Conflicting rights to the city in New York's community gardens

Staeheli, Lynn A.; Mitchell, Don; Gibson, Kristina

doi:10.1023/b:gejo.0000010839.59734.01

Cited by 142 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…5. This is especially well documented for New York City (Schmelzkopf, 1995;Staeheli et al, 2002;Hassell, 2005; for another example see e. g. Lebuhn, 2008). Here the guerilla gardening movement stands out, which became famous in New York City in the 1970s (Meyer-Renschhausen, 2004;Reynolds, 2008).…”

Section: Community Gardening In Berlinmentioning

confidence: 83%

Public Participation in Post-Fordist Urban Green Space Governance: The Case of Community Gardens in Berlin

Viana-Cárdenas¹

2014

HabitatySociedad

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThis article examines citizen participation in the governance of contemporary urban green space. Rather than exploring normative questions of ideal forms of participatory democracy, it focuses on changing roles and relationships between local state and non-state actors in order to identify and explain the changing nature of participation. I argue that neoliberal urban restructuring has changed the conditions for participation and thus participation itself in fundamental ways and that we need an account of changes in statehood and governance in order to capture this conceptually. Based on the case of community gardens in Berlin, the article discusses the extent to which this changed relationship is expressed by current citizen participation as well as the potential and problems that result from it. My empirical results show the emergence of a new political acceptance of autonomously organized projects and active citizen participation in urban green space governance. The central argument of this article is that this new acceptance can be conceptualized as an expression of the neoliberalization of cities. Nevertheless, this neoliberal strategy at the same time leads to complex and contradictory outcomes and the resulting benefits are also acknowledged.

show abstract

Section: Community Gardening In Berlinmentioning

confidence: 83%

Public Participation in Post-Fordist Urban Green Space Governance: The Case of Community Gardens in Berlin

Viana-Cárdenas¹

2014

HabitatySociedad

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The unauthorized course is simultaneously close and distant to terra nullius. In this scenario, residents cultivate abandoned or vacant lands without official approval, such as guerrilla gardening in New York City (Schmelzkopf 1995;Staeheli et al 2002) or grass-roots developments in Detroit (Colasanti et al 2012;White 2011). A third category could be included, those with contested authorized status, a key factor leading to the dispute between the South Central Farm and the City of Los Angeles (Barraclough 2009;Irazabal and Punja 2009).…”

Section: Cultivation and Dispossession Of Landmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Agrarian Imaginary in Urban Life: Cultivating Virtues and Vices Through a Conflicted History

Mayes

2013

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the influence and use of agrarian thought on collective understandings of food practices as sources of ethical and communal value in urban contexts. A primary proponent of agrarian thought that this paper engages is Paul Thompson and his exceptional book, The Agrarian Vision. Thompson aims to use agrarian ideals of agriculture and communal life to rethink current issues of sustainability and environmental ethics. However, Thompson perceives the current cultural mood as hostile to agrarian virtue. There are two related claims of this paper. The first argues that contrary to Thompson's perception of hostility, agrarian thought is popularly and commercially mobilized among urban populations. To establish this claim I extend Charles Taylor's notion of a social imaginary and suggest that urban agriculture can be theorized as an agrarian imaginary. Entwined with the first claim is the second, that proponents selectively use agrarian history to overemphasis a narrative of virtue while ignoring or marginalizing historical practices of agrarian violence, exclusion and dispossession. I do not discount or deny the significance of agrarian virtue. By situating agrarian thought within a clearer virtue ethics framework and acknowledging potential manifestation of agrarian vice, I suggest that the idea of agrarian virtue is strengthened.

show abstract

“…As a green activist put it, the gardens are "a space of democracy, with a little 'd'." 198 Why is equality of autonomy best promoted through common ownership of urban gardens, rather than through other means, such as regulation and zoning? First, land-use experts note that traditional zoning is often unsuccessful in protecting a community's social capital.…”

Section: Community Gardensmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common Ownership and Equality of Autonomy

Robilant¹

2013

mlj

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, common ownership has enjoyed unprecedented favour among policy-makers and citizens in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Conservation land trusts, affordable-housing co-operatives, community gardens, and neighbourhood-managed parks are spreading throughout major cities. Normatively, these common-ownership regimes are seen as yielding a variety of benefits, such as a communitarian ethos in the efficient use of scarce resources, or greater freedom to interact and create in new ways. The design of common-ownership regimes, however, requires difficult trade-offs. Most importantly, successful achievement of the goals of common-ownership regimes requires the limitation of individual co-owners’ ability to freely use the common resource, as well as to exit the common-ownership arrangement.This article makes two contributions. First, at the normative level, it argues that common ownership has the potential to help foster greater “equality of autonomy”. By “equality of autonomy”, I mean more equitable access to the material and relational means that allow individuals to be autonomous. Second, at the level of design, this article argues that the difficult trade-offs of common-ownership regimes should be dealt with by grounding the commitment to equality of autonomy in the context of specific resources. In some cases, this resource-specific design helps to minimize or avoid difficult trade-offs. In hard cases, where trade-offs cannot be avoided, this article offers arguments for privileging greater equality of autonomy over full negative freedom.Au cours de ces dernières années, la propriété commune a joui d’un avantage sans précédent auprès des décideurs politiques et des citoyens des États-Unis, du Canada et d’Europe. Le nombre de fiducies de préservation de terrains, de logements abordables, de coopératives, de jardins communaux et de parcs gérés par des quartiers est en croissance dans toutes les grandes villes. D’un point de vue normatif, ces régimes de propriétés communes impliquent de nombreux bénéfices, comme l’esprit communautaire de l’utilisation efficace de ressources peu abondantes, ou la plus grande liberté d’interagir et de créer de façons nouvelles. La conception du régime de propriété commune, cependant, demande des compromis difficiles. Plus important encore, pour atteindre avec succès les objectifs des régimes de propriété commune, il faut limiter la capacité des copropriétaires individuels à utiliser la ressource commune librement ainsi que celle de sortir de l’arrangement de propriété commune.Cet article a deux rôles. Premièrement, au niveau normatif, il présente l’argument que la propriété commune a le potentiel d’encourager une plus grande « égalité d’autonomie ». Par « égalité d’autonomie », je veux dire un accès plus équitable aux moyens relationnels et matériels qui permettent à un individu d’être autonome. Deuxièmement, au niveau de la conception, cet article avance que les compromis difficiles des régimes de propriété commune devraient être gérés en renforçant l’engagement à l’...

show abstract

Conflicting rights to the city in New York's community gardens

Cited by 142 publications

References 13 publications

Public Participation in Post-Fordist Urban Green Space Governance: The Case of Community Gardens in Berlin

Public Participation in Post-Fordist Urban Green Space Governance: The Case of Community Gardens in Berlin

An Agrarian Imaginary in Urban Life: Cultivating Virtues and Vices Through a Conflicted History

Common Ownership and Equality of Autonomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About