I didn't read the article, but my immediate reaction is, the word 'Rights' sometimes gets overused and inappropriately used. I think it would have been a better idea, to encourage and interest builders, developers and landlords to be willing to give space for a garden to a tenant. Because otherwise, it becomes tenant rights vs property owner's rights.

And are there that many tenants protesting on the corner, because they just really want to garden and they can't? [g] And I would assume that the way it works now, if a tenant decides they want to try their hand at gardening, they check with their landlord because they see a space on the property they could use....talking about a single or two family sububrban or urban rental and the landlord can decide whether that works for him. That seems like a good way to go about it. I don't think we have to have a rule about it or a law, saying the tenant has the 'right' to garden on a landlord's property. To do that means you are abusing the rights of the property owner.

Rosaprimula, I’m not sure how much of what you describe applies equally here in the US, but I am coming from the point of view of a property owner. It’s been a long time since I rented. But, I do have kids who have all been renting for a long time and they are definitely dealing with very high rent increases for sure.

As far as rights swinging in favor of landlords, here in the US, I think that is a regional determination. In some areas there is rent control. And others there is not. Slumlords? I would be surprised if that is a big problem in my area, but certainly there is always some property that could be described that way everywhere.

We are not landlords, never have been. We do have a family member who has a lot of rentals and they are just the opposite as you describe. They renovated to the nth degree all the apartments they manage. They cater to their tenants and have a good reputation as landlords.

But all of that seems way afield of the issue of whether a tenant has a “right” to garden. Maybe I should have read the article for some context. My comments were in the context of single and two family properties managed by the owner. Not large apartment buildings. Although even then, I don't see the difference. It is a choice of a property owner whether to provide space to garden, and that is usually driven by whether there is demand and if a landlord provides the space, then his apartment can ask for higher rent. Like every other feature in a rental property.

Tenants have to bear the responsibility of whether they rent somewhere where garden space is available to them. I’m sure if gardening is popular, then apartments that have available space - either in a backyard, or offering a balcony where someone can grow in containers would be in demand, which would be an incentive to landlords to provide that space.

I see the problems, I just don’t see what the solutions are. It would seem the world is still overpopulated. Where do all these people find homes, rental or otherwise? Thinking of Asian countries, and China, India.

Heya Prairie,

I am old enough to have lived through a couple of cycles in housing history - growing up in an era of social housing (in some towns, such as my hometown, it accounted for 70% of household dwellings. Since the 80s, housing has been used in a brutally ideologically way, selling off social housing in a neoliberal reduction of the state (Thatcherism and Reaganomics) and the deliberate suppression of housing stock inevitably resulted in a distorted market - where property value and mortgages became utterly detached from salaries. In my town, an average house costs 11x an average salary...rather than the 3-4x we expected up to the late 80s.

And of course, rising housing equity was used as a sort of bribe to detract from massive wage stagnation...and if you had bought property before the 90s, it was not beyond the means of the average prudent worker. This is most certainly not the case now...as anyone with kids who are now young adults entering the property market can certainly attest.

TBF, I have worked in housing most of my adult life, dealing with homelessness and social housing, so I do have a particular take on this. I also feel that the present situation is approaching a tipping point of tent cities, shanty towns, favelas etc. and there will almost certainly have to be a new round of regulation (as we saw in the 20s/30s, the 60s, the 80s/90s...all periods when housing and it's discontents resulted in numerous changes to the status quo.

Caveat - I am not a property owner (cos I am a socialist) but have been fortunate to have had a secure tenancy in social housing throughout most of my adult life. This option is no longer available to my children who are all facing an uncertain and worrying future, along with many other young people. Within one generation, property ownership has decreased from 70% to just over 50% (Generation Rent). The current situation is absolutely unsustainable but I think there will be blood in the water because of systemic problems which are not going to be solved by aspirational BS or working harder, longer, etc etc (and the lack of political will).

Hi Rosaprimula, I get the sense, that housing in the UK is different than here in the States. I can’t think of one area in the country where 70% of the housing would be ‘social housing’ Here I think what you are referring to, is called ‘public housing’. Public housing here, represents a very small percentage of housing, to my knowledge. Unless that is happening in another part of the country that I am unaware of.

Here, property values are still rising and so many people have now been priced out of the market. It is the same here, years ago, the average person, if they were smart and had steady work and saved their money could buy property. It used to be that families could live on one income but now that doesn’t seem possible for young people today. Most households are two incomes and are still struggling to make ends meet.

To tell you the truth, I get the sense that the economic system is out of control. No one who is in a position of authority who can do anything about it knows what they are doing. And to me, it is more a question of income inequality than anything else. All these crazy salaries for 100s of millions of dollars at the top of the food chain. I think I heard of a recent contract given to a sports player that was half a billion dollars! Of course, when you then have created a sub set of society who has that much money, it effects the rest of society in a very negative way. That is just one of the many things that are contributing to the situation we are in now. I believe that most of us don’t really see how what we do, affects society. The world seems to have gone right off the tracks. Where is it all going to end up?

Yeah, kinda depressing, isn't it.?Fixable though, but only with unpalatable solutions - but climate change will be removing a whole heap of 'choices' ...and not in some distant future either.

But for sure, income inequality always affects the stability and security of nations (Gini co-efficient).

but climate change will be removing a whole heap of 'choices' ...and not in some distant future either.

And there will be hell to pay as IMO it is too late now for 'simple' palatable solutions to the myriad of problems stemming from climate change. And It is our kids that will be hit the hardest ie much harder than our generation.

Rouge, I apologize. I bet you didn't intend for this article to get political. [g] Maybe just how it was recognized how important it is that as many people as possible have opportunity to garden. Sorry if I sent it in a different direction.

No apology needed @prairiemoon2 z6b MA; lots of good discussion ensued.

O, I think I should be the one apologising for the political overtones...but I do feel that we all need our wits about us since it is entirely obvious that our politicians are never going to be anything other than venal and mealy-mouthed fools.

Soz, dunno why this is in italics - cba to go back and change it all though.

So I tried to post this two days ago but had issues, and I'm just getting back to it now. Luckily I copied my post so I don't have to rewrite the whole thing! Here it is:

What an interesting conversation this is! A bit depressing, because I too see all these negative things that are happening, but very interesting.

I read the article and while maybe some may take umbrage at the use of the word "right", I think this guy has the right idea - trying to get developers and landlords to allow more green space. I can definitely see both sides of the issue (it's a curse my mother always teased me about, and one reason why I have trouble making decisions lol) but I do think this horticulturist is being fairly reasonable. He seems to just be trying to get developers and landlords and neighbors to communicate needs, wants, etc, and come to some kind of compromise or agreement.

I know that around here, when people apply to develop a tract of land, there is some required ratio (not sure what) of open space relative to number of houses. And true open space - not a parking lot with shrubs as the horticulturist in the article mentions sometimes happens. And yes, open space is not the same as gardening, but his goal seems to be, at least in part, getting more nature into our lives, and open space helps with that. I will say I am lucky that I live in a community that puts an emphasis on open space, although in the last few years the development is getting to be way too much, in my opinion.

My thought is that when someone rents a whole house, or perhaps rents a floor in a multi-family house, half a duplex, or perhaps even rents an apartment or a condo in a small building directly from the owner, they can likely come to some agreement with the landlord. I have a feeling that what this horticulturist is discussing is more like when a renter is dealing with the American equivalent of a property management company - usually in cities and usually dealing with actual apartment buildings. They are usually a business or corporation, (or I suppose a municipality) treating the renters as business income rather than human tenants, and these companies have set rules and regulations for their own convenience and liability reasons.

And yes, so many young people do not have the option of buying. I would say in my community also the average house costs at least 9-10 times the average salary. Not quite so much when I bought 30 years ago. And the pandemic made the housing market go crazy. The only reason my daughter was able to buy a house about three years ago was because her husband's cousin is in construction, and a realtor friend of his happened to ask him if he wanted to buy and flip a run-down property. Wonderful timing for them, as the cousin found out they were looking and offered them the house at a decent discount. My son, with a single income and a lower income than his sister (never mind hers combined with her husband's), believes he will never be able to buy a house. He is still getting back on his feet after losing his job during the pandemic, and is back at home because he can't even afford to rent without having several roommates, and he doesn't want to live like a college student anymore.

Sorry for the ramble, but as I said I find this to be a needed and interesting conversation. And while you're correct in that perhaps we can't force landlords to allow gardening, it would be nice to see EVERYONE realize and appreciate the need for green areas, especially in this time of climate change.

:)

Dee

My house is next to some apartments. Last year I gave the tenant closest to us a tomato plant and potted it up in a big pot. She enjoyed it I think...bought it a tomato cage. But I think she only got one tomato out of it. This year I was thinking she could ask the landlord if she could plant one in the ground just outside her patio. There's lots of space.

I am just skeptical of the politicians and theoriticians, academics, media types and billionaires in charge. I think their push for more government intervention often has little to do with any specific issue and has more to do with growing the power of government. So I come down more for free choice for businesses. An apartment complex might well find it makes sense to create garden space. A really good idea may well spread. I know near me there is a little bitty brand new housing development that squishes houses up close together, but plans on making a shared green space between them. It'll be interesting to see what they make.

Dee, You make a good point.

“ They are usually a business or corporation, (or I suppose a municipality) treating the renters as business income rather than human tenants, and these companies have set rules and regulations for their own convenience and liability reasons.”

I agree with this statement.

But look at Condominum Complexes. We have seen enough posts here on GW, about people who own Condominiums and yet the Condo Association decides on strict rules about appearance of the private spaces, which includes anything that grows. And those are rules that the owners combined come to, not a corporation. And that is private property but because so many people basically ‘own’ the property, the compromises made to accommodate everyone, creates pretty limited choices in this regard.

Asthetics becomes an issue. Everyone has their own idea of what looks good. What is neat. And either by assumption or experience, people know that not everyone is going to garden in a way that looks good or neat. Some people start a garden and then realize how much work it is and let it go. As the ‘face’ of the condominium property, people might accept balcony gardens that are like landscaping, not like a meadow, or a lot of vegetables with tomato stakes sticking up and spent crops.

And what to blame that situation on? Someone will be left unhappy if they are a gardener whose methods and style don’t fit with what the association wants to accomplish. But, if you want to do whatever you want to do, then you have to own the entire property with no one to tell you different. If you choose to buy a Condo, then you are accepting the limitations of that. And even in a suburban neighborhood of single family homes, if you want to just leave your lawn to grow without mowing it all season and completely neglect your property, someone is going to complain about that. But that is a very rare instance, I would imagine.

It’s always going to come down to people being able to work out compromises when called for. And it gets down to choice. Is it realistic to think that everyone will come to appreciate the need for green areas?

Along the lines of what Erasmus said, I think the more property and businesses are owned by the average person, the better off society is. That’s why this issue of income inequality is so bad. The average person is pushed out of being able to have any say. When the property owners become large corporations and government, the average person becomes a faceless number and everything is then filtered thru the corporate and government mindset.

And the more that people become dependent on government, the power continues to shift in a very negative way.

Not only do I not know the solution to the problems I don’t know if there is one. How do we ever change the income inequality picture?