Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912752
www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Article
Urban Agriculture as a Means to Food Sovereignty?
A Case Study of Baltimore City Residents
Brionna Colson‐Fearon * and H. Shellae Versey
Department of Psychology, Fordham University, 441 E Fordham Rd, Dealy Hall 226, Bronx, NY 10458, USA
* Correspondence: bcolsonfearon@fordham.edu
Abstract: A large body of research suggests that neighborhood disparities in food access persist.
Emerging evidence suggests that the global COVID‐19 pandemic likely exacerbated disparities in
food access. Given the potential role that alternative food networks (AFNs) and local food sources
may play during times of extreme scarcity, this study examines urban agriculture (e. g., community
farms and gardens) as a sustainable strategy to address food insecurity. In‐depth qualitative inter‐
views with fifteen community stakeholders revealed several major themes including food insecurity
as a feature of systemic racism, food affordability and distance to food as major barriers to food
security, and the role of AFNs in creating community empowerment. Our findings indicate that
urban agricultural practices help build social capital, inform and educate community members
about healthy eating behaviors, and facilitate the distribution of affordable food. Implications for
future research and policy targeting sustainable food distribution in marginalized communities of
color are discussed.
Keywords: alternative food networks; food insecurity; food access; urban agriculture;
community farming
1. Introduction
Variability in the way that food is produced, sold, and consumed leads to significant
food inequities. On a neighborhood level, studies find significant disparities in neighbor‐
hood food environments, specifically among the types of food outlets available, food
products offered, and dietary intake [1–6]. In the United States, it is well documented that
lower‐income and African American neighborhoods, for example, have fewer supermar‐
kets, more liquor stores, and more convenience stores than higher‐income and White
neighborhoods, respectively [7,8]. Even after adjusting for store type, there are fewer
healthy food options and lower quality foods in low‐income and African American neigh‐
borhoods [9–11]. This literature indicates that there is significant variation in food access
across neighborhood types tied to larger systems; namely spatial racism and discrimina‐
tion, creating barriers to healthy eating for lower‐income residents and people living in
predominantly African American neighborhoods [12].
Studies examining food access disparities have primarily focused on documenting
food deserts, with less attention paid to solutions that may alleviate them. Emerging lit‐
erature suggests that alternative food networks (AFNs), systems that directly connect lo‐
cal producers (e.g., farmers) with distribution channels and consumers, may help reimag‐
ine consumers’ spatial relationship with food, especially in areas where access to fresh
food is low. In fact, studies find that AFNs not only improve food security, but also ad‐
dress issues such as unemployment, community decline, and food deserts [13]. To date,
much of the research addressing food deserts relies on traditional food system solutions,
such as the introduction of large supermarkets into communities. Yet, findings indicate
that the success of supermarket interventions has been mixed, suggesting the need for
Citation: Colson‐Fearon, B.;
Versey, H.S. Urban Agriculture as a
Means to Food Sovereignty? A Case
Study of Baltimore City Residents.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,
19, 12752. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph191912752
Academic Editors: Irene H. Yen
and Irene E. Headen
Received: 30 June 2022
Accepted: 2 October 2022
Published: 5 October 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu‐
tral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institu‐
tional affiliations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Li‐
censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and con‐
ditions of the Creative Commons At‐
tribution (CC BY) license (https://cre‐
ativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
2 of 17
more comprehensive and sustainable food source alternatives for residents living in com‐
munities with fewer options. Previously, Cummins, Flint, and Matthews found that open‐
ing a new supermarket in a Philadelphia neighborhood considered a “food desert” mod‐
erately improved perceptions of food accessibility; however, there was no significant
change in residents’ body mass index (BMI) or fruit and vegetable intake, suggesting that
supermarkets alone are insufficient to change eating behaviors [14]. Similarly, Ghosh‐Das‐
tidar and colleagues found that introducing a new supermarket into a low food‐access
neighborhood did not result in more healthy food availability than would have been ex‐
pected otherwise [15].
The current paper examines urban agriculture within a metropolitan area described
as a ”food desert” to better understand the role urban gardens and urban farms play in
lower‐access cities and neighborhoods. We begin with a review of theoretical perspectives
characterizing food environments, and then examine the importance of urban agriculture
(as one form of AFN) in Baltimore, Maryland, where approximately one in four city resi‐
dents are food insecure [16].
1.1. Theoretical Considerations
1.1.1. Food Deserts, Food Apartheid, and Food Sovereignty
Most literature on low‐food access neighborhoods overwhelmingly focuses on de‐
scribing, measuring, and characterizing “food deserts,” an outcome of a political economic
system that structures access to food spatially (e.g., by where you live) [7,8,17–20]. While
initially conceptualized as a metaphor to describe areas where access to healthful food is
limited, a persistent focus on food deserts obscures the macro‐level drivers that create
food deserts in the first place [21]. In other words, while the term is commonly used by
researchers, it does not adequately or accurately reflect how and why areas where people
have lower incomes and lower access to healthy food become that way. This misnaming
is an important oversight because the language used to describe people, processes, and
outcomes is important and shapes strategies for systemic change [22–24].
Developed by food justice advocate, Karen Washington (2018), the term “food apart‐
heid” describes the broad framework that creates inequitable food environments. Accord‐
ing to the National Black Food & Justice Alliance (http://www.blackfoodjustice.org (ac‐
cessed on 10 June 2022)), food apartheid is “the systematic destruction of Black self‐deter‐
mination to control one’s food, the hyper‐saturation of destructive foods and predatory
marketing, and the blatantly discriminatory corporate‐controlled food system that results
in (communities of color) suffering from some of the highest rates of heart disease and
diabetes of all time.” Therefore, food deserts do not simply emerge organically; they are
the product of deliberate, exclusionary practices and policies that restrict food access to
lower‐income (and predominantly Black and Latino/x) neighborhoods. This exclusion is
facilitated, in part, by a traditional food supply chain that distances residents from their
food. Despite calls to reframe food deserts as an outcome (rather than a cause) of structural
racism [12], research has been slow to realign its focus to the large‐scale drivers of food
inequity [25] and the equitable solutions that might overcome these drivers.
One solution that has been proposed to address food apartheid is a shift towards
local, community‐owned and operated food networks (i.e., food sovereignty). Food sov‐
ereignty describes “the right of local people to control their own food systems, including
markets, ecological resources, food cultures, and production modes” [26]. Food sover‐
eignty is an ongoing process in which necessary changes are pursued to achieve the state
of having food security [27–29]. Research on food sovereignty measures is limited within
the academic literature. However, supporting AFNs broadly, and urban agriculture spe‐
cifically, has been proposed as one pathway to achieving food sovereignty.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
3 of 17
1.1.2. Alternative Food Network Solutions
Research suggests that reframing and reconsidering how food is supplied to commu‐
nities is a potentially more fruitful strategy to lessen disparities across food environments
[16,28,30–33]. “AFNs” is a broad term that refers to local food producers and distributors
that facilitate more direct food access to consumers, which can include community gar‐
dens, urban/rural farms, farming cooperatives, farm‐to‐school programs, and farmer’s
markets [34,35]. While some efforts in this area have been criticized for not being fully
inclusive of lower‐income groups, other research suggests an alignment between alterna‐
tive food systems and food sovereignty values – cooperation, self‐determination, and food
justice [36–38]. For example, the Growing Food and Justice Initiative (GFJI) maintains that
food insecurity is a form of systematic racism; therefore, designing sustainable and equi‐
table food systems necessarily involves dismantling racism. These and other models of
cooperative farming (used for years across various contexts) may provide a more effective
and sustainable method to providing quality, health‐promoting foods in low‐access areas
[39–40]. One popular cooperative farming model is community‐supported agriculture
(CSA), a system where consumers (also called members) pay a small fee to a local farm in
exchange for fresh and healthy produce. Among members, CSAs have been found to in‐
crease fruit and vegetable consumption and improve household food environment [41].
Though similar, urban/rural farms and gardens that operate within so‐called food deserts
are not well‐studied. Part of this discordance is due to a lack of scholarship about com‐
munity‐run producer models, and to some extent, a de‐prioritization of local community
knowledge (i.e., community residents as experts in their own experiences in relation to
food systems), distorting perceptions of what food access actually looks like in urban food
environments [42–45].
1.2. Current Study
Generally, research finds that a lack of high‐quality, reasonably priced, healthy foods,
and reliable transportation are barriers to healthy eating in low‐access markets [46–55].
However, few of these studies have examined the potential utility of urban agricultural
markets in filling this gap [46,51,52,55]. Furthermore, economic variability and recent
events, including the global COVID‐19 pandemic, have led to greater challenges in food
security, particularly for marginalized and lower‐income groups [56]. Since these issues
are likely to be ongoing, understanding how proximity to alternative food outlets, such as
community gardens and urban farms, may alleviate hunger is important for informing
future research and policy interventions.
This paper uses a qualitative approach to explore the role of urban agriculture in
Baltimore, Maryland during the COVID‐19 pandemic. In a series of interviews with local
urban farmers, food advocates, city residents (i.e., food equity advisors), and academic
scholars, we examined urban farming cooperatives as “alternative food systems” to better
understand the potential these sources may hold for addressing food security in low‐ac‐
cess neighborhoods, particularly during times of extreme emergencies and scarcity. One
way to achieve food sovereignty is to build on the experiences, practices, and values of
community members by engaging their expertise about what food and food access means
in their lives [57]. Therefore, the guiding research question for this study was: What role
does urban agriculture play in facilitating food access in Baltimore City?
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
4 of 17
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area: Baltimore, MD, as a Case Study
Eighty‐six percent of Baltimore residents live in a limited‐supermarket access (LSA)
area, meaning that residents within LSA areas travel farther to reach supermarkets than
residents of non‐LSA areas. Additionally, the city is ranked first as an area in need of inter‐
vention(s) to ensure greater food access equity [58]. Baltimore is the largest city in the state
of Maryland, with a population of 585,708 as of April 2020; 62% of residents are Black/Afri‐
can American and 27.5% of residents are non‐Hispanic whites, the second largest racial
group [59]. The city’s poverty rate (20.0%) is higher than the national average (11.4%) and
the median household income is $52,164 (USD), nearly $15,000 less than the United States
average of USD $67,521 [59,60]. Approximately 57,500 Baltimore households receive assis‐
tance from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—24% of the total pop‐
ulation [61]. One in three high school students in Baltimore City is either obese or over‐
weight, and less than half eat at least one serving of vegetables a day [62].
2.2. Participants and Recruitment
Participants were recruited through direct outreach, internet recruitment (i.e., email,
social media posts), and snowball sampling. The qualitative framing of this study (e.g.,
phenomenology) determined the sampling approach. For example, phenomenological re‐
search recommends recruiting a sample of individuals that have experienced the phenom‐
enon under inquiry [63]. Therefore, following initial recruitment, criterion sampling was
applied to ensure that all study participants had some experience with (or close
knowledge of) the urban agricultural system in Baltimore [63].
The authors identified and contacted local activists, advocates, and scholars involved
in Baltimore food justice issues (the central topic of interest), and then invited participants
to schedule an in‐depth interview. Additional inclusion criteria required individuals to:
1) live/work in urban agriculture in Baltimore; or 2) conduct food justice work in the area.
Researchers identified participants across a range of sectors (e.g., community members,
academic researchers, and government officials). Fifteen individuals identifying as urban
farmers, community residents, leading academic scholars, or food equity advisors partic‐
ipated in the study. Food equity advisors are Baltimore residents who work collabora‐
tively with the city’s Department of Planning to create an equitable community food sys‐
tem. As with all research, the participants in this study were volunteers; therefore, the
representativeness and proportionality to the source community may not be exact.
All participants were over the age of 18, and either lived in Baltimore or conducted
food justice work in the city. Nine were urban farmers, three were food equity advisors,
two were academic scholars, and one was a former employee of the Baltimore City Health
Department. Nine participants identified as women and six identified as men. Ten partic‐
ipants identified as Black/African American (n = 10) and five identified as white (n = 5).
After obtaining informed consent, participants participated in semi‐structured qual‐
itative interviews virtually. All interviews were conducted between June 2020 and Febru‐
ary 2021 by both authors. Due to the timing of this study and COVID‐19 travel restrictions,
nearly all interviews were conducted via phone or online conferencing platform. Partici‐
pants were compensated with USD $30.00 for their participation.
2.3. Interviews
An interview protocol was developed by both authors to understand the role of local
urban agriculture and food access in the Baltimore city area. Interview questions asked
about definitions of the term “food desert,” perceptions of local food access, and the per‐
ceived role of urban farming in increasing food access to Baltimore community residents.
The interview approach was phenomenological and relational [64,65], meaning that re‐
searchers built a rapport with participants to understand the phenomenon under study,
as described by respondents with close knowledge about the topic. In other words,
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
5 of 17
participants were considered privileged sources of information. Thus, emphasis was
placed on understanding urban agriculture during the pandemic within a Baltimore con‐
text rather than eliciting right or wrong answers, or achieving generalizability [66].
The authors followed an inductive analysis approach to preserve the validity of the
data, and highlight the scope of food access inequality that participants either experienced
or observed as a consequence of COVID‐19 specifically, and generally across Baltimore
[67,68]. Interviews were structured to center participants’ narratives, including learning
about how they made meaning of their experiences rather than imposing a particular in‐
terpretation (i.e., by the researcher) [69].
2.4. Coding and Data Analysis
All interviews were read and coded by both authors. The researchers (BCF and HSV)
reviewed the audio and written transcriptions of the data, and recorded field notes. The
authors then used an open‐ended and iterative approach to coding [70,71]. Codes were
developed from text extracts, discussed, classified, organized into a codebook, and later
grouped into themes using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six‐phase thematic approach [71].
Inductive thematic analysis was used because of its flexibility in a variety of theoret‐
ical frameworks. Initial coding agreement was relatively high (κ = 89%) between the two
coders; disagreements about codes were discussed, resolved, and then re‐coded for sub‐
sequent rounds to establish consistency. We employed a combination “unit and focus
analysis” coding scheme, identifying recurring, major themes [72]. The four major themes
that emerged were: (1) food access inequality; (2) community empowerment; (3) health
promotion; and (4) environmental sustainability. Block quotes framing themes were iden‐
tified and extracted to characterize perceptions of food accessibility. To ensure participant
confidentiality, all names reported in the manuscript are pseudonyms.
2.5. Methodological Integrity
During data collection, interviewers recorded field notes on participants’ responses
and asked for clarification when necessary. These notes were referenced during coding and
data analysis to ensure accuracy. Researchers were also reflexive throughout, noting per‐
sonal connections to the subject matter and the ways in which this guided analysis. The
authors participated in debriefing sessions, discussing their own subjectivity in relation to
the study, as well as the best practices to ensure all findings were based within the data.
3. Results
Findings revealed that food access remains a challenge in Baltimore; a challenge that
was exacerbated due to the pandemic. Participants expressed four main themes in relation
to the perceived role of urban agriculture in facilitating food access and, to a larger extent,
food sovereignty. If supported, urban agriculture could: (1) address food access inequal‐
ity; (2) support community empowerment; (3) encourage health promotion; and (4) pro‐
vide sustainable access to healthy food.
3.1. Food Access Inequality
The most frequently mentioned theme across interviews was food access inequality.
Food access inequality was coded according to conventional definitions found in the lit‐
erature; participants mentioned inequality resulting from a sustained lack of resources
devoted to food equity across Baltimore—disparities that worsened during the COVID‐
19 pandemic. Therefore, in describing the role that urban agriculture plays in Baltimore
City, most participants discussed local farming and agriculture as an underexamined and
under‐resourced equity strategy. Within this broad theme, three subthemes emerged: sys‐
tematic racism, affordability, and distance to healthy food.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
6 of 17
3.1.1. Systematic Racism
When presented with prompts about why such stark food disparities exist across
neighborhood lines, several participants highlighted systematic racism as a primary
driver. For example, in response to the question, “What do you see as the primary chal‐
lenge(s) to food justice in Baltimore City?” Saundra, an academic researcher and Baltimore
resident, attributed differences in food access to long‐standing systematic issues that have
contributed to neighborhood disparities.
We didn’t just wake up one day and arrive at food insecurity, income insecurity,
no jobs, and a lack of access to quality food…we have the intersection of quite a
few pandemics at one time now. But the real pandemic is American apartheid,
segregation, inequality, and racism. America has been in crisis for 400 years.
(Saundra, Academic)
Drawing on her experiences as a Baltimore native and public health researcher, Saun‐
dra discusses how the current food system, rooted in neighborhood segregation, deprives
communities of the right to healthy food. These culminating crises, though made visible
by the pandemic, are not new. In relating disparities to potential solutions, Saundra em‐
phasizes the role of structural solutions (e.g., community co‐ownership of land) to correct
the legacy of structural racism in creating low food access for Baltimore residents.
Rodney, another academic researcher, describes how racism informed the planning
and design of Baltimore City. According to him, “Black and brown communities were
intentionally pushed” to the edges of society, where they lacked access to several needs,
including quality food.
The planning of the city was no accident …in the 1880s, it was one of the first
cities in the U.S. to do really explicit racialized zoning, and the Baltimore today
that we have is a result of that…We were complicit, as urban planners, in red‐
lining. The way our cities look is a direct result of urban planning. Not to say
urban planners are all racist, but it is to say that we have been using a toolkit
specifically designed by the white supremacist regime to segregate, to separate,
to discriminate, to differentiate. (Rodney, Academic)
Rodney highlights that the design of disparate neighborhoods that led to modern‐
day food deserts, were the result of decisions made to support residential segregation by
race and class. This process is the foundation of racial spatialization and restricted access
to basic resources, including food.
Reinforcing the idea that low‐access food areas are the result of racist toolkits and
policies, Rosslyn discusses how segregation impacts not only food, but also the health and
psychological well‐being of Black city residents.
Food apartheid is intentional violence—physical, emotional, mental violence to‐
wards Black and brown people…it makes it hard for people to eat healthy pro‐
duce, to grow healthy produce, and to be paid a living wage for their work.
(Rosslyn, Farmer)
The idea that a lack of access to food is a form of violence clearly outlines the drivers
(e.g., systemic racism) and consequences of disparate access. The inability to grow and eat
healthy food also aligns with a systems view of health and health disparities that food
impacts other areas of life. Rosslyn notes that urban agriculture can disrupt this process;
improving health through food that residents can grow themselves enables greater control
over the foods they eat, and in turn, their health. During the height of the COVID‐19 pan‐
demic, for example, Rosslyn mentioned that many residents turned to community pan‐
tries and churches for food relief, given the difficulties in purchasing food at traditional
supermarkets. Having limited control over food access meant primarily relying on tem‐
porary safety nets, such as charitable groups and community generosity.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
7 of 17
Monica, a Baltimore resident (and Food Equity Advisor), also discusses the role of
racial and economic determinants in shaping food access in Baltimore specifically, noting
a lack of diversity among local food providers in certain neighborhoods.
What attracts a supermarket in the area…is the income that people have…and
if there’s other businesses around. And…in Baltimore, if there’s a high concen‐
tration of Black people, there’s really not that many businesses; there’s only cor‐
ner stores, there’s only liquor stores, and it doesn’t really attract any businesses
but those. (Monica, Food Equity Advisor)
Similar to Rodney and Saundra’s emphasis on the role of structural drivers, Monica’s
reflection suggests why an overreliance on supermarkets is likely to be an ineffective strat‐
egy. Large‐scale food providers are less likely to open and operate in lower‐income neigh‐
borhoods, creating a system in which community residents must rely on external forces
to access food. Most participants discussed this as an unsustainable option, noting that an
overreliance on supermarkets is a primary factor in maintaining food deserts, whereas
urban agriculture is one way to begin to redress these issues, by relying on local options
to provide food.
3.1.2. Affordability
The second subtheme, affordability, was also mentioned as a major barrier to access‐
ing fresh and healthy food. SNAP benefits (e.g., food stamps) were discussed as important
to relieve some financial burden, especially during the pandemic, when SNAP recipients
could shop for food at selected online retailers. However, our participants noted that
SNAP is not necessarily available to everyone who needs it, and retail outlets that accept
SNAP continue to be limited.
There’s only one store [close by] that accepts EBT. There’s three different corner
stores on my block, so the one store that does accept EBT has a little bit of fresh
produce…they just don’t have the refrigeration. (Monica, Food Equity Advisor)
Monica points out the limits of relying on corner stores, often the only type of retail
outlet that sells food in a neighborhood. While one of her local corner stores does sell fresh
food and accepts SNAP, it is often limited in selection given the lack of refrigeration. Be‐
cause of this, residents who both rely on SNAP benefits and use corner stores as a primary
source of food are severely restricted in their food options.
The point about affordability was raised by several participants including Paula, an ur‐
ban farmer, who believes that the cost of food is a major issue to food security in Baltimore.
The issue remains of…how does a person without financial…resources get food?
And learn where [it] really comes from and how to grow it, so they’re not de‐
pendent upon fast food? (Paula, Farmer)
Paula’s response suggests that food cost and education should be aligned in a way
that shifts demand away from cheap, highly dense, fast food, and towards more healthy
options. The idea that healthy food is more expensive than fast food was raised as a central
reason to support local urban agriculture, since farms and gardens usually provide
cheaper produce and oftentimes give away free food.
Esther and Sasha, a food equity advisor and Baltimore resident, respectively, further
connect the points between food costs, quality, and decisions about food purchasing.
Sometimes there are substandard supermarkets close to where you live, so you
go to those substandard supermarkets and you’ll buy food. I’ve been to super‐
markets where you walk in and they smell, and I would not buy anything, but
then I look around and there’s so many people in there because they have no
choice. This is the closest thing to them, they have to buy there; they don’t have
anywhere else to go. (Esther, Food Equity Advisor)
I’ve noticed that a lot of low‐income markets are cheaper and more reasona‐
ble .…[but they] don’t care about [your] health. And a lot of high‐priced markets
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
8 of 17
that have good quality and fresh vegetables…do care about your health…but
it’s too expensive. There’s a Whole Foods…[where] a pack of hot dogs, the
cheapest is $3.99. And at Price Rite or Save‐a‐Lot you get them for 99 cents. So if
you want quality, you have to go with the high price. (Sasha, Food Equity Ad‐
visor)
Sasha’s comment reflects the tradeoff lower‐income residents often must make be‐
tween price and quality: high quality often comes at a higher price that is sometimes un‐
attainable. In this way, alternative options offered by community‐run gardens and farms
would address this issue, providing higher quality produce at lower prices.
3.1.3. Distance to Healthy Food
Finally, distance to healthy food emerged as a significant subtheme. In Baltimore,
lower‐income residents typically live further away from any grocery or retail food outlets
– healthy or otherwise. Across all interviews, participants discussed how a lack of trans‐
portation (e.g., car ownership) or physical disability can cause difficulty in traveling to a
supermarket, particularly when the closest one is over a mile away. For example, when
asked, “When did you first realize there were differences in food access in your commu‐
nity and other neighboring areas?” Esther discussed how a sudden change in mobility
made her better understand the challenges individuals with disabilities must go through
to obtain food.
Up until ten or twelve years ago when I lost my legs, I had a car, so it meant
nothing to go here, there, and everywhere to get food…I didn’t think about other
people and their hardships until only a couple of years ago…the challenges were
different…seeing the senior citizens or people with disabilities trying to navi‐
gate to a store, and the store is where? More than a mile away. (Esther, Food
Equity Advisor)
As Esther points out, traveling to supermarkets that are located over a mile away is
difficult for many people, including older adults with mobility limitations and/or those
with disabilities. In addressing this point, Tyler, a Baltimore City urban farmer, highlights
how a community garden located a few blocks away can provide closer access to food:
Where our farm is [located], the closest supermarket is at least a mile, maybe
two or three. So…an elderly person is taking two buses…it’s their whole day to
get to a supermarket. Or they’re paying someone an exorbitant amount of
money out of their budget…to go pick up stuff because they can’t. It’s inconven‐
ient for them to get to the store. (Tyler, Farmer)
The burden of transportation adds context to the notion of “access.” Whereas driving
to a supermarket may make living in a low‐access area easier, few families have that op‐
tion. According to several participants, taking multiple buses to get to a supermarket is a
necessity, “yet extremely time consuming.”
One of Tyler’s motivations in starting a local farm was to address this issue; he saw
a need for a healthy food source in the low‐access neighborhood where his farm is located.
The farm offers fresh seasonal food to residents on a sliding scale to maintain affordability.
Community residents volunteer at the farm; however, Tyler and his operational staff run
the farm year‐round. There is a need for additional farms and gardens in the area. This
need presents an additional challenge, since the availability of land is limited, and barriers
to owning land within the city limits are high.
Farmer Jimmy notes that bringing farms closer to residents is essential in reducing
the cost of food, directly addressing the issue of food inequality:
Most of Baltimore’s food is imported. It comes from California, Miami, outside
of the country and the surrounding counties…so we have to find a way to de‐
centralize the distribution, decentralize the storage, and decentralize the pro‐
cessing. If we are able to do that on our farm, then we’ll be able to create our
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
9 of 17
own food, create our own work, [and] manage our own resources. (Jimmy,
Farmer)
Jimmy raises the point that since most of Baltimore’s food is imported, transportation
costs lead to higher food prices for city residents. Growing and selling food locally sim‐
plifies some aspects of the food supply chain, making healthful foods less expensive and
within reach. All the urban farmers in our study noted that increasing access to fresh,
quality food in a low‐access neighborhood was their central reason for engaging in urban
farming.
3.2. Community Empowerment
Urban agriculture was cited as contributing to community empowerment. Commu‐
nity empowerment was coded by mentions of communities taking increased control over
systems responsible for food production and distribution. In this way, farms and gardens
served a functional need in providing an alternate outlet from which to purchase fresh
food. Across multiple interviews, participants discussed the importance of using agricul‐
tural knowledge to provide food for their neighbors and teach them about farming meth‐
ods. Two subthemes emerged: community control and instrumental support.
3.2.1. Community Control
The farmers in our study noted that urban agriculture played a central role in overall
community empowerment and self‐reliance, providing residents with an opportunity to
grow and take care of their own food.
Participants stated that investing in urban agriculture would be a more fruitful and
economically sustainable goal than attempting to attract supermarkets into the neighbor‐
hood. For example, Esther believes that community‐run urban gardens will one day be
widespread throughout Baltimore City, and if successful, the barriers of affordability and
distance will no longer prevent anyone from accessing fresh fruits and vegetables.
There’s a lot of soil, there’s a lot of abandoned houses in Baltimore City. Tear
them down, make a little garden where you plant food, and have the neighbors
tend to it, and then when it’s time for harvest, everyone can get it for free. It’s a
little far‐fetched, but it can happen. If people wanted to eat and eat good, there
are vegetables and fruits that we could plant right here in Baltimore that would
be successful, but everybody would have to want to come together and partici‐
pate. (Esther, Food Equity Advisor)
Esther highlights that limited options can be broadened with urban agriculture, pro‐
moting healthier eating by leveraging community and neighborhood resources, rather
than relying solely on supermarket solutions. One farmer, Lauren, says she recognized
this potential during the start of the pandemic, and is now using land she owns to feed
those in her community.
I met this guy who had just…adopted a vacant lot around the corner from my
house… and I was like, oh, that’s very cool…I just sort of took over…and now I
have a community garden here that I run…With COVID, all of a sudden we had
all this time and this property…We said, ”Let’s just go there every day and work
and do it and…anybody who wants to come and join and help us grow can.”
But also, people are allowed to take food whether or not they help us grow it.
(Lauren, Farmer)
Lauren’s actions speak to the recurring theme that urban farms and gardens are im‐
portant resources in the community, providing both opportunities for self‐sufficiency and
community control. In addition to making fresh food affordable and accessible, several
respondents discuss strengthening intergenerational community ties as important to
maintaining community engagement. For example, Esther highlights the role of children
as both teachers and learners of healthy food habits:
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12752
10 of 17
There is a program where they go to schools and teach the children how to pre‐
pare certain meals with vegetables the kids have probably never even heard of,
like zucchini. Some children have never seen what a zucchini looks like, but
there is a program where they…teach them how to cook it…then you give them
some to take home so they can show their parents how to cook it…teach them
while their minds are open and they’re willing to try something new. (Esther,
Food Equity Advisor)
Farmer Jimmy discusses similar outreach his farm does to include younger people,
hoping to instill an appreciation for farming.
Urban farms serve as a nucleus in communities when you talk about food secu‐
rity, bringing people together, and…addressing trauma. I really think urban
farmers and administrators should go above and beyond by providing support
for young people to be involved in urban farming…What we’re doing is we’re
creating our own work, managing our own resources, and we are feeding secu‐
rity by growing food with children for everyone in our community. (Jimmy,
Famer)
Jimmy believes that “by teaching children urban farming techniques while they are
young, they will grow up understanding their role in providing food for their communi‐
ties,” perhaps breaking the cycle of food insecurity, which he stated as a primary goal of
his work.
3.2.2. Instrumental Support
As a complementary theme to community control, participants spoke about the role
of urban agriculture in providing instrumental support, or a tangible solution to accessing
affordable, fresh food. Participants spoke about how urban agriculture fills a critical need
in the community, providing food to those who need it, and giving away food for those
who are unable to afford it. This was noted as especially important during the pandemic.
Framing food distribution in this way, as a basic need rather than a commodity, was raised
as a central reason why farmers started farming in the community in the first place. Tyler
says his farm donates produce to those in need since they often have a surplus:
Our farm partnered with a community organization and supplemented some of
the boxes that people were getting with like, collards, tomatoes, peaches, all free
of cost. So we grow all our food and we donate it all to people. We don’t have
any fences around our property, so neighbors can come and go as they please,
taking what they want. (Tyler, Farmer)
Tyler created a freely accessible space, open to the community, with a goal of provid‐
ing food to those in need. Unlike grocery stores, excess food on Tyler’s farm is not thrown
away, but given away, because profit is not the central goal.
3.3. Health Promotion
Improving community health was mentioned as a major goal and perhaps the great‐
est benefit of urban agriculture. Participants drew connections between using urban farm‐
ing to increase the control and supply of food, enabling communities to improve their
health. Regarding health promotion, most respondents discussed health education as a
main focus of their work. For example, Rodney detailed how nutrition influences the qual‐
ity of life and lifespan of low‐resourced communities.
We’ve got to look to nutrition because it is the contributor to life opportuni‐
ties…it’s a contributor to lifespan and quality of life, and in BIPOC (The term
POC refers to “people of color,” individuals in the United States of African,
Asian, Latin American, Middle Eastern, Arab, and/or Indigenous descent. BI‐
POC highlights specific intersections within POC groups, mainly the unique re‐
lationships Indigenous and Black (African American) people have within a U.S.