SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
food security
Why Guaranteed Income Is the GOAT
Minnesota's three-year-old Guaranteed Income for Artists pilot program offers a small yet mighty payment that has unlocked creative freedom and opened new opportunities that ripple through our communities.
Nov 21, 2024
If you were driving by a remote stretch of Minnesota County Highway 210—connecting Wahpeton, North Dakota and Fergus Falls—you would see a massive billboard depicting a painting of three goats. It looks out of place—colorful and vibrant on a desolate stretch of highway mostly used by westbound truckers and locals. On the top left-hand corner of the billboard rests a stark reminder to anyone looking up: "In rural we tend to the herd."
My wife and I share a farm with Edith, Willa, and Milagro—our three goats and the willing subjects of the billboard—and 10 laying chickens, two inside dogs, and three outside cats. As a recipient of Minnesota's three-year-old Guaranteed Income for Artists pilot program, I was inspired to create the billboard as a tribute to the state's guaranteed income pilot, which tends to the community and is changing the lives of artists like myself.
Since moving to Otter Tail County in 2017, I've deepened my connection to the land and the rhythms of rural life. I am attuned to the changing of the seasons, and the serene landscape outside my windows becomes inspiration for paintings in my home studio. Living in a rural setting provides the space I need to get into the creative flow. And the quiet, slower pace of life has unlocked the creative freedom to make my large-scale narrative paintings.
As policymakers and community leaders consider implementing guaranteed income programs, I hope they look to Minnesota's example.
But making a living as an artist in rural Minnesota is no easy feat. It often requires having many different income streams to stay on top of student loans, car payments, and grocery bills. So, when I received an email telling me I had been chosen by lottery to participate in a new pilot providing guaranteed income for rural artists, I breathed a sigh of relief.
The program is set to expand, soon providing no-strings-attached $500 monthly payments to 100 artists for five years—far exceeding typical 12-18-month pilots. This growth cements its position as the nation's longest-running guaranteed income pilot focusing on both urban and rural creators. For me and my fellow artists, this small yet mighty payment has unlocked creative freedom and opened new opportunities that ripple through our communities.
As Minnesota finds itself in the national spotlight following Gov. Tim Walz's candidacy for Vice President, our state's innovative approaches to social and economic policy are garnering renewed attention. As of 2024, 10 states have introduced legislation attempting to ban guaranteed income programs. The misplaced fear stems from ideological and economic concerns about the effects of guaranteed income even though more than a dozen studies have shown that it leads to higher employment rates, housing and food security, and more family time.
When artists have the freedom to create and engage, we become catalysts for positive change that benefits entire communities. Take Jess Torgerson, a multidisciplinary artist and community organizer in Fergus Falls, Minnesota. Before the guaranteed income program, Jess was working 60 hours a week. Now, she has partnered with another artist to create sculptures from found materials, simultaneously making art and ridding her community of unwanted waste. Then there's Torri Hanna, a fiber artist. The program helped Torri and her daughter improve their living situation and stabilize her yarn store business. Torri, too, has expanded her community involvement, working with the local senior center to create art for downtown storefront windows.
Recent data from the program shows its remarkable impacts. Participants reported a decrease in financial stress, an increase in their ability to pay for basic needs, and an increase in their ability to take on creative and community projects they wouldn't have otherwise pursued. The success of Minnesota's program is part of a larger movement, with over 100 pilot programs across the United States testing the impact for different groups of people. Programs like the Works Projects Administration coming out of the New Deal made it possible for artists to make a living and beautified our nation's infrastructure. We have a history to look back on in guiding public investments in artists—we already know that investing in artists pays back manifold.
In my community, we understand the value of tending to the herd—and we've all taken an important lesson from Edith, Willa, and Milagro, who sit in formation with their backs to each other so that they can share body heat, and each can observe a different direction to keep an eye out for threats. Our communities are strengthened when we tend to each other with the same dedication. This, to me, is what guaranteed income does for artists. It says, "We've got your back."
As policymakers and community leaders consider implementing guaranteed income programs, I hope they look to Minnesota's example. Include artists in your pilots. Recognize the unique value they bring to your communities. Understand that by supporting artists, you're nurturing the creativity, resilience, and interconnectedness that make our communities thrive. In Minnesota, we know that the strength of the herd depends on how well we tend to each individual. We know our rural parts of the state enable our strong urban centers to thrive. As you consider the future of your own communities, look out for each other. Share your warmth. Face different directions, but always stay close and connected.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Reimagining Conservation Post-Cop16: The Case for a Universal Basic Income
The recent COP16 underscored the need for inclusive conservation strategies in Latin America, where social conflicts and environmental vulnerabilities intersect. A Universal Basic Income could be the answer.
Nov 13, 2024
The recent 16th Conference of Parties (COP16) to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, or COP16, has highlighted the urgent need to rethink conservation strategies, particularly in Latin America, where the convergence of social conflict and environmental vulnerability creates a complex, high-stakes landscape.
The global environmental crisis, manifesting in the accelerated loss of biodiversity, is exacerbated by deep socio-economic inequalities. Yet communities most affected by environmental degradation are often those that can play a crucial role in its protection. Traditional approaches are no longer sufficient; conservation efforts must be both innovative and inclusive. Therefore, it is vital that communities are included in the formulation of policies that impact their lives. And to take an active role in conservation, they require support through financing mechanisms tailored to their specific needs.
The intersection of conservation and social justice is not merely an ideal; it is an urgent necessity that we must embrace to achieve a sustainable future for all.
In this regard, Universal Basic Income (UBI) emerges as an essential tool for empowering vulnerable communities and promoting equitable conservation strategies. It is not merely about mitigating environmental impacts; these actions also strengthen community resilience and contribute to peace, helping to prevent conflicts. However, the true potential of UBI is only fully realized when supported by financing mechanisms such as Cap and Share.
A Model of Climate Justice
The Cap and Share model generates socio-economic equality through emission reductions and biodiversity protection. And by redirecting these resources towards UBI, we can create a virtuous cycle in which vulnerable communities benefit directly from conservation actions.
Cap and Share enables communities to receive regular, unconditional payments, providing them with crucial financial security. This not only alleviates pressure on natural resources but also facilitates active community participation in the conservation of their surroundings. UBI is not simply economic assistance; it is a model of climate justice that ensures those most affected by climate change receive direct support, empowering them to become agents of change.
Colombia Pilot Project
In Colombia, where the intersection of urgent environmental challenges and violent conflict is particularly evident, a pilot project implementing UBI could be pivotal. This initiative would provide regular income to affected communities, offering them economic relief and the opportunity to engage in conservation practices. Such a project would not only generate immediate benefits for the communities involved but also serve as a vital case study for scaling UBI initiatives across similar contexts. The evidence gathered from this pilot could demonstrate the effectiveness of UBI in reducing poverty, enhancing food security, and fostering peaceful sustainable practices, thereby making a compelling case for broader implementation.
Global evidence suggests that regular income from UBI can have significant positive effects on food security and community autonomy. Communities receiving cash transfers can diversify their income sources and improve their agricultural practices, thereby reducing pressure on ecosystems. In Colombia, this could mean a reduction in practices that contribute to deforestation, as communities empowered by financial security are more likely to invest in sustainable land management.
Armed conflict in Colombia has left deep scars on the country’s social and environmental fabric. Displaced communities and areas of high ecological degradation serve as constant reminders of the interconnectedness of social and environmental issues. Restoring the environment and reducing inequalities must be tackled together to achieve lasting peace. Implementing UBI, supported by Cap and Share, could be a crucial step toward rebuilding the relationship between communities and nature, creating a foundation for sustainable development.
A Sustainable and Equitable Future
As we look forward, it is essential that the conversation around inclusive financing does not stall. Every dollar allocated to conservation should be seen as an investment in the communities that care for our most precious ecosystems. Both international and national actors must recognise the importance of these initiatives and collaborate to ensure that vulnerable communities have access to the resources they need.
The implementation of UBI, alongside mechanisms like Cap and Share, not only offers an economic solution but also addresses the root causes of social and environmental injustice. In doing so, we not only protect biodiversity and ecosystems but also build more just and resilient societies, capable of facing present and future challenges. The intersection of conservation and social justice is not merely an ideal; it is an urgent necessity that we must embrace to achieve a sustainable future for all.
Concluding this chapter of COP16, it is clear that the path to effective conservation must be inclusive. Promoting dialogue around financing mechanisms that empower vulnerable communities is essential to ensure that conservation strategies are fair and effective. Only by doing so can we strengthen the resilience of our communities and contribute to a more equitable world, where nature and humanity coexist in harmony. A pilot project in Colombia can provide the necessary evidence to scale these initiatives, offering a replicable model on a larger scale, which can be advocated in upcoming scenarios such as COP29 and COP30.
Keep ReadingShow Less
How to Solve Food Insecurity? Treat Healthy Food as a Human Right
There’s more than enough food to feed everyone in the U.S., but the food distribution system is built for profit, not people.
Feb 01, 2024
Here’s a milestone I didn’t even envision when I founded the nonprofit Dion’s Chicago Dream: 1 million pounds of fresh fruits and vegetables purchased, packed, and delivered to people who didn’t have regular access to healthy food.
But that’s what the Dream Team has done, in just three-and-a-half ears, from a standing start as a brand-new organization. For us, it is a day of celebration: We rejoice and take pride in the fact that thousands of our Chicagoland neighbors are incorporating more healthy fruits and vegetables into their diets—and they speak of being healthier, both mentally and physically, as a result.
How do we know this? Every 15 days or so, we survey each of the households receiving our weekly Dream Deliveries of top-quality fresh produce. But don’t take our word for it. Our partners at the American Diabetes Association commissioned a study that found “participants stated that the produce boxes help them maintain or return to a healthier eating track, particularly by increasing their daily intake of fruits and vegetables. As a result, they reported better health outcomes such as reduced blood pressure, improved energy levels, better sugar level management for diabetics, and a sense of overall well-being.”
Apart from programs like ours that take the time to build trusting relationships with recipients, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of interest in understanding exactly who is food insecure and why, so there’s not a lot of understanding about durable solutions to the problem.
I founded Dion’s Chicago Dream because in our city, 1 in 5 households are at risk of food insecurity—they don’t have regular access to enough nutritious food for normal growth and development and an active and healthy life. We started with this vision statement: Ending food insecurity in Chicago so that every resident has consistent access to fresh, nutritious food.
I like bold vision statements as much as the next guy. But after working to get healthy food to people who need it for the past few years and finding a level of success that blows me away, I’m finding it increasingly difficult to envision an end to food insecurity, in Chicago or anywhere else in the country. After three-and-a-half years of hard work and innovation, we’ve made a big difference in some people’s lives, but the problem of food insecurity itself is as big as it ever was. I’m convinced that food insecurity cannot be solved as long as our country fails to treat consistent access to healthy food as a human right.
But while food insecurity cannot be solved, it can be managed—and that’s something I can see our society doing a lot better. As a Black man who grew up often hungry and sometimes homeless in the South Side neighborhood of Englewood—and as a Navy veteran who found himself homeless and hungry once again, after leaving the military—I understand the realities of food insecurity. I knew that if Dion’s Chicago Dream was going to make a difference, it was essential that we always put the needs of our recipients first.
For example, for a lot of the people in my neighborhood, getting to a faraway food pantry during opening hours is dangerous or unrealistic. So instead of asking recipients to come to us, we bring healthy food to people who need it. We started with a single Dream Fridge stocked with healthy food. Then we rolled out our flagship weekly Dream Deliveries of fresh produce, and our sprinter vans fanned out across the city. Then we developed network-enabled Dream Vaults, each of which can serve up to 175 families a week from a neighborhood store or other gathering spot.
We developed processes and procedures, built out infrastructure, and tracked metrics to hold ourselves accountable. As a result, we know not only how many pounds of produce we delivered, but also how the people who received that food feel about their deliveries, and what the effect on their lives has been. I believe food philanthropy—and the entire food sector—need to pay a lot more attention to tracking whether they’re truly making a difference in terms of supplying consistent and nutritious food, and to the physical and mental health effects of increased food security.
It’s frustrating: There’s more than enough food to feed everyone in the U.S. But the food distribution system is built for profit, not people, and nobody’s in charge of tracking who isn’t getting the healthy food they need, let alone figuring out and scaling up solutions. Apart from programs like ours that take the time to build trusting relationships with recipients, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of interest in understanding exactly who is food insecure and why, so there’s not a lot of understanding about durable solutions to the problem. That makes managing food insecurity much harder than it needs to be.
Food nonprofits and philanthropists have good intentions, but that’s not enough. We need to listen to the people we serve, focus on execution, and measure our results. We need to be willing to change and innovate, and to work for the day that as many people as possible have regular access to the healthy food we all need to thrive.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular