IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/5qpa6.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Use-Based Welfare: Property Experiments in Chicago, 1895-1935

Author

Listed:
  • Ela, Nate

    (American Bar Foundation)

Abstract

Use-based welfare achieves redistribution by reallocating rights to use and benefit from idle resources, rather than via tax and transfer. How and why has this form of welfare provision emerged as an urban institution, and what affects whether it endures? This article compares projects to grant poor and unemployed Chicagoans access to land for gardens and small farms between 1895 and 1935, explaining how this form of social support came about through experiments with rules, norms, and forms of property. While social policy is typically understood as emerging through the realization of rights to public support, use-based welfare turns instead on efforts to create a legal privilege for the needy to use idle resources. During the Progressive Era and the Great Depression, this form of relief was pitched as both an alternative and a complement to welfare based on tax and transfer. Yet efforts to establish it as a permanent institution repeatedly failed, due to implementation challenges, opposition from people committed to treating land and food as commodities, and the non-emergence of a social movement to defend land access. Recognizing the historical dynamics of use-based welfare offers a new perspective on the contemporary resurgence of urban farming as a strategy for addressing unemployment and poverty.

Suggested Citation

  • Ela, Nate, 2018. "Use-Based Welfare: Property Experiments in Chicago, 1895-1935," SocArXiv 5qpa6, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:5qpa6
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/5qpa6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5bedb7ca7ef59f0018f3b0a1/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/5qpa6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patricia Allen, 2008. "Mining for justice in the food system: perceptions, practices, and possibilities," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(2), pages 157-161, June.
    2. Ioan Voicu & Vicki Been, 2008. "The Effect of Community Gardens on Neighboring Property Values," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 241-283, June.
    3. Hillary Angelo & David Wachsmuth, 2015. "Urbanizing Urban Political Ecology: A Critique of Methodological Cityism," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 16-27, January.
    4. Mario Luis Small, 2007. "Is there such a thing as 'the ghetto’?," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 413-421, December.
    5. Levitsky, Sandra R., 2014. "Caring for Our Own: Why There is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199993130.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alana Siegner & Jennifer Sowerwine & Charisma Acey, 2018. "Does Urban Agriculture Improve Food Security? Examining the Nexus of Food Access and Distribution of Urban Produced Foods in the United States: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Sofya Aptekar & Justin S. Myers, 2020. "The tale of two community gardens: green aesthetics versus food justice in the big apple," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(3), pages 779-792, September.
    3. Pushpa Arabindoo, 2020. "Renewable energy, sustainability paradox and the post-urban question," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(11), pages 2300-2320, August.
    4. Berta Morata & Chiara Cavalieri & Agatino Rizzo & Andrea Luciani, 2020. "Territories of Extraction: Mapping Palimpsests of Appropriation," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(2), pages 132-151.
    5. Sara A. L. Smaal & Joost Dessein & Barend J. Wind & Elke Rogge, 2021. "Social justice-oriented narratives in European urban food strategies: Bringing forward redistribution, recognition and representation," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(3), pages 709-727, September.
    6. Zahirovich-Herbert, Velma & Gibler, Karen M., 2014. "The effect of new residential construction on housing prices," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-18.
    7. Michal Shur‐Ofry & Ofer Malcai, 2021. "Collective action and social contagion: Community gardens as a case study," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 63-81, January.
    8. Byron Miller & Samuel Mössner, 2020. "Urban sustainability and counter-sustainability: Spatial contradictions and conflicts in policy and governance in the Freiburg and Calgary metropolitan regions," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(11), pages 2241-2262, August.
    9. Roberta Sonnino & Helen Coulson, 2021. "Unpacking the new urban food agenda: The changing dynamics of global governance in the urban age," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(5), pages 1032-1049, April.
    10. Enwei Zhu & Stanislav Sobolevsky, 2018. "House Price Modeling with Digital Census," Papers 1809.03834, arXiv.org.
    11. George Martin & Roland Clift & Ian Christie, 2016. "Urban Cultivation and Its Contributions to Sustainability: Nibbles of Food but Oodles of Social Capital," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-18, April.
    12. Yun‐chien Chang, 2011. "An Empirical Study of Court‐Adjudicated Takings Compensation in New York City: 1990–2003," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 384-412, June.
    13. Carrie Chennault & Laura Klavitter & Lynn Sutton, 2019. "Visceral Encounters: A Political Ecology of Urban Land, Food, and Housing in Dubuque, Iowa," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-25, April.
    14. Kelly J. Hodgins & Evan D. G. Fraser, 2018. ""We are a business, not a social service agency." Barriers to widening access for low-income shoppers in alternative food market spaces," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(1), pages 149-162, March.
    15. Manoj Misra, 2018. "Moving away from technocratic framing: agroecology and food sovereignty as possible alternatives to alleviate rural malnutrition in Bangladesh," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 473-487, June.
    16. Delores Conway & Christina Li & Jennifer Wolch & Christopher Kahle & Michael Jerrett, 2010. "A Spatial Autocorrelation Approach for Examining the Effects of Urban Greenspace on Residential Property Values," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 150-169, August.
    17. Stefano Cellini & Francisco Nobre, 2023. "Business Improvement Districts and Housing Markets: Evidence from Neighborhoods in London," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0523, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
    18. Niblick, Briana & Landis, Amy E., 2016. "Assessing renewable energy potential on United States marginal and contaminated sites," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 489-497.
    19. Hefeng Wang & Yishao Shi & Anbing Zhang & Yuan Cao & Haixin Liu, 2017. "Does Suburbanization Cause Ecological Deterioration? An Empirical Analysis of Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, January.
    20. Chihsin Chiu, 2020. "Theorizing Public Participation and Local Governance in Urban Resilience: Reflections on the “Provincializing Urban Political Ecology” Thesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-12, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:5qpa6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.