"Community Gardens as New Forms of Public Space." _Langegger [conference paper] - 0 views

• 
  #1 Metropolitan Institute on 04 Jan 12

   

  Langegger, Sig. "Community Gardens as New Forms of Public Space." Paper to be presented at the annual conference for the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Salt Lake City, Utah, October 13-16, 2011.
  
  LANGEGGER, Sig [University of Colorado, Denver] slangegger@gmail.com
  
  
  Paper Abstract: Vacant lots present city managers and neighborhood residents with myriad problems. They are often trash strewn, tangible signs of neighborhood decay, and thus negatively affect the assessed values of adjacent properties Additionally, they often serve as locations for dangerous or illicit activities. As part of neighborhood revitalization strategies, cities in financial straits often allow, even encourage, neighborhood-driven gardening efforts to morph vacant lots into verdant community gardens. By producing healthy foods and engaging residents, these community-driven, community-funded efforts impact neighborhood well-being and health. But they often do more. Community gardens raise the property values of surrounding parcels (Voicu & Been, 2008). Interestingly, certain community gardens serve their neighborhoods as de facto pocket parks, replete with landscaping, benches and even BBQ grills.
  
  Since many scholars deride the erosion of the publicness of existing parks and plazas through behavior-regulating rules, increased surveillance and a more general privatization and commodification of space (Nemeth, 2010), the emergence of neighborhood-driven public spaces proves an interesting phenomenon. Nonetheless, despite their ostensible public benefits, community gardens are always considered temporary land uses and thus always face eventual destruction by the exchange-value logics of urban development. Communities struggle to save gardens threatened by development. Yet efforts rarely center on benefits to publics wider than a community of gardeners.
  
  In this paper, I ask two related questions. First, can the legitimation of certain types of gardens as public spaces help save them from destruction? And second, how can planners and city managers learn to consider the publicness of community gardens in land-use decisions and comprehensive planning? Answering these questions necessitates empirical examination of the physical, legal and social factors that contribute to the publiness of community gardens. In this effort, I examine the property regimes governing three park-like community gardens in Denver, Colorado. Related to regime theory, property regime inquiry involves first considering public space as a specific form of property and then examining the various claims to property rights made by various actors along with the power asymmetries that obligate certain parties to recognize some rights while trumping others (Staeheli & Mitchell, 2008). Using Setha Low's (1981) Rapid Ethnographic Assessment Procedure to explore their publicness, I examine the neighborhood context of each garden; I conduct interpretive policy analysis on documents regulating gardens; I construct time-space behavior maps of activities in gardens at different times of day, week and season; I employ visual analysis of garden growth and behavioral-trace patterns; and I interview gardeners and neighborhood residents to gain insight into their perceptions of garden publicness. This paper will present the results of these analyses: I expect to find that garden publicness is affected most by: the non-gardening meanings of the garden to both residents and gardeners, the diversity of claims to occupy them, balanced power relations between those who claim rights and those who are obligated to recognize them, neighborhood gentrification and the garden's regulatory and legal framework.
  This work serves as a central component of my dissertation at the University of Colorado Denver, which is supervised by Dr. Jeremy Németh.
  
  References
  Low, S. M. (1981). Social Science Methods in Landscape Architecture Design. Landscape Planning, 8, 137-148.
  Nemeth, J. (2010). Security in public space: an empirical assessment of three US cities. Environment and Planning A, 42(10), 2487-2507.
  Staeheli, L., & Mitchell, D. (2008). The People's Property?: Power, Politics, and the Public. New York: Routledge.
  Voicu, I., & Been, V. (2008). The Effect of Community Gardens on Neighboring Property Values. Real Estate Economics, 36(2), 241-283.

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">Langegger, Sig. "Community Gardens as New Forms of Public Space." Paper to be presented at the annual conference for the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Salt Lake City, Utah, October 13-16, 2011. <br /> <br /> LANGEGGER, Sig [University of Colorado, Denver] slangegger@gmail.com <br /> <br /> <br /> Paper Abstract: Vacant lots present city managers and neighborhood residents with myriad problems. They are often trash strewn, tangible signs of neighborhood decay, and thus negatively affect the assessed values of adjacent properties Additionally, they often serve as locations for dangerous or illicit activities. As part of neighborhood revitalization strategies, cities in financial straits often allow, even encourage, neighborhood-driven gardening efforts to morph vacant lots into verdant community gardens. By producing healthy foods and engaging residents, these community-driven, community-funded efforts impact neighborhood well-being and health. But they often do more. Community gardens raise the property values of surrounding parcels (Voicu & Been, 2008). Interestingly, certain community gardens serve their neighborhoods as de facto pocket parks, replete with landscaping, benches and even BBQ grills. <br /> <br /> Since many scholars deride the erosion of the publicness of existing parks and plazas through behavior-regulating rules, increased surveillance and a more general privatization and commodification of space (Nemeth, 2010), the emergence of neighborhood-driven public spaces proves an interesting phenomenon. Nonetheless, despite their ostensible public benefits, community gardens are always considered temporary land uses and thus always face eventual destruction by the exchange-value logics of urban development. Communities struggle to save gardens threatened by development. Yet efforts rarely center on benefits to publics wider than a community of gardeners. <br /> <br /> In this paper, I ask two related questions. First, can the legitimation of certain types of gardens as public spaces help save them from destruction? And second, how can planners and city managers learn to consider the publicness of community gardens in land-use decisions and comprehensive planning? Answering these questions necessitates empirical examination of the physical, legal and social factors that contribute to the publiness of community gardens. In this effort, I examine the property regimes governing three park-like community gardens in Denver, Colorado. Related to regime theory, property regime inquiry involves first considering public space as a specific form of property and then examining the various claims to property rights made by various actors along with the power asymmetries that obligate certain parties to recognize some rights while trumping others (Staeheli & Mitchell, 2008). Using Setha Low's (1981) Rapid Ethnographic Assessment Procedure to explore their publicness, I examine the neighborhood context of each garden; I conduct interpretive policy analysis on documents regulating gardens; I construct time-space behavior maps of activities in gardens at different times of day, week and season; I employ visual analysis of garden growth and behavioral-trace patterns; and I interview gardeners and neighborhood residents to gain insight into their perceptions of garden publicness. This paper will present the results of these analyses: I expect to find that garden publicness is affected most by: the non-gardening meanings of the garden to both residents and gardeners, the diversity of claims to occupy them, balanced power relations between those who claim rights and those who are obligated to recognize them, neighborhood gentrification and the garden's regulatory and legal framework. <br /> This work serves as a central component of my dissertation at the University of Colorado Denver, which is supervised by Dr. Jeremy Németh. <br /> <br /> References <br /> Low, S. M. (1981). Social Science Methods in Landscape Architecture Design. Landscape Planning, 8, 137-148. <br /> Nemeth, J. (2010). Security in public space: an empirical assessment of three US cities. Environment and Planning A, 42(10), 2487-2507. <br /> Staeheli, L., & Mitchell, D. (2008). The People's Property?: Power, Politics, and the Public. New York: Routledge. <br /> Voicu, I., & Been, V. (2008). The Effect of Community Gardens on Neighboring Property Values. Real Estate Economics, 36(2), 241-283.</div>

  ...

  Cancel

To Top