Considering the social factors that shape access to opportunities brings up notions of spatial justice and the idea that rights and opportunities are not evenly distributed. Spatial justice would require space to be reorganized and reconceptualized “to promote equal access to opportunities, foster participation in decision-making, and encourage different ways of being in space” . To paraphrase a popular expression, the growing field is not levelled. Geographers are particularly well-positioned to examine the spatial barriers that prevent people from accessing and growing food. As several observers have noted, distributive ‘food justice’ activities like community gardens and farmer’s markets often take a top-down approach in which decision-making power is relegated to a few leaders such as nonprofit directors and/or managers that may reinforce existing power inequities . Procedural justice, a more radical approach to justice, rejects top-down strategies, instead advocating for participatory, grassroots action. In place of fairness in outcomes, procedural justice promotes fairness in procedures such as participation in regulatory and organizational processes and decision-making . This form of justice is less common and primarily associated with food sovereignty . It is also informing progressive visions of the food movement and many food justice initiatives . Herman and Goodman urge us to cultivate a participatory understanding of food justice to “move beyond the local,blueberry container distributive issues in which it often becomes mired” and focus our efforts instead on building a movement that is itself inclusive and just.
Procedural and distributive forms of justice are not mutually exclusive – in many ways, they inform one another. For example, the distribution of land and capital undoubtedly influences the power people possess to participate in and make decisions around food provisioning. In fact, researchers argue that the most effective concepts of justice are actually ‘trivalent’ – they combine distribution and participation and include recognition of disenfranchised groups . This approach, they argue, is critical, pluralist, unified, and accounts for the particular and everyday experiences of injustice that vary with social context . Some, however, argue that this perspective of justice that is contingent upon time and space, fails to produce a universal notion of justice that might combat global forms of injustice . Indeed, Cadieux and Slocum warn, “If food justice means anything, it may stand for nothing—or, worse, serve to undermine the credibility and rigor of substantive food justice practices,” which, in turn, may make it vulnerable to co-optation . Indeed, researchers must examine not only how actors define food justice, but also how they do food justice . Yet, singular, standardized, and universalist ideals may reinforce insider/outsider mentalities that devalue particular justice practices that do not fit this view . In the face of the dynamic nature of justice, Goodman, Dupuis, and Goodman recommend a reflexive theory of justice that moves away from “the perfect and privileged politics of standard setting” .
This approach sees justice as “a process by which people pursue goals while acknowledging the imperfection in their actions” . This concept of justice is situated , admits conflicts, responds to changing circumstances, and recognizes the nuance of everyday. San Diego County is a growing, diverse metropolitan region of over 3 million people. Its 4,526 square miles are comprised of distinct landscapes including densely populated urban neighborhoods, sprawling suburbs, and open spaces. Urban agriculture thrives in this county with the help of a year-round growing climate and generally supportive regulatory environment. Traditional soil-based models have flourished in this atmosphere and over 90 urban farms and community gardens currently operate in the county. The city’s approval of the Urban Agriculture Incentive Zones Act – a 2014 California bill that provides tax incentives to private landowners who allow urban agriculture on their vacant parcels in urban areas –suggests the trend will continue. Soilless models, specifically hydroponic and aquaponic greenhouses, are also on the rise in the county, particularly in the North County area. The availability of natural resources, specifically water and affordable land, drive urban agriculture locations and practices in the county. Water is increasingly scarce and expensive in southern California and land prices continue to rise throughout the county.
Further, less than 1% of the county’s inhabitants are employed in agriculture. However, interest in urban agriculture is growing – a list of 40 urban growers seeking land for urban agriculture through AB551 in San Diego is available on a website created in support of the bill. The availability of environmental resources is complicated by disproportional access to the economic and social resources required to support these activities including funding, skills, and institutional capacity. Indeed, research indicates that urban agriculture is more often realized as a cultural amenity among white, educated and affluent consumers, who tend to have greater access to these resources . People of color, who disproportionately suffer from hunger, are less likely to have similar access to environmental, economic, and social resources. The region’s socio-spatial landscape supports the thesis of disproportional access to resources. The county itself is highly segregated and race and socio-economic status differences can be read in the landscape. For example, poverty is concentrated in certain areas, specifically in older urban neighborhoods around Downtown San Diego , the South Bay, Oceanside, Vista, and Escondido, as well as a few sparsely populated rural areas. Racial segregation is even more concentrated, following a similar pattern, with most non-white and non-white Latino residents living around downtown and in the South Bay. These spatial patterns are not accidental, but instead reflect racially-biased political and economic decisions, such as mortgage policies, zoning regulations, municipal funding, transportation planning, and real estate practices, as well as histories of suburbanization, and more recently, gentrification. In cities, neoliberal economic development shifts state responsibilities onto the private and nonprofit sector and creates competition among neighborhoods for resources while also supporting do-it-yourself approaches to urban issues such as urban agriculture . US Census data also unveils gross inequities in median incomes . For example, according to American Community Survey data for 2013-2017, the median household income in the county for that period was $70,588. The top 20 percent of households earned 50 percent of the total income; the bottom 20 percent earned just 3 percent. Income varied considerably among racial groups.
The non-Latino white median household income reached $86,790; however, it was much lower for Latinos and African Americans . This disparity explains the high rate of poverty among these groups – 16% for Latinos and 21% for African Americans compared to 8.3% for non-Latino whites. The county’s social landscape suggests disparate access to the resources needed to support urban agriculture activities. Land is expensive and scare and capital is unevenly distributed since it likely follows income distribution. Nonetheless, soil-based and soilless urban agriculture are popping up throughout the county,growing blueberries in containers and often with a mission to promote social justice. However, what these organizations mean by ‘justice’ and how they practice it, as well as the shared and unique contexts that support and constrain it, remain unknown. Tounpack the complexities of justice in the county, I examine three urban growing spaces, two soil-based and one soilless, that prioritize a social mission, but whose contexts produce differential access to the resources to support it. I analyze these growing spaces using a qualitative research design described in the next section. The neighborhood settings of these urban agriculture enterprises are quite different . Encinitas and Southeastern San Diego represent two ends of the spectrum; their socio-economic landscapes tell two quite different stories. In Encinitas, the median household income is high and poverty and unemployment rates are low. Residents tend to be non-Latino white and many have college degrees. Housing is predominately owner-occupied and the median property values are high . In Southeastern San Diego, the population is denser and more diverse – mainly Latino, but with relatively sizable non-Latino Black and Asian inhabitants. In fact, in the 1950s and 60s, the black population was much larger because Southeastern San Diego was one of the few places in San Diego where African Americans were not restricted by legal covenants to own or rent properties . Today, despite demographic changes, this remains an important element of the neighborhood’s identity. The median household income is significantly lower than in Encinitas. Unsurprisingly, poverty and unemployment rates are higher here, as well. There are fewer people with college degrees and the home-ownership rate and median property value are considerably lower than in the rest of the county. Vista lies somewhere in the middle on economic characteristics such as median income, poverty and unemployment. The city is less dominated by a single race or ethnicity, with almost the same proportion of non-Latino White and Latino residents. However, it has one of the highest percentages of homelessness in the county , which drives local nonprofit organizing.
These neighborhood characteristics contribute to the way the local organizations define and do justice and provide the socio-spatial setting that creates barriers and opportunities for their work.Coastal Roots Farm was established in 2014 as a Jewish community farm to “provide dignified access to fresh food for those who need it most” . The 20-acre, organic farm names food justice, as well as sustainable agriculture and ancient Jewish wisdom, as its founding principles. “What we mean by food justice is that everyone deserves a right to this wonderful food,” says Sharon Goodson, the farm’s Director of Philanthropy in 2016. The farm uses soil-based methods to grow produce that it sells through its Community Supported Agriculture programs; however, the majority of the harvest is donated to local organizations aimed at hunger relief in Encinitas, as well as local Holocaust survivors and their families. The farm hosts monthly ‘pop-up’ farm stands in Vista and at Camp Pendleton – areas with high poverty rates. It also hosts educational events and Jewish farming festivals for the local community. Community members can participate in volunteering activities; however, there are no personal plots for resident use. The farm’s staff tend to have considerable experience in farming and are recruited nationally– for example, the current Farm Manager has over 17 years of experience in farming throughout the Pacific Northwest – as well as nonprofit management. Ellie Honan, the Farm Production Assistant Manager, was drawn to the farm from Minnesota by an apprenticeship. Leadership and management positions are also staffed by applicants with previous nonprofit experience. The farm’s funding comes from Leichtag Foundation, a private foundation dedicated to Jewish life and social entrepreneurship in San Diego County and Jerusalem . Solutions Farms opened in 2012 to serve as a social enterprise for the Solutions for Change family homelessness program. It is a 2-acre, organic, soilless farm that uses commercial aquaponic production to provide workforce training to previously homeless adults who have overcome addiction and may have few of the appropriate skills to build a career to support their families. The farm operates as an LLC and participants are formal employees that receive income, in addition to transformational housing, to support career development and self-sufficiency. Participants on average triple their annual income after their first year in the program to upwards of $20,000, which in turn decreases their dependence on cash aid and food stamps . The program pays specific attention to financial literacy – for instance, program graduates are required to have $3,000 in a personal savings account when they graduate. The structure of the program is top-down, although there are some opportunities for graduates to join the organization as staff if positions are available. The farm primarily grows lettuces that are sold to local restaurants, juice bars, and farmers’ markets in North County. Previously, the farm had a contract with Vista Unified School District; however, the bid was not renewed. The enterprise does not mention ‘justice’ in its promotional material, but the website notes that the farm’s workforce development program has a “worthwhile social purpose” . Funding for the Solutions for Change program comes from governmental support such as affordable housing funds, private foundation grants, and donations. Mt. Hope Community Garden, overseen by the local nonprofit Project New Village, broke ground in 2011. The garden is 1/3 of an acre and has 40 garden beds specifically for local residents to grow food and flowers for personal use and/or sale.