Connectivity of social-ecological systems promotes resilience across urban landscapes. Community gardens are social-ecological systems that support food production, social interactions, and biodiversity conservation. We investigate how these hubs of ecosystem services facilitate socio-ecological connectivity and service flows as a network across complex urban landscapes. In three US cities (Baltimore, Chicago, New York City), we use community garden networks as a model system to demonstrate how biophysical and social features of urban landscapes control the pattern and magnitude of ecosystem service flows through these systems. We show that community gardens within a city are connected through biological and social mechanisms, and connectivity levels and spatial arrangement differ across cities. We found that biophysical connectivity was higher than social connectivity in one case study, while they were nearly equal in the other two. This higher social connectivity can be attributed to clustered distributions of gardens within neighborhoods (network modularity), which promotes neighborhood-scale connectivity hotspots, but produces landscape-scale connectivity coldspots. The particular patterns illustrate how urban form and social amenities largely shape ecosystem service flows among garden networks. Such socio-ecological analyses can be applied to enhance and stabilize landscape connectedness to improve life and resilience in cities.

People, Place and Policy, 12 (3), 241-251 First published: 8 February 2019 DOI: 10.3351/ppp.2019.3396732665 Abstract Green infrastructure is a

Urban community gardens offer unique social and ecological benefits in cities. However, given the dynamic nature of cities and the profound effects of variable land uses on green space provisioning for people and wildlife, investigating community gardens from a landscape perspective offers valuable insight into the functions of these spaces in terms of ecosystem services and sustainable development. In this study, we use garden locations provided by stakeholder groups and fine-scale spatial data to compare community gardens across three cities: New York City, NY, Chicago, IL, and Baltimore, MD (USA). In each city, we assess the spatial distribution of gardens and compare the natural vegetation and impervious surface cover within these gardens to the surrounding neighborhood and landscape. We then compared these cities to clarify the role of community gardens in metropolitan development. Our findings demonstrate that gardens cluster in neighborhoods in New York City and Chicago, but they are more spatially distributed across the landscape in Baltimore. The distribution of Baltimore’s community gardens is more likely to be contributing to a greater network of ecosystem services across a broader urban landscape. Moreover, at the garden scale, gardens in NYC and Chicago have more canopy cover and built infrastructure than the more herbaceous gardens in Baltimore. This suggests that our case study cities exhibit different garden typologies, histories, and potential for ecosystem services. This work provides critical insight into the typology in and around community gardens in different cities, which is useful in understanding the potential ecosystem services and planning trajectories of these cities.