Sharing the load
Growing better community gardens, by Nolan Monaghan
Today’s piece from Nolan Monaghan, looking at ‘community gardens’ organised as individual plots (allotments in the UK) vs. a workshare model, has a US focus. Although the terminology and situation might not mirror exactly, I think the ideas introduced are interesting and something that I have done a little bit of thinking on too, aspects of which I explore in the chapter I wrote on Cultivating Community for the book This Allotment, which was published last year. In it I ask what it means to build community and relationality in whatever type of ‘garden’ we find ourselves in.
A workshare model, which Nolan discusses and which I think is distinct from what we would call a community garden in the UK, is not prevalent here. Examples that come to mind include Grow and Share in Devon and CoFarm in Cambridge. If anyone has any other examples it would be great to hear of them. It’s a way of organising and growing that I feel could be fruitful and fertile but don’t see many examples of where and how they could be easily replicated/sustainable/feasible (land/cost/funding etc being major issues ofc). I have left the comments open if you would like to share any ideas or examples.
Growing better community gardens, by Nolan Monaghan
Cities are one of the main drivers of human flourishing. They bring people from diverse backgrounds together to build novel communities. Metropolises allow for the shirking of social mores and the forging of subcultures in defiance of the more deferential culture of the countryside. There is a reason that urban areas give rise to innovative movements, be they technological (as with the computer revolution) or social (as with the gay rights movement).
A drawback of urban life, however, is alienation from the vegetated landscapes of rural areas and their nourishing fields, orchards, woodlands, meadows, and gardens. As our cities swelled throughout the Industrial Revolution, urbanities missing the call of the soil sought out alternatives. As a part of the effort to restore a semblance of nature and food production to urban life, community gardens in empty lots and parkland were established. Beginning in Detroit in the United States, the idea spread to neighborhoods across the world, returning the joys of gardening to millions of people.
There are two broad ways to organize a community garden. The individual plot model is fairly straightforward. A large tract of land is subdivided into a series of beds which are assigned to members, normally on a first come first serve basis. Generally, there is shared infrastructure: hoses, tools, and compost bins, available for members, but the core of the model is personal plots for individual households.
The alternative to individual plots is the workshare. Under this model, the whole garden is tended collectively. The details of how labor is organized, and produce is distributed, vary widely. Hours contributed may or may not be tracked, work periods may be scheduled in advance or operated on a ‘when you are available’ basis, and one’s share of produce may or may not be linked to hours worked. But the central idea is that the burdens and joys of gardening are shared among neighbors.
I find individual plot gardens to be something of a watered-down version of a private yard. Underlying this framework is the desire to achieve a facsimile of land ownership, reproducing the powers of total control afforded to landholders in our system of property. Everyone sowing their own seed, weeding their own rows, watering their own plants, and harvesting their own fruits. Within this model, there’s little space for coordination, which functionally hampers community building. Collective activity is reduced to what is logistically necessary, a distasteful bargain driven not by a desire for conviviality but by the limitations of space in a metropolitan environment.
This is a strength the workshare has over the individual plot model. In a workshare garden, activity is built around socialization. Sharing work naturally leads to more time spent in proximity with others, leading to greater linkages between people. There are more opportunities for building friendship, companionship, and general togetherness among neighbors. From this foundation, a renewed sense of goodwill among neighbors can arise.
Workshares can also make community gardening more accessible. Under the individual plot model, all the labor must come from the plot-holder. Given the distance a community garden may be from one's house, taking the time after a long day of work to water peppers or trellis beans can become a sizable effort, souring one's gardening experience. With a workshare alternative, however, labor could be divided in a manner that provides more flexibility. Tasks could be built around individual schedules. If one doesn’t have to think about watering every day, they may be more inclined to join, increasing access. A single mom may not be able to handle a plot of their own but might be able to dedicate a Sunday afternoon every week.
Here in St. Louis, almost every community garden operates on the individual plot model, and I would hazard a guess that most in the western world do as well. In an age of increasing social isolation, this is a missed opportunity for connection-building. I’m sure many social bonds have been built in individual plot gardens, but I think community gardens would be even more powerful forces of socialization if the workshare model were more widely adopted. In a perfect world, both would be available to meet a diversity of individual needs and situations (introverts deserve to feel comfortable in our gardens as well!) but to do that, the workshare model needs to spread more to cities and towns across the country. If done so, it would be a boon for community building across the country.
Nolan Monaghan is a recent graduate of the University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry where he studied the agronomy and nutrient dynamics of perennial polycultures. He writes about agroecology, circular sustainability, and human cooperation on his blog, Headwaters.
Nolan is being paid for this article.
Photo credit: Sui Searle
Thanks for presenting this topic! I have participated in both workshare and individual plot urban community gardens and I will say my preference leans toward the individual plot model. Mainly because inevitably someone or a small group has to take on a leadership role in the workshare model which requires a lot of coordinating and picking up the slack when the members with less capacity can't contribute. In my case it lead to an off kilter dynamic and those who put in the most work became tired. I'm sure there are structures that could be put in place to avoid this, but we never quite figured it out. I love my current individual plot because I can interact with my neighbors but I don't have to coordinate with them. And everyone can garden in there own style and method without compromise. I end up spending hours just talking to people at my garden.
When I lived in Portland, Oregon there was a nonprofit called the Urban Farm Collective. Thier model was to make a collective of urban gardens around town and each garden would grow a few select crops. Then every week there would be a "market" where those gardens came together and traded food. Volunteers would receive "slug" tokens for evey hour they worked that they could use to "buy" produce at the market. It worked really well! And everyone got a variety of produce without having to grow everything. They eventually closed due to the struggles of running a non- profit, but I think this could be replicated on a lot of scales.
I work for a community organisation in Montreal: while we offer several food related program to our participants, we also run community and collective gardens. Our community garden program is run in conjunction with the city, whereby they give access to the land, provide basic infrastructure, and we have a staff member who manages registrations, gardener conflicts, assign garden plots, etc.
Our collective gardens are run by another staff member, also on city land, but also private land. A team of garden animators oversee each garden, and schedule garden time during which participants who signed up can come in to share the workload. While garden time schedule is decided before the start of the season, almost every other decision is made collectively by the participants: once registered and assigned to a garden, they choose the crops they want to grow, and harvests are shared evenly between the people who showed up on the day. Some of the more die hard gardeners may choose to come in on unsupervised days. All participants contribute to the extent of their capacity. Some of the gardeners also choose to share the harvest with our community kitchen or our food bank.
Our organization is extremely lucky that we are large enough to have a talented urban ag team to manage these gardens.