The New Victory Garden

the new victory garden
Royal Horticultural Society Dissertation

Wisley Diploma in Practical Horticulture
©2007
Sandra Spudić
Wisley Diploma in Practical Horticulture January 2007

Wisley Diploma in Practical Horticulture The New Victory Garden
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Introduction
Victory Gardens Revisited ______1
Section One
1.0 ‘Allotment’ or ‘Leisure Garden’ ______2
Section Two
2.0 A Brief Evolutionary History of Allotments and their Legislation ______4
2.1 Allotment-holdings and Legislation from the 17th to 19th Century ______4
2.2 Allotment Holdings and Legislation of the 20th Century ______5
2.3 'Dig for Victory' - A National investment into Allotment Holdings ______7
2.4 'Back-to-the-Land' - A post war Renaissance of Allotment Gardens ______10
2.5 Allotment Numbers between the 19th and 20th Centuries ______11
Section Three
3.0 Modern Allotment Holdings + the Alternatives ______12
3.1 Community Gardens ______13
Culpeper Community Garden, Case Study
3.2 City Farms ______15
Vauxhall City Farm, Case Study
Section Four
4.0 Allotment holdings : an Expression of Sustainable Development ______17
4.1 Understanding Sustainability + UK Policy on Sustainable Development ______17
4.2 An initiative towards sustainability ______18
Conclusion
A New Victory Garden ______20
R e f e r e n c e s ______21
Li s t of Il l u st ra t io n s a nd R efe renc e s ______22
Appendices
Ap pend ix A: Al lo tmen t s Legi s la t i on fo r t he Pe riod 19 08 to 1 95 0
Ap pend ix B : Ca teg o ri e s of A ll ot me n t Sit es
Ap pend ix C: Ri o D ecla ra tion
Sandra Spudic, January 2007©

Acknowledgements
The work of David Crouch, professor of Cultural Geography, Anglia University UK; Geography and
Tourism, Univeristy of Karlstad, Sweden, was of tremendous help during the research of this
dissertation. His dedication to allotment holding, and extolling the cultural value these vibrant places
have was a continual inspiration.
Thank you to Roberto Veri for his strategic ‘tweaking’ and commentary, Nuala A. Madden for her
meticulous editing and questioning and Marijana Hinton for her continual support and reassurance.

Victory Gardens Revisited
In 1941, the United Kingdom, in the thick of war, launched an intrepid campaign. The predecessor of
this campaign was a product of The Great War, and was practiced throughout much of the
Commonwealth and the United States to decrease the demands on the public food supply brought
on by the war effort. The campaign, dubbed 'Dig for Victory', encouraged British subjects to put
hand to spade as a means of fighting Nazi forces through self-sufficiency and the conscientious use
of local food resources. In addition to aiding the war effort, The Victory Garden became the most
renown civil "morale booster": gardeners were empowered by their contribution of labour and
rewarded by the produce grown.
The Ministry of Agriculture, in conjunction with the wartime Ministry of Information, created a
number of slogans, posters and mascots to help spread and enforce the message of economic food
use and local farming. As a result, allotment gardens saw re-popularisation, and agricultural
opportunities were made of every available piece of vacant land. The campaign successfully
prevented food shortages; it also educated a generation of British citizens in the benefits of self-
sufficiency. The Victory Garden allotment transformed into a popular hobby, after wartime prudence
and self-reliance was no longer of dire necessity.
More than sixty years on, as we face several ecological crises, a re-examination of the ‘Dig for
Victory’ campaign is in order. The recent renewal of interest in community gardening, as well as the
growth of the relatively new urban agricultural movement, could be of great benefit to modern
urban society. With the backing of a powerful government initiative, the benefits of a widespread
modern urban allotment campaign could be immeasurable. Such benefits could include a cleaner
urban environment, greater ecological conscientiousness, therapeutic mental and physical exercise,
greater social interaction and cooperation, low-cost rehabilitation programmes, and affordable
children’s workshops.
The Government should seek to exploit this popular past time and shape it into a national
campaign for health and ecological sustainability. By encouraging local initiatives in communities
that are open to an allotment programme, the prudence and collective knowledge of the allotment
generations could greatly enrich the generations of tomorrow.
Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 1

1.0 ‘Allotment’ or ‘Leisure Garden’
Allot men t, a.k. a.: fi eld ga rd en , c ott ag e gard en, gard en

g roun d, p ot at o, s mall- h o ldi ng , lei s ur e
gard en, pleasure gard en,
g ui ne a g ar d en
In 1964, allotments were brought under scrutiny. The Wilson government, in response to increased
pressure on urban land and rising market prices, established the short-lived Ministry of Land and
Natural Resources. One of its first projects was to commission a Departmental Committee of Inquiry
into Allotments. The objectives of the committee were to review the general policy on allotments in
light of conditions in England and Wales and to recommend what changes (i.e. legislative or
otherwise) were necessary (Crouch, Ward, 1997). The committee, chaired by the late Harry Thorpe,
professor of geography at the University of Birmingham, reported in 1969; however, now to a different
department.
The report of the Departmental Committee of Inquiry into Allotments, more commonly referred to
as the ‘Thorpe report’, outlined 44 recommendations that were based on two propositions. The first
was that legislation up until that point was vague, outdated, confusing, and in dire need of revision
by one new act (Crouch, Ward, 1997). The second questioned the suitability of the word ‘allotment’
as a signifier for modern allotment practice; it suggested that the term had a ‘stigma of charity’
about it, reminiscent of bygone rural oppression and warfare. Thorpe proposed that ‘allotments’ be
replaced by the concept of ‘leisure gardens’, which included an improvement and upgrading of
sites as recreational family facilities, similar to the examples admired by the committee in other
European countries.
The latter suggestion caused considerable upset and triggered debate. Traditional allotment
holders, who viewed their plots as meaningful opportunities for cultivation, requiring dedication and
hard work, objected to the whimsy the word ‘leisure’ implied. The new term articulated a shift in
allotment gardening – from a vital manoeuvre to mere recreation. ‘Allotment’, however, remains the
most common signifier, leaving the resolution of a new working definition to be considered.
In The Allotment Movement in England, 1793-1873, Jeremy Burchardt provides two definitions for
the term. The first simply states that allotments are “…small plots of land used for vegetable and soil
production.” The second holds that allotments are “A plot of land, not attached to a house, in a
field divided into similar plots, surrounded by a common external fence but without internal
partitions”. In legal terms, an allotment is defined as “A plot not exceeding 40 poles (1000 square
metres) in extent which is wholly or mainly cultivated by the occupier for the production of
vegetables and fruit crops for consumption by himself and his family.” (Allotments Act (1922), Section
22.1).
Of the three definitions, the first remains the most commonly used. It states, most simply, what the
historical purpose of allotment holding has been: the right to individual land access for cultivation. In

essence, allotments continue to serve this purpose. However, where the definition falls short is its
failure to incorporate contemporary allotment practice. Allotments have become dynamic
horticultural centres. Healthy communities, as well as produce, are being cultivated. Allotments
contribute to the beautification of neighbourhoods and create valuable urban green space. A new
working definition should classify allotments as sites of vibrant community activity, designated for the
purpose of agricultural cultivation and education, and which contribute to the overall beautification
and ecological value of urban areas.

2.0 A Brief Evolutionary History of Allotments and their Legislation
2.1 Allo tment- ho ldi ng s a nd Leg is lat io n f ro m th e 17 t h to 1 9 t h Ce n tu r i e s
Historically, the provision of allotments has always been somewhat contentious, inextricably linked to
the struggle against poverty. Before the Norman invasion, land was viewed as a communal resource
and managed accordingly: individuals were responsible for their own small plots, while popular crops
were grown as a collective. This form of egalitarian land management (somewhat predictive of the
communist ideal), worked reasonably well in providing enough food for the masses. However, the
arrival of the Norman Empire put an end to this practice with the introduction of the feudal system.
Land was appropriated by noblemen, and those wishing to use it for agricultural purposes were
allotted a smallholding at the discretion of the landlord. Farmers, or tenants, were taxed heavily to
use the land, and they were required to hand over a percentage of their crops to their feudal lords.
What followed was the establishment of deer parks-- large formal gardens, and financial
opportunities in husbandry and fodder introduced a series of local Enclosure Acts that allowed
noblemen to legally reclaim their rights to the land, to terminate tenancies with little compensation,
and to render the tilling of common land illegal.
Initial resistance to the process of enclosure was futile, but it gained strength as starvation and
hunger infuriated the dispossessed. A protest group, known as
the Diggers and led by the fervent Quaker Gerrard Winstanley,
believed that the land should be equitably dispersed. In 1649,
the group set up a colony on St George's Hill in Surrey to
remonstrate against the enclosures. Despite their ardent efforts,
the local landowner quickly put down their rebellion and
destroyed their crops and lean-tos. Interestingly, these
demonstrations resulted in the drafting of The Riot Act (1715) to
prevent – and punish - further insurgence. This act empowered
landowners, with the support of the army, to remove protestors
from their land using force as necessary. Furthermore, The Black Acts (1723) outlined 50 new capital
offences against anti-enclosure riots, making protest that much more perilous. Nevertheless, the
protests continued as starvation proved a more immediate threat.
As the enclosure situation escalated, cities ballooned with the influx of displaced tenants looking
for work. As a result, resources in urban areas were strained. In areas where a strip of common land
was available, it was possible for workers to cultivate the land in order to supplement their meagre
wages. However, such an opportunity was temporary and at the mercy of local authorities. Many
employers and landowners feared that by allowing the freedom of cultivation, employees would
develop independence and become remiss in their job duties; thus, many of them doled out
allotments grudgingly. An 1843 government report on allotments confirms this situation, stating that
allotment provision "should not become an inducement to neglect his usual labour, and therefore
the allotment should be of no greater extent that can be cultivated during the leisure moments of

the family" (Crouch, Ward, 1997). This passage also reveals the changing perception of poverty: it
was no longer viewed as an inevitable condition of society, dealt out to the unfortunate, but a
situation that could be improved through personal initiative. Even though land was grudgingly
distributed, the legislation governing it was "landlord and tenant", which meant that final favour
rested with the party of greater authority and implied a condition of servitude for the people tilling
the soil. Until 1845, the only regulations concerning the provision of allotments were the Poor Laws.
They ensured that where no common land was available, churchwardens had the authority to
provide it. However, a legislative resolution was achieved: The General Enclosure Act (1845) was
established, ending the practice of enclosure and making rudimentary allotment provision for the
'labouring poor' mandatory. Unfortunately, the act did not specify the size, extent, workability or
proximity of the land to be allotted, nor did it limit the amount of rent that a landowner could
charge.
The introduction of The General Enclosure Act(1845) is regarded historically as the formal inception
of the allotment movement and the age-old struggle over land. Despite its attempt to improve
available land, the act was met with some disapproval. Local cooperative groups felt it would
jeopardise their holdings and survival, while urban dwellers feared it would reduce the amount of
recreational countryside. Debate about the act continued, and The Allotment Act (1887), later
amended by the Act of 1890, was established, securing the compulsory provision of allotment
holdings for the labouring poor.
2.2 Allo tmen t Ho ld in g s a nd L egi s la t io n of t he 20 t h Ce nt u ry

The debate over allotments continued well into the 20th century, causing political unrest over the
responsibility and conditions of allotment provision. Up until the 1900s, allotments were controlled by
wealthy landowners and designated for the labouring poor. There was little legislation concerning
the qualitative or quantitative conditions of allotted holdings. However, the situation improved
considerably with the passing of the Small Holdings and Allotments Act (1908) (refer to Appendix A). It
repealed and consolidated previous legislation, establishing the framework for modern allotment
legislation and shifted the responsibility of allotment provision to local authorities. It dictated that
allotments had to be provided where such a need was expressed, and it empowered local
authorities to purchase land where it could not be obtained through private agreement. However,
the designation of allotments was still restricted to 'the labouring population' and remained so until
1919 when the Land Settlement Facilities Act opened up allotment holding to everyone, chiefly in an
effort to assist servicemen returning home from WW I.
Until 1947, allotments were governed as forms of small agricultural holdings. It wasn't until The Town
and Country Planning Act (1947) that a distinction between the two was made. The act also
eliminated the need for town planning authorities to consider allotment provision when preparing
town planning schemes. The years between 1920 and 1950 saw the passing, and amendment of,
three Allotment Acts: The Allotment Acts of 1922, 1925 and 1950. The first provided allotment tenants
with some security of tenure, required authorities to appoint allotment committees, and provided

tenants with greater compensation at the termination of their tenancy. The second was intended to
facilitate the acquisition and maintenance of allotments, and to make further security of tenure for
allotment tenants. The 1950 Allotment Act increased both the compensation given to tenants upon
the termination of their tenancies, as well as the financial disbursement of allotments by local
authorities. Furthermore, it changed the provision requirements of 1908, stating that allotments were
only obligatory for populations over 10, 000 people; it reduced the statutory plot-size from 40 to 20
rods (500 square metres); and it stated that tenants should be charged a reasonable rent, relative to
the quality of the plot. Since then, no further allotment legislation has been passed. However, repeals
and amendments have been made indirectly through ensuing acts concerning the use and
acquisition of land.
Current legislation concerning allotments is extremely confusing. It exists as a patchwork of laws,
comprised of amendments made over the past century. In The Law of Allotments, J.F. Garner writes,
"Within the law of contract, allotments law is a specialised branch of Landlord and Tenant, and a
branch which is the product of statute. Unfortunately, the relevant statutes are many and of
considerable age; the recommendations of the Thorpe Committee that 'all existing allotments
legislation should be repealed and replaced by a single new Act' has not yet been implemented"
(Andrews, 2005). This leaves room for broad interpretation and tremendous ambiguity when applying
the law.
In 1998, the former Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions created the Select
Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs. It commissioned the committee to
produce a report that analysed the future of allotments. The Select Committee Report: The Future of
Allotments (1998) outlined 29 conclusions and recommendations. It emphasised the importance of
immediate government action with regards to the protection of allotment sites, and it urged an
overhaul of allotment legislation. The government failed to act on many of these suggestions, and
only two were developed into effective policies. The first requires that before a council can sell off a
site, it must be able to show that it effectively promoted it among its constituents. The second
suggested that the government produce a set of best practice guidelines on allotment use for local
authorities.
The latter of the two suggestions has developed into a successful management strategy. 'Best
Value Plans' and 'Core Values' are national initiatives that ensure a community's best interests are
considered before any decisions regarding allotments are finalised. Further advice and guidance are
offered to both councils and the public by the Best Practice Guidelines (2001) and by government
policy papers published in the form of Planning Policy Statements.
Despite these efforts the government has yet to produce a single, intelligible legislative allotment
policy – one that would encapsulate the working definition of contemporary allotment practice,
preserve its historical value, and promote its environmental and social benefits. Government failure to
act on the recommendations made by the committees it commissioned shows political disinterest
and a lack of appreciation for the benefits this popular activity offers. Perhaps present-day politicians

should look to the past for inspiration, when the implementation of a national allotment scheme
saved the British population from starvation and brought victory over her oppressors.
2.3 'Dig f or Victo ry' - A Na ti onal inve stment into Allotm ent H old i ng s
The concept of ‘Victory Gardens’ emerged during WWI, when
civilians were encouraged to grow their own vegetables, fruits and
herbs, in order to reduce the pressure on the public food supply
brought on by the war effort. These gardens also supplemented the
food rations put in place by the Food Department in 1918. Supplies
were allocated according to the size of the family, and official figures
show that once rationing was in place the intake of calories was
close to that of pre-war levels. It was this experience that aided the
British government in preparing similar food supply tactics in
preparation for WWII.
Once the threat of war was over and international trade was
possible without the threat of enemy attacks, Britain gradually
returned to its dependence on imported food products. In fact, during the period leading up to the
Second World War, more than half of the total meat supply was imported, as well as 70% of cheeses
and sugar, nearly 80% of fruit, and approximately 90% of cereals and fats.
Only potatoes and milk were produced nationally (Davies, 1993). The
possibility of a Second World War meant either a drastic reduction, or a
complete end to these foreign comforts. Fortunately, the food defence
plan tactics employed during the First World War, meant the British
government was ready to deal with a drop in foreign food supplies and
capable of providing adequate nutrition to the nation.
In 1940, the government established the Food Defence Plans
Department, which operated locally as two separate bodies: the Local
Food Control Committee and the War Agricultural Committee. These
committees were set up with the objective of increasing local food
production, and were empowered by the Cultivation of Lands Order 1939.
They initiated a massive ploughing campaign to encourage the
cultivation of pastures, particularly for the production of bulky crops such
as potatoes, grains and corn. The War Agricultural committee offered the
incentive of £2 an acre to farmers who ploughed fields that had been left
fallow for several years, granted they completed it by the end of
December 1939 (Davies, 1993).
At the domestic level, the Ministry of Agriculture formed a committee
consisting of officials from the ministry, the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS),
the Horticultural Education Association, the National Allotment Association, and various research

institutes. The aim of the committee was to create a campaign that would both inspire and educate
the public, encouraging them to grow their own
produce – not only to supplement their rations, but to
reduce the need for foreign import.
The campaign's first step was to publish an
educational bulletin, 'Food from the Garden'; however,
its title was deemed too dull, so the group contacted
the Ministry of Information who suggested calling it
'Grow More Food'. By this time, various media were
aware of the campaign, and they dubbed it 'Dig for
Victory', which was adopted by the committee and
used as the campaign slogan. Posters, bulletins,
pamphlets and films issued by the ministry now carried
this motto, imprinting it on the minds of the nation. The iconic image of the foot on the spade was
designed by F.G. Stevens and became the official logo of the campaign, accompanying the slogan
on all of the literature produced by the ministry.
Wartime propaganda was produced in order to ensure that the message reached everyone.
Cinemas were used to screen 'Weekly Food Flashes', to announce ration changes, or to promote
seasonal produce before showing features films. The BBC broadcasted 'In Your Garden', 'Kitchen
Front Talks', and 'The Radio Doctor Says' - programmes that provided
people with practical tips on growing and using produce.
Newspapers printed 'Food Facts', updates about food prices, ration
booklet details, and vegetable recipes.
Uncertain about the population's ability to produce worthwhile
crops, the government committee sought to develop a
comprehensive horticultural strategy that could assist all levels of
gardeners, from the experienced to the novice. Simple,
straightforward horticultural advice was printed on posters,
published as leaflets or bulletins, and clarified through
demonstrations and model allotments. Local horticultural advisors
and park superintendents provided practical workshops and training
to ensure that people had access to hands-on lessons on vegetable growing. The Ministry of Food, in
conjunction with the RHS, published a series of guides and information booklets that taught people
how to make the most of their rations and vegetables. Other notable horticulturists contributed to the
effort: in 1942 Constance Spry published Come into the Garden and Cook. Eleanor Sinclair Rhode
wrote Gardens of Delight. Both books advised keen amateur gardeners about growing - and using -
a variety of vegetables.

Cartoon characters like 'Potato Pete' and 'Doctor

Carrot' were developed to target children and to instil
the need for self-sufficiency, as well as an appreciation
of home-grown food. By providing simple explanations
about their nutritional - and national - benefits, the
cartoons were also used to help break the monotony
of a vegetable diet. Children were also involved in the
national growing campaign. Besides helping with
family allotment holdings, many school children were
sent to help the Women's Land Army with harvesting
during the summer months. Children also learned about the importance of
economic food use: mothers were expected to save vegetable peelings, as
well as extend the supply of rationed food by using every bit available. Food
was described as ammunition, and as such, not to be wasted. Potatoes were
especially targeted in the campaign against waste, and culinary tips
highlighted the nutritional benefits of leaving the skins on.
In order to ensure that all families could produce their own vegetables, the government used
every available piece of land for cultivation. This included prominent London
sites such as Hyde Park and the grounds near the Tower of London.
Recreational spaces, such as tennis courts, were dug for cultivation, as well.
Private estates were also enlisted, turning formal rose gardens into onion beds.
Even bombsites were seen as an agricultural opportunity.
The need for rationing and home-grown produce continued until 1954. At
this time, allotment holdings were considered invaluable and an ordinary part
of life. The government continued with its campaign, encouraging its citizens
and returning servicemen to produce crops locally.

2.4 'Ba ck -t o-t he - Land ' - A po st wa r Re nais sa n ce of A ll otme nt Ga rde n s

The enthusiasm for allotments waned in the late 1950s as consumerism took hold and people
embraced post-war industrial wealth. Greater affluence, higher levels of employment and a wider
availability of food supplies reduced the need for cheap food. Many plots - even entire sites -
became under-used, neglected or abandoned (Clevely, 2006). Allotments were left with the stigma
of war, depression and frugality - and as much as the ideal of self-sufficiency resounded with the
wartime generation, some people chose to link this ideal to consumerism, interpreting self-sufficiency
as the ability to purchase whatever they required whenever they desired. Another factor in the
decline of allotment holding was time: many families became dual income earners, and with both
parents working, there was little opportunity to tend to an allotment.
A brief revival occurred in 1969 and coincided with the release of the Thorpe Report, which
suggested that allotment gardening needed a new image in order to capture public interest. The
report argued that a more designer-style approach to allotment site development was necessary to
replace the "monotonous grid of rectangular plots" which had become "neglected eyesores". Thorpe
asserted that a site should be 'subjected to a programme of landscaping and improvement under
the guidance of a landscape architect with the dual objective of making the appearance of the site
from beyond its perimeter as pleasing as possible, while increasing the attractiveness of the interior of
the site for the benefit of the plot-holders, both existing and prospective' (Crouch, 1997). He also
contended that the emphasis of allotments should be on "family, beauty, community, amenity,
respectability, productivity, grow-to-show, grow-for-fun, and grow-for-leisure" (Hyde, 1998).
The resurgence in allotments that corresponded with the release of the Thorpe report was partly
due to the disillusionment with consumerism. Allotments became a symbol of simplicity and they
embodied a rural ideal. The new reasons for wanting an allotment were far from the need for
survival: they had more to do with a quality of life, a source of recreation that offered physical and
mental health benefits, as well as a bit of 'free veg'. They were a way to escape from the demands
and stress of a highly-organised, structured society.
Environmental concerns were also beginning to emerge as industrial agricultural methods were
viewed as invasive and short-sighted. Issues relating to chemical residues, soil erosion, deforestation,
limited plant variety, and excessive packaging and transport costs were attracting a new breed of
allotment gardeners – a group of ideological plot-holders that yearned for some degree of self-
sufficiency in an environmentally-conscious world. The continued interest and popularity in allotment
holding during the 21st century follows from this environmental mindset.

2.5 Allo tment Numb ers b etw een the 19 t h and 20 t h Centuries
Allotment holding has remained a vital necessity for individual land
Year Number of Plots
access and cultivation throughout the centuries. Record numbers of
1873 244, 268
allotment holders, however, were recorded during WWII, as illustrated
1890 448, 586
in the side table. This can be attributed to the grave war threat felt by
1914 674, 000
much of the population, as well as the enormous effort put forth by
1918 1, 500, 000
the government in the 'Dig for Victory' campaign. Growing produce
was tantamount to national vigilance, and ultimately, victory. Food 1928 1, 024, 000
was considered to be ”ammunition of war", as home-grown produce 1930 965, 000
reduced the need for foreign imports and freed up cargo space for 1934 936, 000
artillery. When victory was achieved, and the threat of war 1939 814, 917
disappeared, the urgency with which allotment cultivation was 1943 1, 399, 935
practiced gradually declined. People returned to their old habits of 1948 1, 117, 308
food shopping and rejoiced in the comforts of affordable foreign
1950 1, 100, 000
foods.
1955 1, 000, 000
In Reinventing Allotments for the Twenty-First Century: The U.K.
1960 860, 000
Experience David Crouch, professor of Cultural Geography at Anglia
1965 650, 000
University, cites from the English Allotment Survey (1997) that of the
1967 600, 000
296, 000 allotment plots in the United Kingdom, 50, 000 are vacant,
unused or uncultivated. He then compares this to a waiting list of potential allotment holders of 13,
000. Crouch attributes the discrepancy in numbers to the indifference by local authorities in
advertising and promoting allotments, real estate speculation driving up land value for development,
poor site management and vandalism – issues that could be resolved by local councils encouraged
by a national incentive to provide comprehensive, accessible information and improved allotment
management.

3.0 Modern Allotment Holdings + the Alternatives
Present-day allotment sites have become dynamic hubs of horticultural interaction. Besides the usual
rows of vegetable crops and fruits, meadows, ponds and forest gardens have emerged, which
provide valuable habitats for beneficial insects, song birds and small mammals. In a normally barren
city environment, such places can go a long way to improve the diversity and quantity of urban
wildlife. They also provide valuable educational opportunities for local schools and community
groups, demonstrating how inviting ‘nature’ into a garden is mutually beneficial. Gardeners get the
added assistance with pollination and pest control while wildlife is provided with places for nesting
and foraging. Allotment sites that incorporate such a range of habitats are important because they
contribute to the overall ecological richness of an area,‘green’cities and provide food for its
residents.
Allotment sites have also begun to conform to a more stylised ideal. Although the rustic charm of
make-shift sheds, abandoned bedsteads and muddy paths are appreciated by some allotment
holders as quaint reminders of a bygone allotment era, there is a growing desire to develop a tidier,
slicker look for allotment sites. This vision is based on a European model, where allotments sites are
precisely designed – from the number of parking spaces to the types of sheds. The benefits of such
restructuring can be evaluated according to the increased number of users it can attract and
support. Improved roads and paths allow for better access for vehicles and wheel chairs; strategic
lighting improves security and reduces the likelihood of vandalism; and the provision of raised beds
accommodates less-able gardeners. An example of this is
the allotments of Sandwell Borough where certain sites
have been equipped with raised beds and improved paths
in order to accommodate special user groups, which may
other wise go unrepresented.
The construction of a communal building and the supply
of standard site tool sheds have also become increasingly
popular site amenities adopted from the European model.
As allotments become increasingly more social places – where site members participate in
barbecues, plant fairs and seed collections – local councils have found the provision of a communal
building a worthwhile necessity. They encourage greater community interaction, and in doing so,
have increased their appeal to young families and internationals seeking to settle into a new country.
The supply of standard site tool sheds may appear institutional to traditional English allotment
holders, but it has the added benefit of being egalitarian, easily transferable from one holder to
another and built to a municipal standard. This appeals to those with a low income who are
interested in allotment holding, but are concerned about the possible start-up costs; it also appeals
to a younger generation, accustomed to uniform and simple design.
The modern allotment now exists in a more diverse and stimulating cultural context, although still
firmly rooted in its tradition of individual land access and cultivation. The old utilitarian image of
allotment sites has changed as plots are seen to be important community facilities, as well as crucial
habitats in the process of ‘greening’ our cities (Clevely, 2006).
Alongside conventional allotment holdings have surfaced new forms of urban agriculture.
Community gardens and city farms are contemporary alternatives to allotment holdings. They offer
many of the same benefits associated with traditional allotments but with greater convenience. They
allow people to participate and learn about cultivation, but do not demand the time and
responsibility of an ordinary 10-rod allotment.
3.1 Community Gardens

Community gardens first gained popularity in the United States. Managed as a co-operative,
community gardens are a democratic organisation in which members share both the maintenance
and rewards. Most of the sites used for the gardens are abandoned city lots. Through diligent
canvassing and government lobbying, local community groups are able to obtain use of these
derelict sites for cultivation purposes. Although it can prove to be a difficult battle for community
groups, especially when competing with developers, the approval rate for such projects by local
councils has been increasing. The increase can be attributed to the realisation of benefits offered by
such projects. Community gardens are a catalyst for building meaningful environmental relationships
and are increasingly being regarded by the government as an important part of a community’s
development and urban regeneration. (Crouch, 2003)
In the United Kingdom, community gardens are a relatively new development and based on the
American model. Like allotments, they are most often situated on land owned by local councils or
governing agencies. However, they do not have the legal framework of allotments, thus lack the
relative legislative security for stability. At present, in the United Kingdom, there are over 300
community gardens registered with the Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens (FCFCG).
The Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens identifies these sites as having the following
characteristics:
• They all grow food crops and/or other plants, but do not keep farm animals
• They are managed by their local community or community of interest
• They have often been developed on derelict or disused land
• They provide educational and volunteering opportunities.
‘Community gardens are found in a variety of different settings, including public parks,
school grounds, allotment sites, disused wasteland, hospitals and other therapeutic
establishments, residential settings and of course, city farms.’
(http://www.farmgarden.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=78)

C u lp epe r Com munity Ga rd en, Ca se S t udy
Culpeper Community Garden in Islington, North London, is an example of a successful

community garden. It serves as both a city park and an environmental community
project. It was first initiated in 1982, when two local schools approached the Islington
council with the request to use a derelict site for the creation of a small temporary
garden. The project grew in popularity and gradually drew in the participation of local
residents. Over time, it has developed into a public garden, and is now a registered
charity, managed organically in a communal effort by and for local community
members.
Culpeper contains 50 allotment plots, including two raised beds, which are available
for use by community groups, children and local residents without a garden of their
own. Incorporated into the garden are ornamental beds, a lawn, seating, pergolas and
a host of wildlife areas boasting native plant species. The site is tended by garden
members and volunteers, and hosts a variety of community and social events, including
annual spring and autumn plant sales, a pensioners’ strawberry tea, open days, summer
arts projects, Hallowe’en and Christmas parties, and barbecues.

3.2 Cit y Farm s

City Farms are quite similar to community gardens in terms of their management and objective, the
fundamental difference between them being the presence of livestock. City farms serve a valuable
role in the community by providing an opportunity for agricultural education, as well as saleable
crops. At present in the United Kingdom there are 59 registered city farms. The Federation of City
Farms and Community Gardens identifies these sites as having the following characteristics:
• They keep livestock.

• They are managed by their local community.
• They are open to the public and provide educational and volunteering opportunities.
As with a community garden, the initiation of such a project is based on community initiative; success
is determined by the dedication of its members.
V a ux ha ll Ci ty Fa rm, Ca se St udy
Established in 1977, Vauxhall City Farm in Vauxhall is a free-of-charge urban farm

located in the heart of London. It is a charitable organisation housing a variety of
animals, from horses and sheep to chickens and guinea pigs. There are three full-
time qualified staff members on site throughout the week, and an extensive network
of volunteers to assist with the regular chores of the farm. The long-term strategic
planning of the farm and budgetary responsibilities are looked after by a
management committee consisting of a number of unpaid trustees and co-opted
members.
Vauxhall City Farm’s objective is to promote
social welfare and environmental awareness. It
provides educational, recreational and training
opportunities for local youth and residents, with a
particular focus on disadvantaged children,
teenagers, the elderly and those with special
needs. It is for city residents wanting the sounds
and smells of the countryside, local people
wanting to learn more about animals, and just
about anyone that would like to escape the rush
of the city.

In certain instances, community gardens

and city farms are being exploited for their
commercial sale and productivity. A recent
issue of the Telegraph Magazine was entirely
devoted to exploring the agricultural projects
of 23 of the UK’s renowned chefs. Many of
them source their food from local farms, or
help support local community farms by
purchasing produce. But most of these culinary
masters tend to have kitchen gardens of their

own, as well. This lends itself well to
gastronomic creativity, as menus can be
customised according to seasonal crops,
which include ‘exotic’ vegetables that incur
naught carbon miles.

4.0 Allotment holdings: An Expression of Sustainable Development
4.1 U nde rsta nd ing S usta i na bility and U K Po l icy on S usta i nab le Dev el opm ent
Sustainability has been a favourite buzzword among environmentalists, politicians and economists
since it first came into mainstream culture during the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. The term is
defined with respect to the amount of resources required to support the needs of present-day
society, while allowing for the development and needs of future generations. Objectives to achieve
sustainable development were outlined at the summit and compiled into a document entitled
Agenda 21 (i.e. an agenda for the 21st century). The document consists of 40 chapters grouped into
four different sections, and it addresses issues ranging from economics and development to poverty
and human health conditions (See Appendix C). Agenda 21 is not a legal agreement, but rather a
moral one. Upon the release of the document in 1992, 179 governments voted to adopt the
principles of the agenda into their national policies. Implementation of these principles at the
international, national, regional and local levels are referred to as Local Agenda 21.
The United Kingdom pledged formal commitment to the Agenda at the 2002 World Summit on
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. It has since developed a national strategy to manage
the implementation of sustainable policies. The strategies are contained in one report, Securing the
Future: Delivering UK Sustainable Development Strategy, and administered by a committee, chaired
by Defra (Department of Food and Rural Affairs). To assist in the implementation of sustainable policy,
the British Government established a set of five principles:
Living Within Ensuring a Strong, Healthy

Environmental Limits and Just Society
Respecting the limits of the
planet’s environment, Meeting the diverse needs of
resources and biodiversity to all people in existing and future
improve our environment and communities, promoting
ensure that the natural personal well-being, social
resources needed for life are cohesion and inclusion, and
unimpaired and remain so for creating equal opportunity for
future generations. all.
Achieving a Using Sound Science Promoting Good

Sustainable Responsibly Governance
Economy
Ensuring policy is Actively promoting
Building a strong, stable
developed and effective, participative
and sustainable
implemented on the systems of governance
economy that provides
basis of strong scientific in all levels of society-
prosperity and
evidence, whilst taking engaging people’s
opportunities for all, and
into account scientific creativity, energy and
in which environmental
uncertainty (through the diversity.
and social costs fall on
Precautionary Principle),
those who impose them
as well as public
(i.e. polluters pay), and
attitudes and values.
efficient resource use is
incentivised.

For a policy to be sustainable, it must meet all five principles. In conjunction with these principles, the
British Government has identified four priority areas requiring immediate action by all levels of
government. These areas are:
• Sustainable Consumption and Production
• Climate Change and Energy
• Natural Resource Protection and Environmental Enhancement
• Sustainable Communities
The British Government recognises that a change in attitude and behaviour is required by both
politicians and constituents in order to endorse these priorities meaningfully.
4.2 An i nit ia tive toward s susta ina bi lity

All four of the priority areas outlined above are addressed in allotment holding. Sustainable
consumption and production are practiced by plot holders on an annual basis. Organic matter is
gathered off of the site and composted, and seeds are harvested and exchanged. Crops are sown,
harvested, consumed and distributed amongst family and friends, or preserved for consumption
during winter months. It was recorded that during the ‘Dig for
Victory’ campaign a 10-rod plot, when used efficiently and
following seasonal crop rotation, could produce enough fresh
vegetables for eight months of the year.
The consumption of locally-grown food also supplements
the need for purchased food products. Plot holders thereby
reduce their ‘ecological footprint’ by avoiding the high
‘carbon miles’ associated with imported produce. An
‘ecological footprint’ is a measure of the amount of land and
water area a human population would theoretically need to
provide the resources required to support itself and to absorb
its wastes, given prevailing technology. A carbon mile, or
food mile, represents the distance that a food product travels
from producer to consumer. The idea is that by minimising the distance between the two there is less
transportation and therefore less carbon dioxide pollution released into the environment. As carbon
dioxide is a notorious greenhouse gas contributing to the problem of global warming, any reduction
of its volume in the atmosphere should be deemed noteworthy. In this manner, diligent allotment
holders are doing their part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Similarly, allotment food minimises the energy consumption normally associated with the
harvesting, packing and storage of food. Produce can be harvested on an as-required basis,
eliminating the need for elaborate refrigeration and packing systems.
Allotment sites also contribute to environmental enhancement. They provide valuable green
space in typically barren urban surroundings that serve a variety of functions, principally cultural
recreation, wildlife habitat, and city beautification. By offering opportunities for recreation, reflection,
and relaxation, parks improve community health and increase property values. The habitat they
create supports numerous species of animals and plants, improving the overall ecology of the city.
Furthermore, urban green spaces have also been shown to cool city air through transpiration and
evaporation. The foliage of plants also assists in cleaning the air by reducing the amount of airborne
dust and pollutants. Green spaces, especially those like allotments paving is minimal, also reduce the
amount of storm water run-off. As they mainly consist of pervious surfaces that are capable of
absorbing and percolating rainfall.
Allotments also encourage sustainable communities. They support and meet the diverse needs of
people in existing and future neighbourhoods. The Uplands Allotment site in Birmingham for instance,
prides itself on the diverse nationalities of its members, and the variety of gardening styles and
atypical produce it supports. The value of such multicultural interaction is that it promotes cultural
cohesion, inclusion and awareness. Allotments also provide a valuable meeting space and
educational opportunity for disadvantaged inner-city residents. By introducing an agricultural
mentality which values hard work, dedication and co-operation, urban allotment sites or community
gardens, are imparting a meaningful experience upon those that rarely seem to find a positive
opportunity in their community. The access to fresh, cheap produce is an added bonus and
incentive to participate in such projects.
From the above examples it is apparent that allotments embody all four of the priority areas
highlighted by the United Kingdom’s Government. These areas are important as they represent the
qualities of a sustainable society. Action by all levels of government is now required. The changes in
attitude and behaviour required have already begun to take place. People are waking up to the
ecological reality of the planet and prepared to take action in improving its fate.

A New Victory Garden

Allotments remain firmly rooted in the tradition of individual land access. Over the past 30 years
they have flourished into vibrant community projects that have revealed their additional social,
economic and environmental benefits. Unfortunately, many local councils have not explored the
advantages of this sustainable initiative. Developmental pressure for urban land and legal ambiguity
regarding allotments exacerbates the languishing status of allotments. However, the current rise in
popularity of urban agriculture suggests that the present time is ideal for the launch of an innovative
national allotment scheme to succeed the ‘Dig for Victory Campaign’.

References
Andrews, S 2005, The Allotment Handbook: A guide to promoting and protecting your site, 2nd edn,
Eco-logic books, Bristol.
Burchardt, J 2002, The Allotment Movement in England, 1793-1873, The Boydell Press, Suffolk.
Calkin, J (2006) Dig in, inside the secret gardens of our culinary elite, Telegraph Magazine 12,
Aug: 9-47
Clevely, A 2006, ‘Introduction’, The Allotment Book, Harper Collins Publishers Ltd, London.
Crouch, D & Ward, C 1997, The Allotment: Its Landscape and Culture, Five Leaves Publications,
Nottingham.
Crouch, D 2000, Reinventing Allotments for the Twenty-first Century: The UK Experience, Acta Hort.
523, ISHS.
Crouch, D 2003, The Art of Allotments: Culture and Cultivation, Five Leaves Publications, Nottingham.
Majeus, M, Culpeper Community Garden (pamphlet), October 29, 2006
Davies, J 1993, The Wartime Kitchen and Garden, BBC Books, London.
Dig for Victory 2006, DVD, Twofour Productions Ltd, Plymouth.
Federation of City Farms and Community Gardens, What type of farm or garden are
you interested in?
http://www.farmgarden.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=78
Hyde, M 1998, City Fields, Country Gardens: Allotment Essays, Five Leaves Publications, Nottingham.
Living Ethically, Food / Shopping Miles,

http://www.livingethically.co.uk/Pages/Ecological/foodmiles.htm, December 16, 2006
Patten, M 1990, We’ll Eat Again: A collection of recipes from the war years selected
by Marguerite Patten, Reed Consumer Books Limited, London.
Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, Allotments,

http://www.laws.sandwell.gov.uk/ccm/navigation/leisure-and-culture/parks-countryside-and-
allotments/allotments/, December 16, 2006
Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Fifth Report,

The Future for Allotments, http://www.parliament.the-stationery-
office.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmenvtra/560/56006.htm, November 25, 2006

APPENDIX II: MODERN ALLOTMENTS LEGISLATION http://www.parliament.the-stationery-
office.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmenvtra/560/56016.htm, November 26, 2006
Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Minutes of Evidence,

Memorandum by the Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions (AL 23),
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmenvtra/560-
iii/560iii02.htm , November 30, 2006
Spartacus, British History: Rationing,

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWrationing.htm, November 21, 2006
Sandra Spudic , January 2007© 21

U.K. Government Sustainable Development, What is it, and how can I do it?
Shared UK principles of sustainable development
http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/what/principles.htm
U.N. Department of Social and Economic Affairs Division for Sustainable Development,
Agenda 21 Table of Contents,
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21toc.htm
Uplands Allotments Association, Uplands Allotments is committed to Equal Opportunities...

http://www.btinternet.com/~richard.wiltshire/uplands1.htm, December 6, 2006.
Vauxhall City Garden, London, About, http://www.vauxhallcityfarm.org.uk/
Virginia Stormwater Management Program, Stormwater Management,

http://www.state.va.us/dcr/sw/stormwat.htm, December 6, 2006.
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Ecological Footprint

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_footprint
Li s t of Il l u st ra t io n s a nd Fig u re s
p 4. Woodcut depicting Gerrard Winstanley, The Law of Freedom Gerrard Winstanley & The Diggers
and all that!, http://tash.gn.apc.org/winst1.htm, November 28, 2006.
p 7. ‘Dig for Victory’ Poster, (Davies, 1993, p 28)

‘Allotment Garden Guide’, Earthly Pursuits, Ministry of Agriculture Allotment
and GardenGuides 1945,
http://www.earthlypursuits.com/AllotGuide/AllotGuide.htm, November 23, 2006.
Dig For Victory Leaflet No. 1 Grow for Winter as well as Summer’, Earthly Pursuits, Ministry of
Agriculture Dig For Victory Leaflet No. 1,
http://www.earthlypursuits.com/AllotGuide/DigforVictory1/DigForVictory1_1.htm,
November 23, 2006
p 8. Wartime Advice and Propaganda Publications collage, (Davies, 1993, p 51)

‘Food Facts’, (Davies, 1993, p 38)
p 9. ‘Potato Pete’, (Davies, 1993, p 142)

‘Doctor Carrot’, (Davies, 1993, p 145)
‘Wage War on Waste’, (Davies, 1993, p 161)
‘Use spades, not ships’, DIG! DIG! DIG! for Victory,
http://www.homesweethomefront.co.uk/web_pages/hshf_dig_for_victory_pg.htm#top
November 13, 2006
Cultivation of land image, (Patten, 1990, p 98)
p 11. Table of Alltoment Numbers, 1873 to 1967,

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-ffice.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmenvtra/560-
iii/560iii02.htm
p 12. Sandwell allotments image, (Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, 2006)
p 14. Culpeper Community Site Plan, (Blackwood, E (illus), 2006,

Culpeper Community Garden Pamphlet.
p 15. Vauxhall City Garden, Vauxhall City Garden, About, http://www.vauxhallcityfarm.org.uk/
p 16. Photos of chefs and gardens, (Telegraph Magazine, p 11, 23,33)

p 17. Principles of sustainability Diagram,

http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/what/principles.htm
p 18. Crop Rotation Poster, (Davies, 1993, p 33)

Appendices
Ap pend ix A : A l l o t m ent s L eg i s l at i on f o r t h e P e ri od 19 08 t o 19 50
Append ix B: Categori es of Allot men t Si tes
Appendix C: Ri o Declarati on

Wisley Diploma in Practical Horticulture Appendix A
Allotments Legislation for the Period 1908 to 1950
Act and Date Description and notes on most important Sections
Small Holdings Repealed and consolidated previous legislation and established the framework for
and Allotments the modern allotments system.
Act 1908
Section 23 provides that if allotment authorities 'are of the opinion that there is a
demand for allotments...in the borough, district or parish the council shall provide a
sufficient number of allotments to persons...resident in the borough district or parish
and desiring the same'. In determining demand an authority must take into
consideration 'a representation in writing by any six registered parliamentary
electors or rate payers'.
Section 25 gives a local authority the power to compulsorily purchase land for
allotments if land cannot be acquired by private agreement.
Section 26 provides that an allotments authority 'may' make improvements to
allotment land such as drainage, paths and hut construction.
Section 32 deals with the 'Sale of superfluous or unsuitable land' and permits local
authorities to sell land if they are 'of opinion that any land ... is not needed for the
purpose of allotments'. However, Section 8 of the Allotments Act 1925 (see below)
places restrictions on this process.
Section 47 deals with compensation for allotment holders who are required to
leave the site. These provisions were amended by the Allotments Act 1922.
Land Settlement This Act was mainly to assist returning servicemen and opened up allotments to all,
Facilities Act not just 'the labouring population'.
1919
Made metropolitan borough councils allotment authorities for the first time.
Section 22 enables an allotment authority to appropriate for allotments any land

held for other purposes.
Allotments Act This Act was established to provide allotment tenants with some security of tenure,
1922 laying down specific periods of notice and compelling most allotment authorities to
appoint allotment committees, and provided tenants with greater compensation
at the termination of their tenancy.
Section 1 provides that an allotment garden tenancy may be determined by the

landlord by notice to quit only if a six months or longer notice is given. This provision
was amended by Section 1 of the Allotments Act 1950.
Section 2 provides for compensation on being forced to quit an allotment, based

on the value of the crops.
Section 16 required allotments authorities to exact a 'full fair rent' for allotments. This
provision was repealed by Section 10 of the Allotments Act 1950.
Section 22 defines 'allotment gardens' as 'an allotment not exceeding forty poles in
extent which is mainly cultivated by the occupier for the production of vegetables
and fruit crops for consumption by himself or his family'.

Allotments Act This Act was intended to facilitate the acquisition and maintenance of allotments,
1925 and to make further provision for the security of tenure of tenants of allotments.
Section 3 specifies that when a local authority is preparing a town-planning

scheme, it must 'consider what provisions ought to be included therein for the
reservation of land for allotments.' This provision was repealed by the Town and
Country Planning Act 1947.
Section 8 specifies that land purchased or appropriated by local authorities for use
as allotments must not be disposed of without Ministerial consent. The Secretary of
State must be satisfied that 'adequate provision will be made for allotment holders
displaced by the action of the local authority, or that such provision is unnecessary
or not reasonably practicable'.
Section 12 provided that a local authority with a population of over 10,000 should
appoint an allotments committee which is responsible for all allotment matters with
the exception of financial issues. This provision was repealed by the Local
Government Act 1972.
Small Holdings Made minor amendments to previous Acts but was mostly concerned with small
and Allotments holdings.
Act 1926
Repealed sections 1-22 of Small Holdings and Allotments Act 1908 which related to
small holdings.
Agricultural Land Temporary measure passed at time of economic depression to assist the
(Utilisation) Act unemployed.
1931
Section 13 permitted the seizure of land for allotments and gave the Minister of
Agriculture authority to provide allotments for the unemployed. This provision
expired in 1939 under Section 19.
Town and Made no specific reference to allotments but removed requirement made in 1925
Country Planning Act for town planning authorities to consider allotment provision within town
Act 1947 planning schemes.
Allotments Act Followed on from the Allotments Advisory Committee report of 1949. Made
1950 provision for better compensation following termination of tenancies, and clarified
the systems for collecting rent.
Section 1 increases the period of notice to be supplied to allotment holders to 12

months and this must expire during the winter months.
Sections 2 to 6 deal with the compensation which should be payable to an

allotment holder according to the season his tenancy terminates. Also, allotment
holders who have allowed their plots to deteriorate through neglect are liable to
pay for compensation for dilapidations on quitting.
Section 9 confines local authorities' obligation to 'allotment gardens'- in effect,

making 'farm allotments' no longer statutory.
Section 10 amends the rent collection systems and allotments authorities may
charge such rent "... as a tenant may reasonably be expected to pay for the land".
This section also makes provision for the allotments authority to let land "... to a
person at a less rent, if the Council are satisfied that there exist special
circumstances affecting the person which render it proper for them to let the land
at a less rent".
Section 12 allows certain forms of livestock (hens and rabbits) to be kept although
this is, in some cases, restricted by local bye-laws.
Note: Allotment authorities in England and Wales are the district councils and, in Wales, community
councils or, in England, London Boroughs and parish councils. County councils have very few
responsibilities with regard to allotments, particularly after the Local Government Act 1972.
Note: The Department now having supervisory powers over allotments authorities in England is the
Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions. Formerly, allotments were the responsibility of
the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The functions were transferred by S.I. 1970, No. 1681.
The Scottish Office, the Welsh Office and the Northern Ireland Office have supervisory powers for the
other parts of the United Kingdom.

Appendix II: Modern Allotments Legislation,
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-ffice.co.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmenvtra/560/56016.htm,
November 26, 2006.

Wisley Diploma in Practical Horticulture Appendix B
Categories of Allotment Sites
Staturoy Sites
These sites make up the bulk of allotment sites (74%). Owned by the local authority, and entirely
governed by allotments legislation, they have legal protection and cannot be sold unless it can be
demonstrated to the Secretary of State that a site is no longer needed for allotments, and would be
better used for alternative development. The Secretary of State, working through the Office of the
Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), tends to trust local council reports on dereliction and the reasons for
it, and agrees on sales based on their reports.
Temporary Sites
Rented by the local authority from a private owner for the purposes of allotments or owned by the
local authority but designed for some other use. This type of allotment site has also recently become
popular with local councils. They make up 13% of allotment provision. There are no statutory
protections for tenants on temporary allotments under the allotment acts. However, prospective
developers need planning permission first before building, and this can be denied, which also applies
to private sites.
Private Sites
These are neither owned nor leased by local authorities. Therefore they are not governed by any of
the allotments legislation. They cover about 8% of all allotment land (statistics from the David
Crouch/NSALG Allotments Survey 1997). It is also worth bearing in mind that there is no national
standard of allotment provision. Although councils have to provide allotments, the number of
allotments per head is not defined, and left up to the individual authorities.
Andrews, S 2005, The Allotment Handbook: A guide to promoting and protecting your site, 2nd edn,
Eco-logic books, Bristol.

Wisley Diploma in Practical Horticulture Appendix C
REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON

ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT*
(Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992)
Annex I
RIO DECLARATION ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development,
Having met at Rio de Janeiro from 3 to 14 June 1992,
Reaffirming the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,
adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972, a/ and seeking to build upon it,
With the goal of establishing a new and equitable global partnership through the creation of new
levels of cooperation among States, key sectors of societies and people,
Working towards international agreements which respect the interests of

all and protect the integrity of the global environmental and developmental
system,
Recognizing the integral and interdependent nature of the Earth, our

home,
Proclaims that:
Principle 1
Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development.

They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature.
Principle 2
States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international
law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and
developmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or
control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of
national jurisdiction.
Principle 3
The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet

developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.
Principle 4
In order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection

shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be
considered in isolation from it.
Principle 5
All States and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of
eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable
development, in order to decrease the disparities in standards of living and
better meet the needs of the majority of the people of the world.

Principle 6
The special situation and needs of developing countries, particularly the

least developed and those most environmentally vulnerable, shall be given
special priority. International actions in the field of environment and
development should also address the interests and needs of all countries.
Principle 7
States shall cooperate in a spirit of global partnership to conserve,

protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's ecosystem. In view
of the different contributions to global environmental degradation, States have
common but differentiated responsibilities. The developed countries
acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit of
sustainable development in view of the pressures their societies place on the
global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they
command.
Principle 8
To achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all

people, States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production
and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies.
Principle 9
States should cooperate to strengthen endogenous capacity-building for

sustainable development by improving scientific understanding through exchanges
of scientific and technological knowledge, and by enhancing the development,
adaptation, diffusion and transfer of technologies, including new and
innovative technologies.
Principle 10
Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all

concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each
individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the
environment that is held by public authorities, including information on
hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity
to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and
encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely
available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings,
including redress and remedy, shall be provided.
Principle 11
States shall enact effective environmental legislation. Environmental

standards, management objectives and priorities should reflect the
environmental and developmental context to which they apply. Standards applied
by some countries may be inappropriate and of unwarranted economic and social
cost to other countries, in particular developing countries.

Principle 12
States should cooperate to promote a supportive and open international

economic system that would lead to economic growth and sustainable development
in all countries, to better address the problems of environmental degradation.
Trade policy measures for environmental purposes should not constitute a means
of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on
international trade. Unilateral actions to deal with environmental challenges
outside the jurisdiction of the importing country should be avoided.
Environmental measures addressing transboundary or global environmental
problems should, as far as possible, be based on an international consensus.
Principle 13
States shall develop national law regarding liability and compensation

for the victims of pollution and other environmental damage. States shall also
cooperate in an expeditious and more determined manner to develop further
international law regarding liability and compensation for adverse effects of
environmental damage caused by activities within their jurisdiction or control
to areas beyond their jurisdiction.
Principle 14
States should effectively cooperate to discourage or prevent the

relocation and transfer to other States of any activities and substances that
cause severe environmental degradation or are found to be harmful to human
health.
Principle 15
In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be

widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are
threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty
shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent
environmental degradation.
Principle 16
National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalization of

environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account
the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of
pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting
international trade and investment.
Principle 17
Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be

undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant
adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent
national authority.

Principle 18
States shall immediately notify other States of any natural disasters or

other emergencies that are likely to produce sudden harmful effects on the
environment of those States. Every effort shall be made by the international
community to help States so afflicted.
Principle 19
States shall provide prior and timely notification and relevant

information to potentially affected States on activities that may have a
significant adverse transboundary environmental effect and shall consult with
those States at an early stage and in good faith.
Principle 20
Women have a vital role in environmental management and development.

Their full participation is therefore essential to achieve sustainable
development.
Principle 21
The creativity, ideals and courage of the youth of the world should be
mobilized to forge a global partnership in order to achieve sustainable
development and ensure a better future for all.
Principle 22
Indigenous people and their communities and other local communities have
a vital role in environmental management and development because of their
knowledge and traditional practices. States should recognize and duly support
their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation
in the achievement of sustainable development.
Principle 23
The environment and natural resources of people under oppression,

domination and occupation shall be protected.
Principle 24
Warfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development. States

shall therefore respect international law providing protection for the
environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further
development, as necessary.
Principle 25
Peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and

indivisible.

Principle 26
States shall resolve all their environmental disputes peacefully and by

appropriate means in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
Principle 27
States and people shall cooperate in good faith and in a spirit of

partnership in the fulfilment of the principles embodied in this Declaration
and in the further development of international law in the field of sustainable
development.
*****
a/ Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment,
Stockholm, 5-16 June 1972 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.73.II.A.14
and corrigendum), chap. I
This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA).
Reproduction and dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is encouraged,
provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United Nations in making it available.
Date last updated: by DESA/DSD

Copyright © 1999 United Nations

The New Victory Garden

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The New Victory Garden

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

the new victory garden

Royal Horticultural Society Dissertation

Wisley Diploma in Practical Horticulture January 2007

2.2 Allotment Holdings and Legislation of the 20th Century ______5

2.4 'Back-to-the-Land' - A post war Renaissance of Allotment Gardens ______10

Sandra Spudic, January 2007©

Sandra Spudic, January 2007©

Victory Gardens Revisited

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 1

1.0 ‘Allotment’ or ‘Leisure Garden’

Allot men t, a.k. a.: fi eld ga rd en , c ott ag e gard en, gard en

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 2

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 3

2.0 A Brief Evolutionary History of Allotments and their Legislation

2.1 Allo tment- ho ldi ng s a nd Leg is lat io n f ro m th e 17 t h to 1 9 t h Ce n tu r i e s

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 4

2.2 Allo tmen t Ho ld in g s a nd L egi s la t io n of t he 20 t h Ce nt u ry

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 5

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 6

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 7

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 8

Cartoon characters like 'Potato Pete' and 'Doctor

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 9

2.4 'Ba ck -t o-t he - Land ' - A po st wa r Re nais sa n ce of A ll otme nt Ga rde n s

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 10

was considered to be ”ammunition of war", as home-grown produce 1930 965, 000

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 11

3.0 Modern Allotment Holdings + the Alternatives

3.1 Community Gardens

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 13

C u lp epe r Com munity Ga rd en, Ca se S t udy

Culpeper Community Garden in Islington, North London, is an example of a successful

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 14

3.2 Cit y Farm s

• They keep livestock.

Established in 1977, Vauxhall City Farm in Vauxhall is a free-of-charge urban farm

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 15

In certain instances, community gardens

masters tend to have kitchen gardens of their

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 16

4.0 Allotment holdings: An Expression of Sustainable Development

Living Within Ensuring a Strong, Healthy

Achieving a Using Sound Science Promoting Good

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 17

4.2 An i nit ia tive toward s susta ina bi lity

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 19

A New Victory Garden

Sandra Spudic, January 2007© 20

Majeus, M, Culpeper Community Garden (pamphlet), October 29, 2006

Dig for Victory 2006, DVD, Twofour Productions Ltd, Plymouth.

Living Ethically, Food / Shopping Miles,

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, Allotments,

Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Fifth Report,

Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Fifth Report,

Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Minutes of Evidence,

Spartacus, British History: Rationing,

Sandra Spudic , January 2007© 21

Uplands Allotments Association, Uplands Allotments is committed to Equal Opportunities...

Vauxhall City Garden, London, About, http://www.vauxhallcityfarm.org.uk/

Virginia Stormwater Management Program, Stormwater Management,

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Ecological Footprint

p 7. ‘Dig for Victory’ Poster, (Davies, 1993, p 28)

p 8. Wartime Advice and Propaganda Publications collage, (Davies, 1993, p 51)

p 9. ‘Potato Pete’, (Davies, 1993, p 142)