Description
- Locate six articles on the same topic of interest—two quantitative research articles, two qualitative research articles, and two mixed methods research articles—published in peer-reviewed journals.
- Prepare an annotated bibliography that includes the following:
•
•
•
o
o
o
o
o
o
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
o
o
•
•
Locate six articles on the same topic of interest—two quantitative research articles,
two qualitative research articles, and two mixed methods research articles—published in peerreviewed journals.
Prepare an annotated bibliography that includes the following:
A one-paragraph introduction that provides context for why you selected the research articles
you did. (this is the paragraph I would like to use but if you can please improve it)
I selected the articles and the subject content because I am extremely concerned about the
food shortage among families in the United States especially children and what it does to them
physically and mentally. I feel that no child should ever go hungry and that families (especially
low income families) that depend on state provided food benefits should have knowledge on
alternative methods of making their benefits last. They could be taught different locations to
obtain food, how to join a community garden group, how to shop correctly, how to make
recipes ahead, and even the use of coupons
A reference list entry in APA Style for each of the six articles that follows proper formatting.
Follow each reference list entry with a three-paragraph annotation that includes:
A summary
An analysis
An application as illustrated in this example
A one-paragraph conclusion that presents a synthesis of the six articles.
Format your annotated bibliography in Times New Roman, 12-point font, double-spaced. A
separate References list page is not needed for this assignment.
Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Applied Geography
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apgeog
Growing what you eat: Developing community gardens in Baltimore, Maryland
Michelle P. Corrigan*
Ohio university, Geography, Clippinger laboratories 122, Athens,OH 45701, USA
a b s t r a c t
Keywords:
Community gardens
Food security
Food insecurity is a growing concern in the United States as it has been linked to increased health
problems including obesity and diabetes. The community food security movement was created in an
attempt to overcome this unequal distribution of food by localizing food production through approaches
such as community gardening. The popularity of community gardening and the localization of food
production are evident across the country, especially in central cities hoping to clean up vacant lots and
in areas hoping to narrow the gap between production and consumption. Qualitative data from in-depth
interviews with gardeners and a non-profit organization and field observations from food stores and
community gardens in Baltimore, Maryland were used in this study to determine the extent to which
community gardens contribute to food security. The selected study site represents different approaches
to community gardening and different perceptions of healthy food. While it is evidenced that the
community garden in this study contributes to individual, household, and community food security,
additional help is needed in the form of education, policy, and funding to increase food security and
promote healthy lifestyles.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
Food insecurity is a growing concern in the United States, where
49.1 million people are unable to access enough nutritious food for
an “active and healthy life at all times,” and are therefore considered food insecure (USDA, 2009). Obesity is also an increasing
problem in the United States, where the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention estimate 34% of people over 20 years of age are
obese (CDC, 2007). Food insecurity in the “Global South” is typically
associated with hunger resulting from protein energy malnutrition
and micronutrient malnutrition (Derose & Millman, 1998).
Conversely, food insecurity in much of the “Global North” is
increasingly defined by obesity. The United States produces enough
food for all residents but almost 15% are unable to access quality
food due to financial or other resource limitations.
Paradoxically, food insecurity and obesity often occur among the
same populations and thus their relationship has important
implications for policymakers (Drewnowski & Specter, 2004).
Community food security (CFS) is emerging as a widely accepted
strategy for addressing food insecurity (Lyson, 2004). CFS attempts
to ensure that all community members obtain enough nutritious
food through safe and culturally acceptable means, while also
incorporating environmentally sustainable techniques in an
economically and socially just manner (Hamm & Bellows, 2003).
* Tel.: þ1 11 513 260 5811.
E-mail address: michellepcorrigan@gmail.com.
0143-6228/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.01.017
A need for CFS exists in environments where obtaining healthy and
affordable food sometimes proves difficult, especially for lowincome and minority populations who often lack access to automobile and public transportation (Block, Scribner, & DeSalvo, 2004;
Bullard, 2004; Kwate, 2008; Morland, Wing, Diez Roux, & Poole,
2002). Improving access to quality food is important because it
contributes to a healthy diet, which, in addition to increased
physical activity, aids in the prevention of obeseogenic environments (Drewnowski & Specter, 2004). Currently, growing your own
food is popular and becoming an important element in many
communities across the country (Muhlke, 2010). Vacant lots are
providing a space for people to grow their own food and engage
with the local food system and also with others in their community.
One suggested method of integrating CFS is through the use of
community gardens (Lyson, 2004). While other studies focus on the
public health implications of community gardens and the benefits of
gardens from a CFS perspective, little information is available
regarding the challenges encountered during the initial stages of
community garden development (Brown & Jameton, 2000; Gottlieb
& Fisher, 1996; Lyson, 2004; Wakefield, Yeudall, Taron, Reynolds, &
Skinner, 2007). Similarly, few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of community gardens in terms of engaging people with food
systems. Understanding the challenges involved with community
gardening provides communities and organizations an opportunity
to be successful during garden development. Successful community
gardens can contribute to increased involvement with the food
system.
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
The purpose of this research is to elucidate the challenges of
community gardening and to determine the extent to which
community gardens encourage involvement with food systems. In
order for communities to promote food security and healthy
environments, CFS approaches, such as community gardening,
need to be better understood. This research will answer the
following question: How does engagement with community
gardens make people more aware of issues of food security as well
as their overall involvement with the food system?.
The Duncan Street Miracle Garden (DSMG) in Baltimore,
Maryland has been selected as a study site. Once a blue-collar
manufacturing city, Baltimore’s economy underwent a painful
transition in the years following World War II. This transformation
to a service economy led to high unemployment and to disinvestment in many neighborhoods (Olson, 1997). At the same time, the
population of Baltimore City quickly fell while suburban areas
experienced an increase in population. Prior to 1900, black and
white populations were more equally distributed throughout many
parts of the city; however, segregation acts instituted as early as
1910 distinctly separated neighborhoods into “white” and “colored”
(Boone, Buckley, Grove, & Sister, 2009). Similar to many other large
cities, after 1950, white populations began leaving the city of Baltimore while African American migration from the South continued
to increase (Boone et al., 2009).
The DSMG is located on North Avenue between Chester Street
and Collington Avenue in the Broadway East neighborhood of
historic East Baltimore and takes up a city block (Fig. 1). This
primarily African American (98%) neighborhood experiences high
rates of poverty. Nearly 42% of residents live below the poverty
level, the median household income in 2007 was about $22,000,
and almost 50% of residents rely on public transportation (City
Data, 2007). The existence of a food desert indicates uneven
access to quality food and therefore creates an issue of injustice.
The DSMG is supported by the Parks and People Foundation (PPF),
whose vision is to “enhance the health and beauty” of communities
and parks in Baltimore (Parks and People Foundation, 2009).
Currently there are 11 gardeners who tend 17 plots. Surplus food
from the garden is donated to various organizations in the neighborhood, including two local churches that manage soup kitchens,
in addition to families and individuals.
In this study, I argue that community gardens engage gardeners
and the community with food systems in Baltimore and this
contributes to improved food security. Interviews with several
gardeners indicate access to fresh food is improved during the
growing season and notably improved during the non-growing
1233
season if techniques such as canning and freezing are utilized.
Donations from this garden are considerable and also have a large
impact on the community. Although community gardens cannot
alone resolve food insecurity; they are able to contribute to
improved access to fresh foods on a local level.
Food insecurity and the unequal distribution of quality food
With respect to food insecurity, the USDA stresses the “availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods” and the ability of
populations “to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable
ways (that is, without resorting to emergency food supplies, scavenging, stealing, or other coping strategies)” (USDA, 2009). The
USDA’s definition is one of many in circulation. Maxwell (2000)
compiled a list of over 32 different definitions of “food insecurity”
published between 1975 and 1991. In the early 1980’s, Sen (1981)
changed the way people thought about food insecurity when he
published work on entitlements. He attributed food insecurity, and
specifically famine, to a decline in entitlements and not of a decline
in food availability. According to Sen, this led to an inequitable
distribution of food and, ultimately, to food insecurity for poorer
segments of the population (Sen, 1981). As difficult as it is to define
food insecurity, measuring it poses an even greater challenge. In
part, this is due to the fact that the first measurements were not
taken until the 1960s. Likewise, the first official report using census
data was only released in 1995. As a result, food insecurity was
largely ignored by policy makers. Except during holidays and
natural disasters, the mainstream media also ignored the issue
(Berg, 2008). Although income is the single greatest predictor of
food insecurity, research indicates that certain groups are more
vulnerable than others at the household level, including the elderly,
single-parent households, and large families (Rose, 1999).
Since the availability and price of food in the U.S. is heavily
influenced by government subsidies and multinational corporations, citizens lacking financial resources or government assistance
have found accessing nutritious food difficult. This problem is
worsened by the uneven distribution of quality food outlets, which
has resulted in the creation of food deserts (Larsen & Gilliland,
2008). Food deserts are defined here as “places where people do
not have easy access to healthy, fresh foods, particularly if they are
poor and have limited mobility” (Furey, Strugnell, & McIlveen,
2001, p. 1). Therefore, food deserts are places offering an abundance of fast food restaurants and a limited number of stores
offering quality food.
Fig. 1. Map of study area in Baltimore, Maryland (Ohio University Cartographic Center, 2010).
1234
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
Fast food restaurants often predominate in low-income and
predominately African American neighborhoods (Block et al., 2004;
Larsen & Gilliland, 2008). Lewis et al. (2005) also found that
restaurants (both full service and fast food) in low-income neighborhoods offer fewer healthy menu options than restaurants
located in more affluent neighborhoods. This pattern has been
attributed to a weak retail climate and an abundance of low wage
labor in low-income neighborhoods (Kwate, 2008). While the
density of fast food restaurants is higher in low-income and
minority neighborhoods, the availability of supermarkets is lower
among these populations (Morland et al., 2002). The same factors
contributing to the abundance of fast food restaurants also
contributes to the limited availability of supermarkets in economically disadvantaged and minority urban neighborhoods. Many
supermarkets migrated to suburbs due to the weak retail climate in
urban environments. In addition, profitability and securing
adequate space required to operate in urban environments proves
difficult (Nayga & Weinberg, 1999).
Ironically, food insecurity exists in conjunction with obesity,
which occurs from an “imbalance between energy intake and
expenditure” (Skidmore & Yarnell, 2004, p. 819). As previously
mentioned, roughly 34% of adults in the United States over 20 are
obese, where obesity is defined as having a Body Mass Index (BMI)
of over 30 (CDC, 2007). In addition, nearly 32% of children ages
2e19 are considered obese (CDC, 2007). Obesity is linked with
elevated levels of mortality as well as harmful medical and
psychological consequences. Medical consequences of obesity
include cardiovascular disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis, and certain
types of cancer while psychological consequences include anxiety,
depression, and low self-esteem (Wyatt, Winters, & Dubbert, 2006).
In addition, obesity has a negative economic impact related to high
health care costs associated with treatment and prevention of the
disease (Friedman & Fanning, 2004). Public health experts have
recommended treating obesity by promoting walking instead of
driving to school and other destinations and encouraging healthy
diets through improved product labeling (Koplan, Liverman, &
Kraak, 2005). However, focus on residents’ environments is also
necessary. By focusing on the environment and individual habits,
both food insecurity and obesity levels could be lowered. The CFS
movement has gained momentum as part of a larger effort to
localize food production and provide greater and equal access to
healthy and affordable food.
A shift towards community food security
Over the last few decades, the CFS movement has sought to
overcome the unequal distribution of food through systems
changes. The movement is growing in popularity as more people
make the link between food production and food consumption
(Lyson, 2004). CFS incorporates environmentally sustainable techniques in an economically and socially just manner by encouraging
community gardening, farmers’ markets, community supported
agriculture (CSA), and food processing microenterprises (Gottlieb &
Fisher, 1996). The movement towards CFS is a response to the lack of
focus paid to current food access problems by city agencies and
planning departments (Allen, 1999). Since the industrialization of
agriculture, most people have little or no say in the way their food is
produced. Instead, these decisions are made by small groups of
executives and affect millions of people. CFS works to restore
a democratic voice and relocalize the production of food in order to
ensure all community members obtain enough nutritious food
through safe and culturally acceptable means (Hamm & Bellows,
2003).
While anti-hunger movements seek to relieve immediate
hunger problems through emergency food programs, CFS attempts
to improve food security over the longer term (Hamm & Bellows,
2003). Also in contrast to anti-hunger movements, CFS uses
multiple indicators to assess the extent of food insecurity in
a particular community. Antihunger indicators of food insecurity
are developed from need-based assessments and statistics on food
program participation, including the Food Stamp Program, Women,
Infants, and Children (WIC), and school breakfast and lunch
programs. Indicators of the CFS model include accessibility to
quality food, public transportation options, rates of diet-related
health problems, nutrition education options, analysis of current
local food production systems, and the availability of emergency
food options (Winne, Joseph, & Fisher, 2000).
Of the various CFS approaches, community gardening may be
the most viable in environments where low-income populations
have few food options (Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996; Lyson, 2004). Here,
a community garden is defined as “an organized, grassroots
initiative whereby a section of land is used to produce food or
flowers or both in an urban environment for the personal use or
collective benefit of its members” (Glover, 2003, p. 265). In urban
environments vacant lots are often rented to community gardeners
until more lucrative uses for these spaces are identified
(Schmelzkopf, 1995). Unlike safety net programs, which often foster
dependency, gardens provide community members with selfreliant strategies for obtaining healthy and affordable food (Winne,
2008). In order for community gardens to prove viable, certain
conditions, such as adequate space, access to soil, water, seeds, and
tools, and a dedicated group of community members, are required.
Carole Nemore states, “community gardens cultivate more than
plants, they cultivate communities” (1998, p. 1). Similarly, Winne
(2008) believes that “garden” is not the most important word in
“community garden.” Thus, community gardens require substantial
participation in order to be successful. Studies have shown gardens
experience a higher success rate when they are developed through
a “bottom-up” approach, which occurs when the community is
involved from the beginning of the planning process. This success is
perhaps due to the gardeners’ desire to build the garden themselves, rather than adopt a garden developed through a “top-down”
approach, which would be planned and perhaps even planted by an
outside organization (Schmelzkopf, 1995). A top-down approach to
development is generally defined by an outside governing body
while a bottom-up approach is identified by the community
(Laverack & Labonte, 2000).
Community gardens, along with many other local-food based
movements such as farmer’s markets and urban agriculture, have
become important resources for the community food security
movement (Baker, 2004). A study in Newark, New Jersey showed
that 44.4% of 189 respondents considered growing their own food
a socio-economic benefit of community gardening (Patel, 1991).
Patel (1991) also found that in 1989, 405 community gardens in
Newark, New Jersey produced $450,000 worth of produce which
allowed garden participants to substantially reduce their food bills.
Additionally, a youth garden in Berkeley, California earned $10,233
from sales in 1998 alone (Lawson, 2005). Some gardens produced
over five times the national production standard of vegetables
(Baker, 2004). An upstate New York survey indicated 60% of lowincome gardeners chose to garden because it provided them with
a significant food supply (Armstrong, 2000). Gardeners in Toronto
thought of the food produced in their gardens as a substitute for
store-bought food; they also believed gardening made a considerable difference in their household food budget (Wakefield et al.,
2007).
Community gardens also represent a part of civic agriculture,
which has been defined by Lyson (2004, p. 1) as a “locally-based
agricultural and food production system that is tightly linked to
a community’s social and economic development.” Community
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
gardens present citizens with a way to obtain food without resorting
to mass production, which typically utilizes chemicals, increased
transportation, and escalated power to the industrialized agriculture entity, thus allowing for the consumption of healthier and more
sustainable foods (Kurtz, 2001; Lyson, 2004). One study focused on
urban youth in Minneapolis shows that participants in a community
gardening program have a better understanding of the food system,
a highly-developed understanding of the gardening process, and an
enhanced understanding of healthy versus unhealthy foods
compared to youth who did not participate in the community
gardening program (Lautenschlager & Smith, 2007). This implies
that the act of gardening makes one more aware of consumption
choices and introduces children to healthier lifestyles.
In addition to contributing to food security, community gardens
increase community development, provide additional access to
greenspace, improve mental and physical health, and empower
community members (Baker, 2004; Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996;
Lawson, 2005; Schmelzkopf, 1995). However, community gardens
also face several challenges. These include gaining access to and
securing land, creating ownership and organization of the garden,
ensuring adequate resources at the garden site, and determining
the safety of soils (Kurtz, 2001; Saldivar-Tanaka & Krasny, 2004;
Schmelzkopf, 1995).
How does your garden grow?
After visiting several gardens in Baltimore, which were suggested to me by a representative from Baltimore Green Space,
a land trust working to secure land for community gardens and
pocket parks, the DSMG was chosen as a study site. During my 2008
fall visits to the gardens, the DSMG appealed to me for several
reasons. First, it was large and took advantage of space wisely. It
also appeared to be well taken care of, especially since the
gardening season was over for the year. Furthermore, it was located
in a neighborhood offering little other healthy and affordable food
options. I was also informed that the gardeners chose to donate
much of their produce to various places around the community,
which made me wonder what their motives were and what the
distribution was.
To determine the extent to which community gardens make
people aware of issues of food security and their involvement with
food systems, qualitative methods, especially interviews, were used
to gain insights into people’s experiences related to food security
and their perceptions of the garden’s donation policies. A total of
five gardeners were interviewed, including the garden manager.
The remaining four gardeners were unavailable for interviews at
the time research was conducted. The in-depth interviews were
used to examine the perceptions, experiences, and opinions of
members of the managing organization (PPF), the garden manager,
and the DSMG gardeners (Winchester, 2005). Interviews were
conducted in June and August 2009 at DSMG. Contact with PPF,
along with the garden manager, was established and these
preliminary contacts and snowball sampling procedures facilitated
contact with gardeners at DSMG (Johnson & Weller, 2002). It should
be noted that food security generally improves during summer
months in cities such as Baltimore. However, in order to determine
the contributions community gardens make towards food security,
summer research proved beneficial as this is when gardening
occurs.
Gardeners at DSMG were first asked basic household questions
to establish demographic characteristics. I then asked about their
gardens, including what is grown and how often their garden plot is
tended to determine the purpose and productivity of the garden.
Gardeners were asked how and why they got involved with
community gardening and what the benefits of community
1235
gardening are to discover the extent to which they engage with the
food system. Gardeners were also asked of any household food
budget changes noticed after they began gardening. In addition, I
asked about any sharing or trading of produce which might take
place between gardeners or gardens and also their perceptions of
the quality of food grown in their gardens. Furthermore, gardeners
were asked how food not grown in their gardens is obtained.
In order to verify the existence of a food desert in Baltimore,
a survey of the types of food stores in the Broadway East neighborhood was carried out. In addition, adjoining neighborhoods
were included in the study. These included streets in the Oliver
neighborhood to the east (to Hartford Avenue) and South Clifton
Park, Darley Park, and Clifton Park to the north. This boundary was
chosen for several reasons. First, the gardeners indicated that
a grocery store (Food Depot) they often use was located in this area
in the Belair Plaza Shopping Center on Belair Road. In addition, the
DSMG and the homes of several gardeners are located within these
boundaries. As the streets were driven, the types of stores were
marked on a map with a symbol to identify each classification,
which was predetermined. The classifications included carryout/
corner store, liquor store, bar/restaurant, grocery store, gas station,
and pharmacy. Observations of these food stores were also made to
determine the quality of food offered.
Answers to the interview questions were analyzed using
descriptive codes to ensure no further clarification was needed
(Cope, 2005). Focused and axial coding was carried out at Ohio
University in Athens, Ohio beginning in September 2009 (Emerson,
Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Determination of food
security/insecurity used indicators similar to those used by the
USDA and those used by the CFS model (USDA, 2008; Winne et al.,
2000). USDA indicators include self-assessment of quality, variety,
and desirability of available food in addition to the quantity of
adequate food available throughout the year while CFS indicators
include the accessibility of quality foods, public transportation
options, rates of diet-related health problems, nutrition education
options, analysis of any current local food production systems, and
the availability of emergency food options.
Growing community: the Duncan street miracle garden
The DSMG (Fig. 2) was established in 1988 on an alleyway, once
the 1800 block of Duncan Street in the Broadway East neighborhood. The site was previously occupied by decaying row houses.
When the city demolished the houses it became an illegal dumping
ground. Members of a local men’s organization in the community,
known as the Pharaoh’s Club, began cleaning up the site, and soon
after, the city provided assistance (Parks and People Foundation,
2005). The initial goal of the Pharaoh’s Club was to clean up the
site that had become such an eyesore to the entire community.
Eventually, members of the club began gardening there. One
gentleman from the garden claims the garden, “Just start[ed] with
flowers and plants and it wasn’t organized but it was clean. That
was the main goal in the beginning, just to get everything cleaned
up. It took off from there.” Shortly after gardening began at the
DSMG, the club convinced the city of Baltimore to close the
alleyway to automobile traffic and fence in the entire city block
containing the garden (Parks and People Foundation, 2005).
The DSMG is located in an area containing several corner stores,
bars/restaurants, and liquor stores and very few quality food
outlets, such as grocery stores (Fig. 3). Food available at the corner
stores is usually more expensive than food at supermarkets and
includes boxed and canned foods and an abundance of potato chips,
candy, and sugary beverages. If produce is available, it usually
includes oranges, apples, or overripe bananas, but not vegetables.
Similar to liquor stores, some corner stores separate the customer
1236
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
Fig. 2. Main entrance to the Duncan Street Miracle Garden (photo by Corrigan, M.P. 2009).
from the store attendant with a plexiglass wall which means
customers are unable to look closely at the food they purchase. The
gas stations range in size and snack foods such as chips, cookies,
and crackers in addition to a variety of sugary beverages are
available. The two pharmacies, located at large intersections, sold
boxed and canned foods in addition to some frozen foods. They also
sold snacks and sugary beverages near the check-out counters. The
food prices at the pharmacies are slightly higher than those at
supermarkets. Several bars and restaurants are also located in the
study area. They are typically located on the corner of two streets,
and are small, non-chain establishments. Most of them do not have
a sign displaying the store name and many of them do not offer
food at all. Liquor/package stores, also in abundance, are also small,
usually unnamed, and do not sell food. The three fast food restaurants are clustered at one large intersection. Food Depot, located in
the Belair Plaza Shopping Center, is the only supermarket in the
study area. The produce selection offers a wide variety of fruits and
vegetables that appear very fresh. The meat department also offers
a wide selection of beef, chicken, turkey, and pork in a variety of
cuts and brands. In addition, Food Depot offers low prices
compared with other options in the study area and other supermarkets in the Baltimore area.
Interviews with gardeners at the DSMG reveal that residents of
the Broadway East neighborhood shop at corner stores and Food
Depot and listed benefits of both. Regarding corner stores, one
African American male gardener in his sixties stated, “They might
not have a big variety of food like you do at the supermarket.”
Another gardener acknowledged, “.you’re gonna have to drive to
the supermarket or take the transit bus or whatever. If you ain’t got
the transit, if you don’t drive, you got to take the bus or something.”
While one gardener identified a benefit of the supermarket as
offering variety, another gardener admitted that he thought the
price “evened out” if you had to take public transportation to access
the supermarket versus using a corner store with less variety. The
four DSMG gardeners, who are all African American males between
the ages of 55 and 70 living in the Broadway East neighborhood,
declared they shopped at Food Depot rather than corner stores
because of the larger variety of goods. In addition, they all stated
that they rarely purchase produce from the supermarket because as
one gardener said, “99% of my vegetables come from the garden.”
Traveling to the grocery store on a city bus is not always a stressfree experience, especially for single mothers, the elderly, and
persons with disabilities. Unless a caringfriend or family member is
available for babysitting on shopping day, single mothers must
either take their children to the supermarket, which usually leads
to additional unhealthy food purchases, or pay for childcare.
Seniors and persons with disabilities are burdened with carrying
groceries while utilizing the bus. Since carrying large quantities of
groceries proves difficult for these groups of people, they often
choose not to purchase in bulk, which typically produces the most
cost savings at a grocery store. “Hacking,” another option identified
by the DSMG gardeners, is a form of unregulated and illegal taxi
service. Unidentified cars transport grocery shoppers from their
homes to the supermarket and back for a fee, which is usually less
expensive than regulated taxis. While this allows customers to
purchase larger quantities of food, it also facilitates additional
spending on transportation to the store.
The DSMG contains individual plots which consist of peppers,
tomatoes, collards, mustard greens, lettuce, kale, cabbage, onions,
Swiss chard, squash, okra, cucumbers, pumpkins and beans,
among many other vegetables and herbs. There are also several
plots dedicated to fruit in the garden, including a blueberry patch,
a grapevine, a melon patch, and a strawberry patch. The fruit plots
are mainly tended by the garden manager, Mr. Lewis Sharpe, with
help from three long-time gardeners. Surplus food from the
garden is donated to a variety of places, including two local
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
1237
Fig. 3. Location of food stores and the Duncan Street Miracle Garden in the Broadway East neighborhood, Baltimore (Ohio University Cartographic Center, 2010).
churches that manage soup kitchens and other community associations, such as the Historic East Baltimore Community Action
Coalition (HEBCAC).
Interview responses from
•
•
o
o
o
o
o
o
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
o
o
•
•
Locate six articles on the same topic of interest—two quantitative research articles,
two qualitative research articles, and two mixed methods research articles—published in peerreviewed journals.
Prepare an annotated bibliography that includes the following:
A one-paragraph introduction that provides context for why you selected the research articles
you did. (this is the paragraph I would like to use but if you can please improve it)
I selected the articles and the subject content because I am extremely concerned about the
food shortage among families in the United States especially children and what it does to them
physically and mentally. I feel that no child should ever go hungry and that families (especially
low income families) that depend on state provided food benefits should have knowledge on
alternative methods of making their benefits last. They could be taught different locations to
obtain food, how to join a community garden group, how to shop correctly, how to make
recipes ahead, and even the use of coupons
A reference list entry in APA Style for each of the six articles that follows proper formatting.
Follow each reference list entry with a three-paragraph annotation that includes:
A summary
An analysis
An application as illustrated in this example
A one-paragraph conclusion that presents a synthesis of the six articles.
Format your annotated bibliography in Times New Roman, 12-point font, double-spaced. A
separate References list page is not needed for this assignment.
Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Applied Geography
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apgeog
Growing what you eat: Developing community gardens in Baltimore, Maryland
Michelle P. Corrigan*
Ohio university, Geography, Clippinger laboratories 122, Athens,OH 45701, USA
a b s t r a c t
Keywords:
Community gardens
Food security
Food insecurity is a growing concern in the United States as it has been linked to increased health
problems including obesity and diabetes. The community food security movement was created in an
attempt to overcome this unequal distribution of food by localizing food production through approaches
such as community gardening. The popularity of community gardening and the localization of food
production are evident across the country, especially in central cities hoping to clean up vacant lots and
in areas hoping to narrow the gap between production and consumption. Qualitative data from in-depth
interviews with gardeners and a non-profit organization and field observations from food stores and
community gardens in Baltimore, Maryland were used in this study to determine the extent to which
community gardens contribute to food security. The selected study site represents different approaches
to community gardening and different perceptions of healthy food. While it is evidenced that the
community garden in this study contributes to individual, household, and community food security,
additional help is needed in the form of education, policy, and funding to increase food security and
promote healthy lifestyles.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
Food insecurity is a growing concern in the United States, where
49.1 million people are unable to access enough nutritious food for
an “active and healthy life at all times,” and are therefore considered food insecure (USDA, 2009). Obesity is also an increasing
problem in the United States, where the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention estimate 34% of people over 20 years of age are
obese (CDC, 2007). Food insecurity in the “Global South” is typically
associated with hunger resulting from protein energy malnutrition
and micronutrient malnutrition (Derose & Millman, 1998).
Conversely, food insecurity in much of the “Global North” is
increasingly defined by obesity. The United States produces enough
food for all residents but almost 15% are unable to access quality
food due to financial or other resource limitations.
Paradoxically, food insecurity and obesity often occur among the
same populations and thus their relationship has important
implications for policymakers (Drewnowski & Specter, 2004).
Community food security (CFS) is emerging as a widely accepted
strategy for addressing food insecurity (Lyson, 2004). CFS attempts
to ensure that all community members obtain enough nutritious
food through safe and culturally acceptable means, while also
incorporating environmentally sustainable techniques in an
economically and socially just manner (Hamm & Bellows, 2003).
* Tel.: þ1 11 513 260 5811.
E-mail address: michellepcorrigan@gmail.com.
0143-6228/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.01.017
A need for CFS exists in environments where obtaining healthy and
affordable food sometimes proves difficult, especially for lowincome and minority populations who often lack access to automobile and public transportation (Block, Scribner, & DeSalvo, 2004;
Bullard, 2004; Kwate, 2008; Morland, Wing, Diez Roux, & Poole,
2002). Improving access to quality food is important because it
contributes to a healthy diet, which, in addition to increased
physical activity, aids in the prevention of obeseogenic environments (Drewnowski & Specter, 2004). Currently, growing your own
food is popular and becoming an important element in many
communities across the country (Muhlke, 2010). Vacant lots are
providing a space for people to grow their own food and engage
with the local food system and also with others in their community.
One suggested method of integrating CFS is through the use of
community gardens (Lyson, 2004). While other studies focus on the
public health implications of community gardens and the benefits of
gardens from a CFS perspective, little information is available
regarding the challenges encountered during the initial stages of
community garden development (Brown & Jameton, 2000; Gottlieb
& Fisher, 1996; Lyson, 2004; Wakefield, Yeudall, Taron, Reynolds, &
Skinner, 2007). Similarly, few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of community gardens in terms of engaging people with food
systems. Understanding the challenges involved with community
gardening provides communities and organizations an opportunity
to be successful during garden development. Successful community
gardens can contribute to increased involvement with the food
system.
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
The purpose of this research is to elucidate the challenges of
community gardening and to determine the extent to which
community gardens encourage involvement with food systems. In
order for communities to promote food security and healthy
environments, CFS approaches, such as community gardening,
need to be better understood. This research will answer the
following question: How does engagement with community
gardens make people more aware of issues of food security as well
as their overall involvement with the food system?.
The Duncan Street Miracle Garden (DSMG) in Baltimore,
Maryland has been selected as a study site. Once a blue-collar
manufacturing city, Baltimore’s economy underwent a painful
transition in the years following World War II. This transformation
to a service economy led to high unemployment and to disinvestment in many neighborhoods (Olson, 1997). At the same time, the
population of Baltimore City quickly fell while suburban areas
experienced an increase in population. Prior to 1900, black and
white populations were more equally distributed throughout many
parts of the city; however, segregation acts instituted as early as
1910 distinctly separated neighborhoods into “white” and “colored”
(Boone, Buckley, Grove, & Sister, 2009). Similar to many other large
cities, after 1950, white populations began leaving the city of Baltimore while African American migration from the South continued
to increase (Boone et al., 2009).
The DSMG is located on North Avenue between Chester Street
and Collington Avenue in the Broadway East neighborhood of
historic East Baltimore and takes up a city block (Fig. 1). This
primarily African American (98%) neighborhood experiences high
rates of poverty. Nearly 42% of residents live below the poverty
level, the median household income in 2007 was about $22,000,
and almost 50% of residents rely on public transportation (City
Data, 2007). The existence of a food desert indicates uneven
access to quality food and therefore creates an issue of injustice.
The DSMG is supported by the Parks and People Foundation (PPF),
whose vision is to “enhance the health and beauty” of communities
and parks in Baltimore (Parks and People Foundation, 2009).
Currently there are 11 gardeners who tend 17 plots. Surplus food
from the garden is donated to various organizations in the neighborhood, including two local churches that manage soup kitchens,
in addition to families and individuals.
In this study, I argue that community gardens engage gardeners
and the community with food systems in Baltimore and this
contributes to improved food security. Interviews with several
gardeners indicate access to fresh food is improved during the
growing season and notably improved during the non-growing
1233
season if techniques such as canning and freezing are utilized.
Donations from this garden are considerable and also have a large
impact on the community. Although community gardens cannot
alone resolve food insecurity; they are able to contribute to
improved access to fresh foods on a local level.
Food insecurity and the unequal distribution of quality food
With respect to food insecurity, the USDA stresses the “availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods” and the ability of
populations “to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable
ways (that is, without resorting to emergency food supplies, scavenging, stealing, or other coping strategies)” (USDA, 2009). The
USDA’s definition is one of many in circulation. Maxwell (2000)
compiled a list of over 32 different definitions of “food insecurity”
published between 1975 and 1991. In the early 1980’s, Sen (1981)
changed the way people thought about food insecurity when he
published work on entitlements. He attributed food insecurity, and
specifically famine, to a decline in entitlements and not of a decline
in food availability. According to Sen, this led to an inequitable
distribution of food and, ultimately, to food insecurity for poorer
segments of the population (Sen, 1981). As difficult as it is to define
food insecurity, measuring it poses an even greater challenge. In
part, this is due to the fact that the first measurements were not
taken until the 1960s. Likewise, the first official report using census
data was only released in 1995. As a result, food insecurity was
largely ignored by policy makers. Except during holidays and
natural disasters, the mainstream media also ignored the issue
(Berg, 2008). Although income is the single greatest predictor of
food insecurity, research indicates that certain groups are more
vulnerable than others at the household level, including the elderly,
single-parent households, and large families (Rose, 1999).
Since the availability and price of food in the U.S. is heavily
influenced by government subsidies and multinational corporations, citizens lacking financial resources or government assistance
have found accessing nutritious food difficult. This problem is
worsened by the uneven distribution of quality food outlets, which
has resulted in the creation of food deserts (Larsen & Gilliland,
2008). Food deserts are defined here as “places where people do
not have easy access to healthy, fresh foods, particularly if they are
poor and have limited mobility” (Furey, Strugnell, & McIlveen,
2001, p. 1). Therefore, food deserts are places offering an abundance of fast food restaurants and a limited number of stores
offering quality food.
Fig. 1. Map of study area in Baltimore, Maryland (Ohio University Cartographic Center, 2010).
1234
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
Fast food restaurants often predominate in low-income and
predominately African American neighborhoods (Block et al., 2004;
Larsen & Gilliland, 2008). Lewis et al. (2005) also found that
restaurants (both full service and fast food) in low-income neighborhoods offer fewer healthy menu options than restaurants
located in more affluent neighborhoods. This pattern has been
attributed to a weak retail climate and an abundance of low wage
labor in low-income neighborhoods (Kwate, 2008). While the
density of fast food restaurants is higher in low-income and
minority neighborhoods, the availability of supermarkets is lower
among these populations (Morland et al., 2002). The same factors
contributing to the abundance of fast food restaurants also
contributes to the limited availability of supermarkets in economically disadvantaged and minority urban neighborhoods. Many
supermarkets migrated to suburbs due to the weak retail climate in
urban environments. In addition, profitability and securing
adequate space required to operate in urban environments proves
difficult (Nayga & Weinberg, 1999).
Ironically, food insecurity exists in conjunction with obesity,
which occurs from an “imbalance between energy intake and
expenditure” (Skidmore & Yarnell, 2004, p. 819). As previously
mentioned, roughly 34% of adults in the United States over 20 are
obese, where obesity is defined as having a Body Mass Index (BMI)
of over 30 (CDC, 2007). In addition, nearly 32% of children ages
2e19 are considered obese (CDC, 2007). Obesity is linked with
elevated levels of mortality as well as harmful medical and
psychological consequences. Medical consequences of obesity
include cardiovascular disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis, and certain
types of cancer while psychological consequences include anxiety,
depression, and low self-esteem (Wyatt, Winters, & Dubbert, 2006).
In addition, obesity has a negative economic impact related to high
health care costs associated with treatment and prevention of the
disease (Friedman & Fanning, 2004). Public health experts have
recommended treating obesity by promoting walking instead of
driving to school and other destinations and encouraging healthy
diets through improved product labeling (Koplan, Liverman, &
Kraak, 2005). However, focus on residents’ environments is also
necessary. By focusing on the environment and individual habits,
both food insecurity and obesity levels could be lowered. The CFS
movement has gained momentum as part of a larger effort to
localize food production and provide greater and equal access to
healthy and affordable food.
A shift towards community food security
Over the last few decades, the CFS movement has sought to
overcome the unequal distribution of food through systems
changes. The movement is growing in popularity as more people
make the link between food production and food consumption
(Lyson, 2004). CFS incorporates environmentally sustainable techniques in an economically and socially just manner by encouraging
community gardening, farmers’ markets, community supported
agriculture (CSA), and food processing microenterprises (Gottlieb &
Fisher, 1996). The movement towards CFS is a response to the lack of
focus paid to current food access problems by city agencies and
planning departments (Allen, 1999). Since the industrialization of
agriculture, most people have little or no say in the way their food is
produced. Instead, these decisions are made by small groups of
executives and affect millions of people. CFS works to restore
a democratic voice and relocalize the production of food in order to
ensure all community members obtain enough nutritious food
through safe and culturally acceptable means (Hamm & Bellows,
2003).
While anti-hunger movements seek to relieve immediate
hunger problems through emergency food programs, CFS attempts
to improve food security over the longer term (Hamm & Bellows,
2003). Also in contrast to anti-hunger movements, CFS uses
multiple indicators to assess the extent of food insecurity in
a particular community. Antihunger indicators of food insecurity
are developed from need-based assessments and statistics on food
program participation, including the Food Stamp Program, Women,
Infants, and Children (WIC), and school breakfast and lunch
programs. Indicators of the CFS model include accessibility to
quality food, public transportation options, rates of diet-related
health problems, nutrition education options, analysis of current
local food production systems, and the availability of emergency
food options (Winne, Joseph, & Fisher, 2000).
Of the various CFS approaches, community gardening may be
the most viable in environments where low-income populations
have few food options (Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996; Lyson, 2004). Here,
a community garden is defined as “an organized, grassroots
initiative whereby a section of land is used to produce food or
flowers or both in an urban environment for the personal use or
collective benefit of its members” (Glover, 2003, p. 265). In urban
environments vacant lots are often rented to community gardeners
until more lucrative uses for these spaces are identified
(Schmelzkopf, 1995). Unlike safety net programs, which often foster
dependency, gardens provide community members with selfreliant strategies for obtaining healthy and affordable food (Winne,
2008). In order for community gardens to prove viable, certain
conditions, such as adequate space, access to soil, water, seeds, and
tools, and a dedicated group of community members, are required.
Carole Nemore states, “community gardens cultivate more than
plants, they cultivate communities” (1998, p. 1). Similarly, Winne
(2008) believes that “garden” is not the most important word in
“community garden.” Thus, community gardens require substantial
participation in order to be successful. Studies have shown gardens
experience a higher success rate when they are developed through
a “bottom-up” approach, which occurs when the community is
involved from the beginning of the planning process. This success is
perhaps due to the gardeners’ desire to build the garden themselves, rather than adopt a garden developed through a “top-down”
approach, which would be planned and perhaps even planted by an
outside organization (Schmelzkopf, 1995). A top-down approach to
development is generally defined by an outside governing body
while a bottom-up approach is identified by the community
(Laverack & Labonte, 2000).
Community gardens, along with many other local-food based
movements such as farmer’s markets and urban agriculture, have
become important resources for the community food security
movement (Baker, 2004). A study in Newark, New Jersey showed
that 44.4% of 189 respondents considered growing their own food
a socio-economic benefit of community gardening (Patel, 1991).
Patel (1991) also found that in 1989, 405 community gardens in
Newark, New Jersey produced $450,000 worth of produce which
allowed garden participants to substantially reduce their food bills.
Additionally, a youth garden in Berkeley, California earned $10,233
from sales in 1998 alone (Lawson, 2005). Some gardens produced
over five times the national production standard of vegetables
(Baker, 2004). An upstate New York survey indicated 60% of lowincome gardeners chose to garden because it provided them with
a significant food supply (Armstrong, 2000). Gardeners in Toronto
thought of the food produced in their gardens as a substitute for
store-bought food; they also believed gardening made a considerable difference in their household food budget (Wakefield et al.,
2007).
Community gardens also represent a part of civic agriculture,
which has been defined by Lyson (2004, p. 1) as a “locally-based
agricultural and food production system that is tightly linked to
a community’s social and economic development.” Community
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
gardens present citizens with a way to obtain food without resorting
to mass production, which typically utilizes chemicals, increased
transportation, and escalated power to the industrialized agriculture entity, thus allowing for the consumption of healthier and more
sustainable foods (Kurtz, 2001; Lyson, 2004). One study focused on
urban youth in Minneapolis shows that participants in a community
gardening program have a better understanding of the food system,
a highly-developed understanding of the gardening process, and an
enhanced understanding of healthy versus unhealthy foods
compared to youth who did not participate in the community
gardening program (Lautenschlager & Smith, 2007). This implies
that the act of gardening makes one more aware of consumption
choices and introduces children to healthier lifestyles.
In addition to contributing to food security, community gardens
increase community development, provide additional access to
greenspace, improve mental and physical health, and empower
community members (Baker, 2004; Gottlieb & Fisher, 1996;
Lawson, 2005; Schmelzkopf, 1995). However, community gardens
also face several challenges. These include gaining access to and
securing land, creating ownership and organization of the garden,
ensuring adequate resources at the garden site, and determining
the safety of soils (Kurtz, 2001; Saldivar-Tanaka & Krasny, 2004;
Schmelzkopf, 1995).
How does your garden grow?
After visiting several gardens in Baltimore, which were suggested to me by a representative from Baltimore Green Space,
a land trust working to secure land for community gardens and
pocket parks, the DSMG was chosen as a study site. During my 2008
fall visits to the gardens, the DSMG appealed to me for several
reasons. First, it was large and took advantage of space wisely. It
also appeared to be well taken care of, especially since the
gardening season was over for the year. Furthermore, it was located
in a neighborhood offering little other healthy and affordable food
options. I was also informed that the gardeners chose to donate
much of their produce to various places around the community,
which made me wonder what their motives were and what the
distribution was.
To determine the extent to which community gardens make
people aware of issues of food security and their involvement with
food systems, qualitative methods, especially interviews, were used
to gain insights into people’s experiences related to food security
and their perceptions of the garden’s donation policies. A total of
five gardeners were interviewed, including the garden manager.
The remaining four gardeners were unavailable for interviews at
the time research was conducted. The in-depth interviews were
used to examine the perceptions, experiences, and opinions of
members of the managing organization (PPF), the garden manager,
and the DSMG gardeners (Winchester, 2005). Interviews were
conducted in June and August 2009 at DSMG. Contact with PPF,
along with the garden manager, was established and these
preliminary contacts and snowball sampling procedures facilitated
contact with gardeners at DSMG (Johnson & Weller, 2002). It should
be noted that food security generally improves during summer
months in cities such as Baltimore. However, in order to determine
the contributions community gardens make towards food security,
summer research proved beneficial as this is when gardening
occurs.
Gardeners at DSMG were first asked basic household questions
to establish demographic characteristics. I then asked about their
gardens, including what is grown and how often their garden plot is
tended to determine the purpose and productivity of the garden.
Gardeners were asked how and why they got involved with
community gardening and what the benefits of community
1235
gardening are to discover the extent to which they engage with the
food system. Gardeners were also asked of any household food
budget changes noticed after they began gardening. In addition, I
asked about any sharing or trading of produce which might take
place between gardeners or gardens and also their perceptions of
the quality of food grown in their gardens. Furthermore, gardeners
were asked how food not grown in their gardens is obtained.
In order to verify the existence of a food desert in Baltimore,
a survey of the types of food stores in the Broadway East neighborhood was carried out. In addition, adjoining neighborhoods
were included in the study. These included streets in the Oliver
neighborhood to the east (to Hartford Avenue) and South Clifton
Park, Darley Park, and Clifton Park to the north. This boundary was
chosen for several reasons. First, the gardeners indicated that
a grocery store (Food Depot) they often use was located in this area
in the Belair Plaza Shopping Center on Belair Road. In addition, the
DSMG and the homes of several gardeners are located within these
boundaries. As the streets were driven, the types of stores were
marked on a map with a symbol to identify each classification,
which was predetermined. The classifications included carryout/
corner store, liquor store, bar/restaurant, grocery store, gas station,
and pharmacy. Observations of these food stores were also made to
determine the quality of food offered.
Answers to the interview questions were analyzed using
descriptive codes to ensure no further clarification was needed
(Cope, 2005). Focused and axial coding was carried out at Ohio
University in Athens, Ohio beginning in September 2009 (Emerson,
Fretz, & Shaw, 1995; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Determination of food
security/insecurity used indicators similar to those used by the
USDA and those used by the CFS model (USDA, 2008; Winne et al.,
2000). USDA indicators include self-assessment of quality, variety,
and desirability of available food in addition to the quantity of
adequate food available throughout the year while CFS indicators
include the accessibility of quality foods, public transportation
options, rates of diet-related health problems, nutrition education
options, analysis of any current local food production systems, and
the availability of emergency food options.
Growing community: the Duncan street miracle garden
The DSMG (Fig. 2) was established in 1988 on an alleyway, once
the 1800 block of Duncan Street in the Broadway East neighborhood. The site was previously occupied by decaying row houses.
When the city demolished the houses it became an illegal dumping
ground. Members of a local men’s organization in the community,
known as the Pharaoh’s Club, began cleaning up the site, and soon
after, the city provided assistance (Parks and People Foundation,
2005). The initial goal of the Pharaoh’s Club was to clean up the
site that had become such an eyesore to the entire community.
Eventually, members of the club began gardening there. One
gentleman from the garden claims the garden, “Just start[ed] with
flowers and plants and it wasn’t organized but it was clean. That
was the main goal in the beginning, just to get everything cleaned
up. It took off from there.” Shortly after gardening began at the
DSMG, the club convinced the city of Baltimore to close the
alleyway to automobile traffic and fence in the entire city block
containing the garden (Parks and People Foundation, 2005).
The DSMG is located in an area containing several corner stores,
bars/restaurants, and liquor stores and very few quality food
outlets, such as grocery stores (Fig. 3). Food available at the corner
stores is usually more expensive than food at supermarkets and
includes boxed and canned foods and an abundance of potato chips,
candy, and sugary beverages. If produce is available, it usually
includes oranges, apples, or overripe bananas, but not vegetables.
Similar to liquor stores, some corner stores separate the customer
1236
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
Fig. 2. Main entrance to the Duncan Street Miracle Garden (photo by Corrigan, M.P. 2009).
from the store attendant with a plexiglass wall which means
customers are unable to look closely at the food they purchase. The
gas stations range in size and snack foods such as chips, cookies,
and crackers in addition to a variety of sugary beverages are
available. The two pharmacies, located at large intersections, sold
boxed and canned foods in addition to some frozen foods. They also
sold snacks and sugary beverages near the check-out counters. The
food prices at the pharmacies are slightly higher than those at
supermarkets. Several bars and restaurants are also located in the
study area. They are typically located on the corner of two streets,
and are small, non-chain establishments. Most of them do not have
a sign displaying the store name and many of them do not offer
food at all. Liquor/package stores, also in abundance, are also small,
usually unnamed, and do not sell food. The three fast food restaurants are clustered at one large intersection. Food Depot, located in
the Belair Plaza Shopping Center, is the only supermarket in the
study area. The produce selection offers a wide variety of fruits and
vegetables that appear very fresh. The meat department also offers
a wide selection of beef, chicken, turkey, and pork in a variety of
cuts and brands. In addition, Food Depot offers low prices
compared with other options in the study area and other supermarkets in the Baltimore area.
Interviews with gardeners at the DSMG reveal that residents of
the Broadway East neighborhood shop at corner stores and Food
Depot and listed benefits of both. Regarding corner stores, one
African American male gardener in his sixties stated, “They might
not have a big variety of food like you do at the supermarket.”
Another gardener acknowledged, “.you’re gonna have to drive to
the supermarket or take the transit bus or whatever. If you ain’t got
the transit, if you don’t drive, you got to take the bus or something.”
While one gardener identified a benefit of the supermarket as
offering variety, another gardener admitted that he thought the
price “evened out” if you had to take public transportation to access
the supermarket versus using a corner store with less variety. The
four DSMG gardeners, who are all African American males between
the ages of 55 and 70 living in the Broadway East neighborhood,
declared they shopped at Food Depot rather than corner stores
because of the larger variety of goods. In addition, they all stated
that they rarely purchase produce from the supermarket because as
one gardener said, “99% of my vegetables come from the garden.”
Traveling to the grocery store on a city bus is not always a stressfree experience, especially for single mothers, the elderly, and
persons with disabilities. Unless a caringfriend or family member is
available for babysitting on shopping day, single mothers must
either take their children to the supermarket, which usually leads
to additional unhealthy food purchases, or pay for childcare.
Seniors and persons with disabilities are burdened with carrying
groceries while utilizing the bus. Since carrying large quantities of
groceries proves difficult for these groups of people, they often
choose not to purchase in bulk, which typically produces the most
cost savings at a grocery store. “Hacking,” another option identified
by the DSMG gardeners, is a form of unregulated and illegal taxi
service. Unidentified cars transport grocery shoppers from their
homes to the supermarket and back for a fee, which is usually less
expensive than regulated taxis. While this allows customers to
purchase larger quantities of food, it also facilitates additional
spending on transportation to the store.
The DSMG contains individual plots which consist of peppers,
tomatoes, collards, mustard greens, lettuce, kale, cabbage, onions,
Swiss chard, squash, okra, cucumbers, pumpkins and beans,
among many other vegetables and herbs. There are also several
plots dedicated to fruit in the garden, including a blueberry patch,
a grapevine, a melon patch, and a strawberry patch. The fruit plots
are mainly tended by the garden manager, Mr. Lewis Sharpe, with
help from three long-time gardeners. Surplus food from the
garden is donated to a variety of places, including two local
M.P. Corrigan / Applied Geography 31 (2011) 1232e1241
1237
Fig. 3. Location of food stores and the Duncan Street Miracle Garden in the Broadway East neighborhood, Baltimore (Ohio University Cartographic Center, 2010).
churches that manage soup kitchens and other community associations, such as the Historic East Baltimore Community Action
Coalition (HEBCAC).
Interview responses from
Categories: