Building a Food Secure City: Gentrification in New York

New York is a city that prides itself in having a diverse constituency of ethnic enclaves, vibrant street culture and a powerful economy with a competitive edge, attracting not only an eclectic population, but millions of tourists each year. The diversity of this city has been created by the intersecting cultures that residents claim as home, while they grow and establish a sense of community in the spaces that they occupy. There is an obvious link between urban design and food culture that have influenced the way that New York residents grow, purchase, consume and prepare their food. It is necessary that the two entities of infrastructure and food intersect in a way that not only enhances the level of food security within the city but ensures that the integrity of the spaces that has been built up for decades is maintained. I will be exploring infrastructure in New York City and how it relates to food security experienced by residents, bridged by the reality of gentrification.

Gentrification is a process that follows the financial flow, safety and convenience of the most affluent within a community. As capital begins to flow into low-income neighbourhoods, typically urban centres, such spaces become more desirable to higher income residents, driving up the market value and displacing original owners from their homes. The vibrant street culture created by original owners become “trendy” to newcomers. The infrastructure that over decades adapted to meeting the needs of the people who designed the space is transitioned into high-rise condominiums and chain-based marketplaces. The mom and pop restaurants that are the building blocks and social hubs of communities acclaimed for their diversity and authenticity are slowly phased out by owners who are no longer able to afford their rent.

Brooklyn resident and high school geography teacher Tim Evans shares that the state of New York is experiencing a reverse effect of urbanism as it was in the fifties and sixties. Throughout these decades, white urbanites escaped the city in search of a safer neighbourhood to raise their families, fleeing to the suburbs and leaving an underclass of urban poor within the city centres. Alongside this trend of migrating urbanites, Manhattan and Brooklyn lost half of their grocery stores between 1970 and 1998, proving the success that suburban residential developments had on attracting middle class wealthy residents. Fast-forward to today, and affluent families are moving into cities as it become a trendier and a safer place for families to live. This pushes out the people of colour who had years to establish their communities within the urban cores that they were forced into decades prior. When analyzing the profiles of such communities, it is clear that the inequity of wealth distribution throughout the country favours the incoming rich who are predominantly white. Evans concludes that New York City is threatened by gentrification. If this situation is left unchecked and unregulated, New York will become a “whiter” city, threatening the diverse foundation the state has been built on.

This pattern of accommodating the rising upper and middle class translates to the city’s evolving food culture and adaptation to peri-urban spaces. Gentrification ultimately changes the development of food landscapes by influencing the retailers that control the space and define what the city’s “food culture” is. This issue is much more complex than the end product for consumers, food, which is why I am taking the time to emphasize the implications that grassroots development patterns such as depreciating land value has on overall food security. The gaps that are created between existing and potential land values are generated by inadequate policies that devalue land, decrease competitive advantage for original dwellers and encourage developers to buy in density and bulk. With the large gap that is created between existing and potential land values, large scale corporations and gentrifiers are able to take advantage of the cheap land and remarket such spaces as “profitable” for new investors. Hiding behind marketing jargon such as “revitalization projects” is a form of supermarket greenlining, where food retailers are able to upsell their products as “healthy” and “environmentally conscious” to higher income consumers while simultaneously gentrifying the area. This is called the “Whole Foods Effect,” which signals that a community is changing, resulting in an increase in neighbouring property values. A study released by Zillow, a NYC realty agency reveals that a typical home near a Whole Foods or Trader Joes markets for twice as much as the median U.S. home. As expensive food retailers move in and rent prices increase, longstanding residents are pressured with having to spend a higher percentage of their income on just affording their homes, having less money to spend on healthy foods, therefore reducing their level of household food security. This creates a “food mirage,” where abundant and high-quality foods become inaccessible and considered a luxury good. The ramifications of this leave low income communities with limited purchasing power and autonomy over their own neighbourhoods.

The City University of New York Urban Food Policy Institute (CUFNY) shares in a policy briefing document that it is the responsibility of the municipal government to be held accountable for the consequences of gentrification and become more involved in the solution of building a food secure city. It is imperative to build a city that functions on the pillars of adapting to a circular metabolism. This means that every output in a system is used in another creative way as an input in another part of the system. For example, the collection of storm water typically seen as waste can be revitalized as an input for food irrigation and production. Recycling is integral to build a healthy and food secure city, and this concept can transcend beyond physical elements and be adapted to intellectual or land capital. For example, farming in cities can be considered by reassessing land sanctions such as outdated zoning laws, which can allow for existing vacant spaces to be transformed into agriculture centres. When we begin to find the solution to our problems with the resources that we already have and develop practises that do not compromise the availability of such resources for future generations, then we are committing to building a food secure city. The CUNFY also suggests that food policy developers expand their planning process beyond the food industry, to also be inclusive of other city organizations that influence development such as housing and economic departments. They recommend collaborating with leading housing organizations to advocate for revising rent regulations, protection for tenants who live in a neighbourhood prone to gentrification and an increased access for residents in need of public housing. From an economic perspective, the CUFNY suggests that community developers are negotiated with to ensure that essential services that satisfy community food needs such as grocery stores, community garden spaces and kitchens as well as public spaces are not undermined by large corporate developers.

When we turn to more local solutions and allow the community to negotiate the future of its infrastructure, we support sustainable designs that are conducive to strengthening their city and building resilience. One goal that all members of a community share, regardless of class, colour, creed or political beliefs is the desire for resilience. A resilient city is able to overcome adversity and absorb shock into its system while maintaining the same functions, structures, systems and identity that is has worked so hard to sustain. When a city is hit with an unprecedented crisis or any disruption from normalcy, it is the expectation that municipal leaders be held accountable for maintaining order and that the most vulnerable within the population are accounted for. For example, in light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, we turn to our government to guide us, healthcare services to take care of us, and our food system to keep us functioning at our maximum potential. Our healthcare system is currently overburdened with escalating levels of diagnoses, facing a shortage of beds for the sick and personal protective equipment for hospital staff. In response to such crisis, mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio recently designated tents along the East Meadow near Fifth Avenue and 99th street across from Mt. Sinai Hospital to be used as an overflow “mobile medical centre.” Concerns arise if patients admitted to such emergency hospital setups will be treated equally and receive the same attention and care as more privileged members of the population. It is clear that the current infrastructure is insufficient to accommodate the medical needs of the most vulnerable. To be more prepared for the future, we need to take the focus off of profit and redelegate our energy towards strengthening our communities with grassroots initiatives and inclusive policies.

Policies need to be developed with a holistic approach that tackles poverty eradication and protection of the urban environment, while promoting a healthy lifestyle. We need to take an integrative approach towards system reform and reflect on how the structure of our policies either help or hinder the ability for all families to be food secure. The ecological public health model envisions a strategy where community health is improved by equipping people with the tools that they need to make informed decisions about their own well-being. It encourages healthy relationships between nutritional patterns and the city’s developmental goals. Implementing programs that offer dietary education and guidelines that are contextualized to the culturally significant and accessible foods found in the urban core is a great place to start. Another example of healthy relationship building is the promotion of increasing fresh fruits and vegetables within one’s diet. Offering farmers markets in low-income areas is one way that communities can have a more accessible and reliable food supply, without having the barrier of long-distance transportation. GROW NYC is an organization founded in 1976 that acts as a resource to promote regional agriculture by providing small farms with the opportunity to sell their products at local farmers markets and connect the local population to fresh and affordable foods. By linking social justice and environmental sustainability goals, the Greenmarket aims to educate people on healthy food acquisition, the importance of fair trade, seasonality and commensality. They are an excellent model in promoting food security, offering Fresh Food Boxes for community members, education programs to learn more about what’s in season, how to grow your own foods, as well as information on how federal SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits can be used to purchase food at the market. According to a recent study, 9.5 million families qualify for SNAP, the largest program working to fight hunger in America. This collaboration between GROW NYC and SNAP is an excellent example of how the food system and government need to work in tandem to tackle the state of a food secure city. Promoting and encouraging the development of infrastructure that brings all members of a community together during an era of gentrification will ultimately forecast its future identity.

“The planning of cities cannot be confined to “housing, work, recreation, and circulation,” the standard planner’s definition. The whole city must rather be conceived mainly as a theatre for active citizenship, for education, and for a vivid and autonomous personal life” (Pothukuchi, 2000). This quote calls upon all community members to recognize the impact that their actions have on maintaining identity and a sense of city-wide food security. Food issues are an essential service and public good that transcends the demand of a highly manipulated market. Authentic revitalization projects require holistic planning and projects that go beyond the physical environment to incorporate social justice and the integrity of the city’s diverse culture. Lifelong Brooklyn resident Malika Giddens shares, “gentrification is not wanting to visit the place you grew up in because there’s nothing left you can relate to. Gentrification is seeing the store owners you love lose their businesses. It is efforts being made to satisfy the comforts of new neighbours at the expense of original dwellers” (2015). A transforming city is inevitable, but the way in which we do it means the difference between healthy restoration versus becoming obsolete. When we involve the people of the community in the solution, we protect our city’s moral principles of committing to positive change for all. When we develop progressive and integrative food policies in context to the evolving needs of New York City residents and direct more attention towards local strategies that enhance community engagement, we ensure a more equitable landscape for everyone.