossRef]
27. Thomaier, S.; Specht, K.; Henckel, D.; Dierich, A.; Siebert, R.; Freisinger, U.B.; Sawicka, M. Farming in and on
urban buildings: Present practice and specific novelties of Zero-Acreage Farming (ZFarming). Renew. Agric.
Food Syst. 2015, 30, 43–54. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 22 of 24

28. McClintock, N.; Cooper, J.; Khandeshi, S. Assessing the potential contribution of vacant land to urban
vegetable production and consumption in Oakland, California. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 111, 46–58.
[CrossRef]
29. Austin, G. Green Infrastructure for Landscape Planning: Integrating Human and Natural Systems; Routledge:
Abingdon, UK, 2014.
30. Paradis, S.; Cieszewska, A.; Tóth, A.; Šuklje-Erjavec, I. Agriculture in urban space. In Urban Agriculture
Europe; Lohrberg, F., Licka, L., Scazzosi, L., Timpe, A., Eds.; Jovis: Berlin, Germany, 2016; pp. 120–125.
31. Roe, M.; Sarlöv Herlin, I.; Speak, S. Identity, food and landscape character in the urban context. Landsc. Res.
2016, 41, 757–772. [CrossRef]
32. Napawan, N.C.; Townsend, S.A. The landscape of urban agriculture in California’s capital. Landsc. Res. 2016,
41, 780–794. [CrossRef]
33. Colasanti, K.J.A.; Hamm, M.W.; Litjens, C.M. The city as an “agricultural powerhouse”? Perspectives on
expanding urban agriculture from Detroit, Michigan. Urban Geogr. 2012, 33, 348–369. [CrossRef]
34. Council of Agriculture (CoA). Policy—Transforming Taiwan’s Agriculture from Traditional to a Modern
One. 2015. Available online: http://eng.coa.gov.tw/theme_list.php?theme=eng_policies (accessed on
24 July 2017).
35. Chen, W.J. Eat homegrown foods: The global popularity of urban farming. Taipei Q. 2016, 4, 16–19.
36. Shi, T.V. Urban agriculture: Green sprawl in concrete jungle. Green Build. 2015, 35, 36–40. (In Chinese)
37. Chung, W.P. Basking in a green radiance: The whole city is my garden. Taipei Q. 2016, 4, 25–29.
38. Chiu, Y.H. Urban Agriculture: Developing a New Vision of the Garden City. 2015. Available
online: http://www.taipeiecon.taipei/article_cont.aspx?MSid=654073513535250113&MmmID=1201&
CatID=653635047463112672 (accessed on 25 July 2017). (In Chinese)
39. Chou, R.J.; Wu, C.T.; Huang, F.T. The Typology and Practice of Healthy Landscape: The Case Study of
Xia-Dian-Zi Farm Pond in Gaoyuan Community, Longtan. In Proceedings of the 2016 National Landscape
Forum, Taoyuan, Taiwan, 10 December 2016. (In Chinese)
40. Taoyuan City Government (TYCG). Presentation of Taoyuan Community Planner Local Participation Plan:
Mayor Zheng Indicated the Importance of Community Building to Identify Different Features of Different
Communities. 2016. Available online: http://www.tycg.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=9&parentpath=0,1&
mcustomize=multimessage_view.jsp&dataserno=201604150001&aplistdn=ou=news,ou=chinese,ou=ap_
root,o=tycg,c=tw&toolsflag=Y (accessed on 26 July 2017). (In Chinese)
41. The Liberty Times. The Exhibition of Taoyuan Community Building, Seventeen Communities Awarded.
15 April 2016. Available online: http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/1665083 (accessed on 26
July 2017). (In Chinese)
42. Chen, X.J. Ideas from learning from Taiwan to develop Fuzhou’s urban agriculture. Chin. Hortic. Abstr. 2016,
12, 65–66. (In Chinese)
43. Yen, C.H. Improving Environment and Economy through Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture: A Case of
Agri-tourism in Taiwan. In Proceedings of the 2006 Urban/Peri-Urban Agriculture in the Asian and Pacific
region, Tagaytay City, Philippines, 22–26 May 2006.
44. Chou, Z.L.; Shi, W.K. The implication of Taiwan’s urban agriculture development for Kunming’s urban
farms. J. Changchun Univ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 26, 74–84. (In Chinese)
45. Tuan, C.L. A Review of Taiwan’s Urban Agriculture Development and Future Development Strategies. 2007.
Available online: http://www.coa.gov.tw/ws.php?id=12560 (accessed on 9 August 2017). (In Chinese)
46. Li, Q.Z. A Study on the Development of Leisure Farms and Management Challenges in Taiwan.
In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Sport Science and Recreational Management, Pingtung, Taiwan,
10–11 December 2010. (In Chinese)
47. Xin, W. Urban agriculture in Taiwan. Beijing Agric. 2012, 13, 46–47. (In Chinese)
48. Zheng, J.X.; Tsai, Q.Z. The development experiences of citizen farms in Taiwan. Taichung Dist. Agric.
Promot. Newsl. 1995, 143, 1–17. (In Chinese)
49. Wen, H. A brief of contemporary agriculture in Taiwan. Anc. Mod. Agric. 2004, 4, 17–24. (In Chinese)
50. Du, Y. Cultivating edible landscapes: Creating a garden city. Taipei Q. 2016, 4, 20–24.
51. The Liberty Times. Managing a Citizen Farm, Not an Easy Work. 27 August 2011. Available online:
http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/local/paper/519648 (accessed on 11 August 2017). (In Chinese)
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 23 of 24

52. Wang, X.; Chen, X.; Duan, Y.N. The practical experiences and inspirations of urban agriculture development
in Asia. Jiangxi Build. Mater. 2016, 197, 21–22. (In Chinese)
53. Chen, J.H.; Wang, Y.Z.; Cao, Q.C. Development experience of Taiwan’s urban agriculture and its inspiration
to Beijing’s Gully area economic construction. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 4, 116–119. (In Chinese)
54. Liu, J. The cooperative development strategies of urban agriculture between the Taiwan Area and the
Mainland Area in the globalization background. Taiwan Agric. Res. 2009, 1, 5–7. (In Chinese)
55. Chou, W.W.; Lee, S.H.; Wu, C.F. Evaluation of the preservation value and location of farm ponds in Yunlin
County, Taiwan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 548–572. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
56. Taoyuan City Government. Farm Ponds in Taoyuan. 2015. Available online: http://www.tycg.gov.tw/ch/
home.jsp?id=64&parentpath=0,6,58 (accessed on 13 September 2016). (In Chinese)
57. Fang, W.T.; Huang, Y.W. Modelling geographic information system with logistic regression in irrigation
ponds, Taoyuan Tableland. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2012, 12, 505–513. [CrossRef]
58. Huang, S.L.; Lee, Y.C.; Budd, W.W.; Yang, M.C. Analysis of changes in farm pond network connectivity
in the peri-urban landscape of the Taoyuan Area, Taiwan. Environ. Manag. 2012, 49, 915–928. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
59. Liou, Y.A.; Wang, T.S.; Chan, H.P. Impacts of pond change on the regional sustainability of water resources
in Taoyuan, Taiwan. Adv. Meteorol. 2013, 2013, 1–6. [CrossRef]
60. Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 3rd ed.; Sage: London, UK, 2003.
61. Hakka Affairs Council. Hakka Themes. 2007. Available online: http://www.hakka.gov.tw/English/Tour#
HakkaThemes (accessed on 3 October 2017).
62. Bryman, A. Social Research Methods, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2004.
63. Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [CrossRef]
64. Vaismoradi, M.; Turunen, H.; Bondas, T. Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting
a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs. Health Sci. 2013, 15, 398–405. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
65. DeWalt, K.M.; DeWalt, B.R. Participant Observation: A Guide for Fieldworkers; AltaMira Press: Walnut Creek,
CA, USA, 2002.
66. Crossman, A. Understanding Participant Observation Research. 2017. Available online: http://sociology.
about.com/od/Research/a/Participant-Observation.htm (accessed on 14 August 2017).
67. Wu, C.T. Social Design of Food Based on “Edible Community Networks”: The Case Study of Longtan in
Taoyuan. Ph.D. Thesis, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, 2017. (In Chinese)
68. Ives, C.D.; Kendal, D. Values and attitudes of the urban public towards peri-urban agricultural land.
Land Use Policy 2013, 34, 80–90. [CrossRef]
69. Napawan, N.C. Complexity in urban agriculture: The role of landscape typologies in promoting urban
agriculture’s growth. J. Urban. 2016, 9, 19–38. [CrossRef]
70. Tornaghi, C. Critical geography of urban agriculture. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2014, 38, 551–567. [CrossRef]
71. Zasada, I. Multifunctional peri-urban agriculture: A review of societal demands and the provision of goods
and services by farming. Land Use Policy 2011, 28, 639–648. [CrossRef]
72. Sowman, L. Towards a landscape of well-being: The role of landscape and perceptions of place in human
well-being. In Landscape, Well-Being and Environment; Coles, R., Millman, Z., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK,
2013; pp. 53–71.
73. Ulrich, R.S. Effects of gardens on health outcomes: Theory and research. In Healing Gardens: Therapeutic
Benefits and Design Recommendations; Cooper-Marcus, C., Barnes, M., Eds.; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1999;
pp. 27–86.
74. Hartig, T.; Staats, H. The need for psychological restoration as a determinant of environmental preferences.
J. Environ. Psychol. 2006, 26, 215–226. [CrossRef]
75. Trochim, W. Qualitative Validity. Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2006. Available online: http://www.
socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualval.php (accessed on 8 October 2017).
76. The Liberty Times. No. 2–5 Farm Pond under Construction, Incorporating Ecology and Recreation.
8 September 2017. Available online: http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/2187521 (accessed
on 8 October 2017). (In Chinese)
77. The Liberty Times. No. 8–15 Farm Pond Make-Up, Transforming to a Recreational, Ecological Park. 30 March
2017. Available online: http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/local/paper/1090219 (accessed on 8 October 2017).
(In Chinese)
Sustainability 2017, 9, 2097 24 of 24

78. The Liberty Times. The Farm Pond in Lanpu Community under Construction, Aiming for a Recreational,
Ecological Park. 6 March 2017. Available online: http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/1995395
(accessed on 8 October 2017). (In Chinese)
79. Council of Europe. European Landscape Convention, Florence 20.X.2000. 2000. Available online:
http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/0900001680080621 (accessed on 24
August 2017).

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).