Keller et al.: Land Trusts and Diversity

In Land for Whom? Diversity, Land Trusts, and Farmers and Gardeners from Marginalized Backgrounds in New England, Julie C. Keller (Sociology and Anthropology, University of Rhode Island), Blake Harrison (Political Science, University of Rhode Island), and Corey Lang (Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, University of Rhode Island) explores the extent to which land trusts in New England have been able to meet the needs of farmers and gardeners of marginalized backgrounds.

Recognizing that land trusts have played an important role in conservation efforts over the last few decades and that they can benefit beginning farmers by facilitating the purchase of affordable farmland, the authors nonetheless noted that little research has been done about who benefits and who is excluded from these efforts. To answer this question, the authors gathered data from two main sources. First, interviews were conducted among 17 staff members of 15 New England land trusts to illuminate how land trusts discuss diversity and land access. Second, nine focus groups were conducted with 38 rural and urban current or aspiring farmers and gardeners from diverse backgrounds to identify their needs and explore their interactions with land trusts.

The authors found a disconnect between land trusts and the needs of current and aspiring farmers and gardeners from marginalized backgrounds. While land trusts increasingly focus on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts, these programs are positioned as separate from existing land trust organizational structures rather than a fundamental reorganization of land trust priorities and mission statements.

Two themes emerged. The first was a practical critique – land trusts were not meeting farmers' everyday needs in terms of access to adequate, affordable land. For example, plot sizes were insufficient to support families nutritionally or financially while bigger plots required hours of travel, making it impractical for the community.

The second theme was a structural critique – power imbalances within conservation policies resulted in uneven benefits, especially given the lack of racial diversity among land trust board and staff. The result is that resources are directed toward residents of White, wealthy towns over urban, poor cities.

The authors encourage land trusts to continue integrating DEI work into their strategic planning by revisiting mission statements and diversifying board and staff. The authors hope that future scholarships will focus on public evaluations of land trusts and the extent to which land trusts serve diverse community interests.