Moving dirt: soil,lead, and the dynamic spatial politics of urban gardening

Urban gardens are often heralded as places for building social, physical, and environmental health. Yet they are also sites of significant conflict based on competing political, economic, and ecological projects. These projects range from radical re-envisionings of liberatory urban spaces, reformist aesthetic and sanitary improvement programmes, to underwriting the production of the neo-liberal city. These projects are based on divergent visions of the garden ground itself, in particular, whether this is soil (the fertile and living source for growing food and social values) or dirt (an inert and even problematic substrate to be removed or built upon for development purposes). These are not fixed or mutually exclusive categories, but are unstable as soil/dirt moves in discursive and material ways over time and space. Contaminants such as lead in the soil contribute to this instability, reframing fertile soil as dangerous dirt. To understand this discursive and material movement of soil/dirt over time and space, a dynamic spatial politics framework is needed that encompasses three scalar concepts: location, duration, and interconnection. This paper applies this dynamic spatial politics framework to interpret the 30-year conflict over the fate of an urban garden in Sacramento, California, that began as a countercultural space and was eventually transformed into a manicured amenity for a gentrifying neighbourhood, and the role of soil lead contamination in this narrative.