1. Introduction
Migration to cities has created economic and cultural challenges for both host and migrant communities. Migrants face job insecurity, high living costs, social isolation, and difficulties in preserving their cultural identity. In Iran, drought, legal pressures on migrants, and labor market discrimination further exacerbate these issues. Neighborhood community gardens are small green spaces collectively managed by residents, including both migrants and locals, and can reduce vulnerability while strengthening local economies. These spaces have productive and participatory functions and are often established on vacant lots or private courtyards. Research shows that such gardens contribute to resilience in two ways: economic (reducing market dependence, saving costs, generating supplementary income) and cultural (preserving traditional foods, transmitting knowledge, enhancing a sense of belonging). Most existing studies are single-site, and direct comparisons between the Global North and South remain rare. In the North, gardens tend to be formal, institutional, and education-oriented; in the South, they are more informal, survival-based, and livelihood-focused. This study compared two contrasting cases: Fahadan in Yazd (informal model) and CERES in Melbourne (formal model).
The novelty of this research lay in three aspects: first, it presented the first comparative study between Iran and Australia on community gardens and migrant resilience; second, it integrated economic and cultural dimensions within a single analytical framework; and third, it offered a locally tailored policy model for application in Iran’s historic and migrant-receptive neighborhoods.

Research Question
What roles and context-specific mechanisms did neighborhood community gardens play in enhancing the cultural and economic resilience of native and migrant communities in two distinct contexts: Fahadan in Yazd (informal) and CERES in Melbourne (formal-institutional)?

2. Literature Review
Resilience is defined as the capacity of social-ecological systems to withstand disturbances and adapt. In migration studies, it encompasses two key dimensions: economic resilience (reducing livelihood vulnerability, diversifying income sources, saving) and cultural resilience (preserving identity, transmitting knowledge, strengthening place attachment). Social capital, particularly bonding and bridging capital, links these two dimensions. Theories of participation and spatial justice emphasize equal access to urban resources such as land and water for migrant groups. In developed countries, formal gardens focus on sustainability education and mental health; in the Global South, they are mostly survival-oriented and adaptive. In Iran, while the role of traditional gardens in historic contexts has been emphasized, urban planning has largely overlooked community gardens as a community-centered strategy.

3. Methodology
This applied research adopted a mixed-methods (quantitative and qualitative) approach. Data were collected from 101 users (54 from Yazd, 47 from Melbourne) in December 2025 using an online questionnaire (five-point Likert scale for resilience dimensions, WHO-5 for psychological well-being, plus two open-ended questions). Validity was confirmed by four experts (CVI = 0.88). Reliability was calculated using Cronbach’s alpha (resilience = 0.86; WHO-5 = 0.91). Quantitative analysis included descriptive statistics, t-tests, ANOVA, Pearson correlation, and regression. Qualitative analysis followed thematic analysis in six stages, with peer debriefing yielding 87% agreement.

4. Results
Mean resilience scores were high in both sites (Yazd: 4.48; Melbourne: 4.46), though differences were observed. In Yazd, items “access to traditional food” (4.65) and “improved food security” (4.61) scored higher. In Melbourne, “participation despite barriers” (4.43), “impact of barriers” (4.36), and psychological well-being (20.8 vs. 18.2) were more prominent. Regression identified well-being as the strongest predictor of resilience. Factor analysis extracted three factors (sociocultural, economic, mental health), explaining 68.4% of the variance. Thematic analysis revealed four themes: economic survival (42% in Yazd), preservation of traditional identity (31% in Yazd), sustainability learning and intercultural integration (38% in Melbourne), and reduced isolation (29% in both).

5. Discussion
Community gardens enhanced resilience in both contexts, but mechanisms were context-dependent. In Yazd, the survival-based, adaptive function operated through food provision, cost reduction, and reproduction of local knowledge (bonding capital). In Melbourne, the formal structure transformed gardens into spaces for organized learning, intercultural exchange, and psychological well-being (bridging capital). Differences in well-being and participation indicated that institutional support and removal of legal-financial barriers directly affected resilience quality. The predominance of internal migration in Yazd versus international migration in Melbourne suggested that policies should be differentiated according to migration patterns. Results aligned with the study’s multilevel model emphasizing feedback loops across macro, meso, and micro levels.

6. Conclusion
Community gardens were effective yet context-sensitive tools for strengthening resilience in local and migrant communities. For policymaking in Iran, three key implications emerged: (1) removing participation barriers through urban agriculture facilitation offices, (2) focusing on psychological well-being through regular group activities, and (3) differentiating policies based on migration patterns (e.g., in cities with internal migration, strengthening bonding capital and indigenous knowledge). Future longitudinal and comparative studies with other Global South countries would further validate and refine this model.

Acknowledgments
This article is derived from a postdoctoral project at Imam Khomeini International University (Contract No. 270599/1/D). The authors sincerely thank all participants who completed the questionnaires.

Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.