Racial Equity Tools for Food Systems Planning

The legacies of racist land-based policies are built into the urban and exurban landscapes of the United States. The area of food systems planning provides a special opportunity within planning practice to recognize these histories and work to ameliorate contemporary inequities. Racial equity assessment tools offer one strategy for prioritizing principles of racial equity into food systems
planning processes. The Food System Racial Equity Assessment tool and process is one such strategy for considering how people, place, process, and power are interrelated in a particular plan, policy, or proposal. Pilot sessions with local food-centered organizations informed the development
of this tool and provided valuable insight into its relevance in planning practice. By using food system-specific racial equity tools, planners can normalize conversations about racial difference, ask critical questions about who is or is not served by plans, and prioritizes deliberate consideration of who is involved in visioning, framing, and proposing solutions to planning problems.

Thoughts on Urban Ag: Inheriting Characteristics of Our Racist System

The problem with urban ag is that it has inherited the problems inherent in a racist system. Where nonprofit orgs could be advocates for black people to control the land in their own communities, where they grow their own food and export that food throughout the region as a form of economic development of ANY scale – the most popular urban ag organizations employ a model where the black & poor communities that are considered food deserts geographically are dependent upon them. The non profit acts as the producer, either of goods – produce – or services – nutrition education classes, double bucks at the farmers market & etc – and the community responds as the consumer of said goods or services.

Recently I was talking to a non profit leader in urban ag about whether their work intersected with racial equity in any way. They responded saying they sell produce in corner stores in black communities and that was racial equity to them. I explained that black people being able buy produce from white folks in stores they dont own wasnt racial equity. Black people being the owner of the store, the owner of the farm and the owner of the distribution company that got the produce to the store was racial equity. I dont think we were seeing equity through the same lens or the same way.

When the non profit fixes itself as a perpetual producer and service provider it is not entering a practice that is sustainable especially when it could create systems to make itself obsolete. In the case of urban ag by providing funding for communities to develop their own food production systems, by advocating for black and brown voices lifting them up and connecting them to their more resourced networks, by asking foundations if they fund black organizations as much as they fund white run ones, by being anti-racist instead of “non-racist” and providing accessible and culturally relevant training and hiring black people from the community in which they are found to do work, these are but a few ways to foster a more equitable food system. But the racist system we live in loves the narrative of helping the poor black people – whether they be in a third world country or in a housing project in the East End of Richmond. In both instances – there is no money for the non profit in empowering poor people to not need them anymore.

If the non profit solves the problem of food deserts how will their staff pay their mortgages? This is why we advance conversations about race into the dialogue. It isnt to bully folks or make folks feel ashamed. It is because at the root of this issue of black dependency – we have to examine why communities are dependent in the first place. How did the food desert become a thing? What racist policies were implemented that created the reality the community is facing today that your organization purports ro address? Then we have examine the presence of white organizations in black communities that arent working to create sustainable models for change. If we arent talking about black people being self determining and solving their own problems are we talking about them being perpetually dependent upon you? Is that not problematic?

“We Didn’t Get Nothing:” The Plight of Black Farmers

The central thesis to this article is that blacks were intended to work the land, but never to own the land. The progression from working the land via slavery,
to peonage, and to land ownership is explored. Africans arrived on American soil carrying with them a rich legacy in caring for the land, and while they did so in America, it was under the most onerous of conditions. Once freed, blacks became prodigious land owners, but with the onset of the twentieth century various systemic factors impacted landownership for blacks. These same factors along with
mechanization, herbicides, government policy, and the courts all served to undermine farm ownership for black Americans. The Pigford Class Action Suit is
central to understanding the complexities of the plight of the black farmer and the attempts of various advocacy groups to maintain black land ownership.

Race To Lead: Confronting the Nonprofit Racial Leadership Gap

The percentage of people of color in nonprofit executive director roles has remained under 20% for the past decade. To increase the number of people of color leading nonprofits, the sector needs a new narrative about the problem and new strategies to address it. Nonprofits have to transfer the responsibility for the racial leadership gap from those who are targeted by it (aspiring leaders of color), to those governing organizations.

Green roof urban farming for buildings in high-density urban cities


Green_roof_urban_farming_for_buildings_in_high-den.pdf

Many urban cities in the world are trying to enhance sustainability by improving urban greenery and promoting urban farming. By installing green roofs with urban farming, it is possible to achieve environmental, social and economic sustainability for the buildings in urban cities because it can contribute to the mitigation of environmental problems, enhancement of community functions and development of urban food systems. This paper presents the findings of a research to investigate green roof urban farming for high-density urban cities like Hong Kong. The benefits and potential of rooftop urban farming are examined; some experiences in the world are described. The characteristics and constraints of high-density urban cities are studied and the situation in Hong Kong is evaluated critically. It is hoped that the research information will be useful to promoting sustainable buildings and environment in urban cities.

Growing Community Food Systems by Erika Allen

The idea of a community food system is much larger than just urban farming. It deals with everything, all the components that are needed to establish, maintain, and perpetually sustain a civilization.

Urban farming is key in the reclamation of an Earth and ecology-based value system, and it plays an important role: We need urban food production, communities growing food in an urban environment. But with a community food system, neighborhood stakeholders are the ones growing that food, moving it around, and in control of land tenure or wherever soil-, food-, and Earthbased materials are being grown. Basically we are talking about sovereignty, about having land and water rights.

This is not a new concept; indigenous communities globally struggle with powerful external entities that attempt to extract raw and refined resources from land that has traditionally been stewarded by families who understand the natural laws of replenishment and proper natural-resource management. In a locally-operated food system we engage all members of the community, taking special care to engage the most marginalized members and those most impacted by food and land degradation. We begin with simple questions:

“Where are you going to get water from, and how are you getting the water?” “Who makes the decision about how land—open space and commercial space—is being used?”

These simple questions activate civic and civil rights and accountability with government, because there are always regulatory issues and agendas that (as is often revealed) community members are unaware of and have not been included in the conversations. So true sustainability in terms of community food systems means that disenfranchised people, especially youth and their families, are involved in the process not only as beneficiaries of “good (and carbon-neutral) food” but as central participants in the planning, development, and execution of the food system, including its interlocking
parts: energy, housing, public transportation, economic development, and so on. You’re building a whole infrastructure that supports local food systems.

Growing Urban Agriculture: Equitable Strategies and Policies for Improving Access to Healthy Food and Revitalizing Communities

A vibrant movement is changing the landscape,
economic outlook, and vitality of cities across the
country. The recent recession affected many low-
income communities—taking with it manufacturing
centers, jobs, and people while leaving behind
abandoned homes and vacant lots. Now a new
crop of urban farmers, along with activists, and
community organizations are turning that land
into productive use and turning around their
communities.

Urban farming brings a multitude of benefits to
struggling communities: improved access to healthy
food, workforce training and job development, and
neighborhood revitalization. Innovative programs
and policies are cropping up nationwide; and city
governments are creating urban agriculture-friendly
policies to support urban farming.

While the movement is exciting, PolicyLink is
committed to ensuring that it is an inclusive one.
Many of the emerging policies could better target
low-income communities and communities of
color—the very communities that would so greatly
benefit from the economic opportunities and
revitalization offered by urban farming.