From access toward sovereignty
A scoping review of municipal land access policies for urban agriculture in the United States
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19568465 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Raychel Santo (0000-0002-7091-6263, Johns Hopkins University), Sara N Lupolt (0000-0001-6263-5333, Johns Hopkins University), Katherine M Uhde (Johns Hopkins University), Robert C Bennaton (6UC Cooperative Extension-Alameda County, Hayward, CA, USA), Keeve E Nachman (0000-0003-4925-4151, Johns Hopkins University) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Publication date | 2024-04-08 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Elementa Science of the Anthropocene (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2325-1026 • E-ISSN: 2325-1026 |
| Publisher | University of California Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1525/elementa.2023.00089 |
| OpenAlex | W4394585187 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 18 |
Accessing land—and protecting that access—for the purpose of growing food and other agricultural products is a significant challenge in urban agriculture (UA), an issue exacerbated by racial and wealth disparities and high land values in cities. While local policies and programs supporting the use or sale of public land for UA have increased steadily since the early 21st century, limited research has examined the diversity, accessibility, and permanency of mechanisms facilitating land access and tenure. To address this gap, we compared the availability and characteristics of land access mechanisms across the 40 most populous U.S. cities. While 75% of cities employed at least one mechanism to facilitate land access, few (20%) offered multiple options. Mechanisms facilitating temporary use of public land for UA such as Adopt-A-Lot programs and city-run farms and gardens were more common than those enabling more secure tenure through long-term leases, land trusts, and simplified sales processes. Most policies and programs explicitly focused on local residents and nonprofit/community groups rather than for-profit entities. Nearly half (45%) of cities designed their land access mechanisms with a focus on equity or supporting underserved populations. Less than a quarter of cities offered subsidized water access, liability insurance, soil testing, or funding to complement public land access. The diversity of available mechanisms for facilitating land access underscores how different cities are enabling UA for different goals. Additionally, the incongruence between advocates’ demands for land sovereignty and the mechanisms currently offered raise questions about the extent to which cities are advancing permanent land reforms or provisional interventions at risk of revocation. Our findings may be of use to policymakers and advocates who are creating, comparing, and adapting land access policies and programs to best address growers’ needs and advance sustainable and equitable food transformations
Agriculture · Business · Environmental planning · Food security · Food sovereignty · Geography · Political science · Politics · Sovereignty · Law · Organic Food and Agriculture · Urban Agriculture and Sustainability · Urban Green Space and Health
The Intersection of Planning, Urban Agriculture, and Food Justice
Black Farmers in the USA and Michigan
Cultivating Place
Cultivating citizenship, equity, and social inclusion? Putting civic agriculture into practice through urban farming
Results of a US and Canada community garden survey
Urban Agriculture Policy Making in New York’s “New Political Spaces”
Beyond backyard chickens
Incommensurability, Land Use, and the Right to Space
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1.5 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |