We started from a focus group of four people who are enthusiastic about the topic of food. We had a good discussion that covered a range of topics from local food consumption to kitchen garden, from food waste to sustainability education.

In order to better understand local food, we conducted a field observation at the Bloomington farmers' market. There we observed the interactions between the vendors and consumers and we found that those who are interested in local food are also willing to share information about it.

From the Farmers' Market, we got to know a stand owner--"Chili Woman", who grows all kinds of chilis by herself. We visited her green house, conducted an interview with her, from which we got a better understanding of her work process.

We also conducted an interview with the president of Centers for Sustainable Living in Bloomington. She was very concerned about the sustainable issue in local Bloomington. From the interview we found out that Community Garden was one of the projects the center has been running.

Having all the notes, pictures and videos, we put the data together and did an affinity diagram to look into research data. From our affinity diagram, we generated the following major insights:

• Community support for local foods encourages production of local food.
• Opportunities for experiential education are not well advertised.
• Container gardening is a possible solution for urban gardens.
• Urban farming is largely supported by community, hindered by government policies.
• Bloomington locals are uniquely passionate about local food and buying local.
• Action by individuals can make a big impact on the local food supply.
• Community gardens require input from multiple resources.
• Community gardens are an easy way for busy individuals to experience gardening.
• Void between food and technology – hard to get food into database to manage inventory records.
• Farming is not a reliable source of income.
• Local farmers primary reason for selling is not profit.
• Family plays an important roll in farming.

From these insights, we narrowed down to two design directions:

• Promote Urban Farming
• Utilize Community Attitudes to Bolster Local Food Economy

We decided to go with the direction of promoting urban farming, which embedded a lot of opportunities and also our design could have more impact on. One case of urban farming is community gardening. We followed the definition of a community garden as a place where offers participants a local, sustainable, and economically preferable alternative to purchasing food from distant sources by allowing a group of people to grow their own food on a shared plot of land.

Among several community gardens in Bloomington, we chose two, which are differenet in terms of the scale, the activity level and the operating mode. We did contextual inquiries with the volunteers and conducted interviews with the administrators.

From observing and working together with the volunteers in one community garden, we found that:

• Working in the garden is not easy for those who are new to gardening.
• People need guidence and the share of knowledge from experienced gardeners to have the tasks done right and well.

Although it's dirty in the garden, we enjoyed the time working together, talking while working, asking and getting the answers and learning something new. We felt it's a nice break from work and study. Also we felt a sense of achievement looking at the organized plants being taken care of by us. We believed all these feelings are the benefits the volunteers could get from doing the work in the garden, but the premise is to have someone for guidence and to work together with someone else with the knowledge sharing, communication, and collaboration.

From interviewing with the administrator in the other community garden, where gardeners rent individual plots or volunteer in the communal areas of the garden, we learned that:

• Volunteers are more likely to return if they feel a personal connection with the garden and feel their effort is meaningful.
• Over time even enthusiastic volunteers may lose interest in the garden as they find it is hard work in an environment that is constantly changing, where it might be hard to find direction.
• Volunteers may also be frustrated by the delayed gratification as they often wait months before they see the fruits of their labor.
• Mementos of seeds and cuttings given as tokens of appreciation hold additional value for the volunteer as a reminder of their time in the garden.

Based on all the insights, we assume that:

• Community gardens facilitate sustainable transfer of local resources.
• If people do not volunteer in the garden, the garden will fail.
• If volunteers feel needed, they will be more likely to return.
• Guidance and knowledge sharing comes from many people being in the garden at the same time.

Having all these insights in mind, we brainstormed on how to bring people together when they are needed in the community garden, and to communicate this information to them in a positive and motivating way. Our mantra is: "to give the garden a voice".

We incorporated ambient design in our concept, because we didn't want to overwhelm people with too much information. Our research showed that ambient displays work well with providing information not intrusively, which are also usually used as a source of motivation.

Our design was an ambient device that could be placed in any plant, living or artificial. It ties a volunteer to a specific community garden, and indicates through motion sensors and wireless internet connection the level of activity within the garden. 

The motion sensors in the garden would be placed at the entrance, and monitor arrival and departure of large beings through the gate or opening.

A higher number of people in the garden would cause the light to glow brighter, and a lower number would cause the light to go dimmer. Although the goal of the design is to motivate volunteers to go to the garden when others are present, so that inexperienced gardeners may learn from other gardeners, if volunteers choose to go to the garden when there are fewer people present, the garden is still benefited from the volunteers for showing up.

Our low-fidelity prototype was a plastic plant rigged with lights that were connected to a dimmer switch. We used the method--Wizard of Oz by letting one person act as the computer, manipulating the the intesity of the lights based on different scenarios.

From the usability testing, We found that:

• Participants want more control over the device.
For instance, they wanted to turn the device off when they didn't want to recieve information from community gardens.
• Light patterns mean different things to different users.
Participants had different mental models of the light patterns. Some would be more encouraged to volunteer when the light was brighter, while others would be more likely to help when it's dimmer.
• Participants want more information.
For instance, they wanted to know the number of people in the community garden while it's glowing; or who are there. Some of them are more willing to volunteer with someone they are familiar with.

Based on the feedback from the usability testing, we considered making further adjustments to our concept in the future:

• Provide more detailed information.
• Display information in a more meaningful way.
• Enhance connection between users.
• Add more ways of interactions.