Figures, Tables, and Methods

Exec Summary | Pre-1500 | 1600-1868 | 1868-1900 | 1900-1950 - Urbanization | 1900-1950 - Farmers | 1920-1970 | 1975-2000 | 2000-2020 | Conclusion | Data-Tables-Methods | Timeline | Download PDF

Methods

The research process began with determining key themes in the national and regional history of food inequity and then identifying primary and secondary sources specific to Durham, to interpret the unique local story of food inequity around these core themes. Locally-focused scholarship helped clarify local historical timelines, identify key actors and events, and support the analysis of food inequity at the intersections of race and class. Additionally, local memoirs and personal accounts were hugely important to bring key themes down to the level of personal experience. Quotes throughout the report convey larger historical themes through the lens of memory and individual storytelling. New oral histories were completed to help fill in some of the gaps of local recorded memory. Research also included community-based input that occurred through a series of presentations and gallery walks whereby different community stakeholders reacted to initial themes and content and provided feedback. The top recommendation from the gallery-walk was a strong desire for first-person accounts which were incorporated throughout the narrative. To help contextualize the narrative and data original maps and charts were created from sources such as census records, city directories, archival maps, wage and employment statistics, and secondary sources.

The language utilized throughout this report was carefully considered and vetted through a community feedback process. ‘Indigenous Nations’ and ‘Native Peoples’ are used interchangeably to describe the original peoples of this land. ‘Enslaved people’ and ‘enslavers’ are used to describe the relationship of people during the time of slavery. Throughout the report, Black, white, and Latino are adjectives used to describe people, not as nouns, and ‘white’ is not capitalized to invert historic hierarchies.

Figure Data

Figure 14. This map shows the social geography of Durham in 1930.

This map shows the social geography of Durham in 1930.

Source: Tim Stallman, Open Durham

Figure 19. Map showing the distribution and ownership status, either locally-owned or chains, of grocery stores in the city in 1940.

19. Map showing the distribution and ownership status, either locally-owned or chains, of grocery stores in the city in 1940. Courtesy Tim Stallmann, based on data from City Directory research done by Taylor Woolen

Courtesy Tim Stallmann, based on data from City Directory research done by Taylor Woolen

Figure 31. Map showing distribution of public amenities and nuisances in Durham. Black neighborhoods are closer to incinerators and factories and have fewer parks and schools. The red stars indicate neighborhoods with racial deed restrictions. Courtesy Tim Stallmann for Bull City 150.

31. Map showing distribution of public amenities and nuisances in Durham. Black neighborhoods are closer to incinerators and factories and have fewer parks and schools. The red stars indicate neighborhoods with racial deed restrictions. Courtesy Tim Stallmann for Bull City 150. Source: Hill’s 1937 City Directory, Durham Public Works Department 1937 city map, and Open Durham

Source: Hill’s 1937 City Directory, Durham Public Works Department 1937 city map, and Open Durham

Figure 32. HOLC Securities Map of the City of Durham, 1930s. The redlined areas include all five historically Black neighborhoods, and the poorest historically white neighborhood of Edgemont.

Source: Courtesy Mapping Inequality Redlining in New Deal America, University of Richmond

Figure 42. These maps show the differences in grocery store locations and ownership in 1940 and 1980. While there is a dramatic reduction of grocery stores across the city, Hayti and the urban renewal area are strikingly void of grocery stores.

Source: Courtesy Tim Stallmann with research by Taylor Woollen

Figure 46. Map of grocery stores in Durham by ownership status in 1940, 1980, and 2020. From 1980 to 2020, there is not a dramatic difference in the number of stores, but a shift in type. There are now several big box and wholesale stores across Durham as well as a number of smaller international or ethnic grocers.

Source: Courtesy Tim Stalmann with research support by Taylor Woolen

Table Data

Table 1. Percentage of Farmers Owning Their Farms and Average Farm Size for Durham County, 1880-1930.

Percentage of Farmers Owning Their Farms and Average Farm Size for Durham County, 1880-1930
 

1880*

1900

1910

1920

1930

Average Farm Size (acres)

115

96

85

76

71

Black Farm Ownership

N/A

9%

21%

26%

20%

White Farm Ownership

N/A

50%

54%

53%

53%

*1880 figures are for Orange County, from which Durham County was formed in 1881

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 10th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th Census for Agriculture; Chart contained in Janiewski, Sisterhood Denied, 25.

Table 2. Black Land Ownership Chart 1875 - 2000

Black Land Ownership Chart 1875-2000

Sources: Color of Wealth (2006) and Black Farmers in America (2002).

Table 3. US Farms Operated by Black and White Farmers, 1900-1997.

US Farms Operated Black & White Farmers

Sources: 1900-1978: US Commission on Civil Rights, 1982, 3;  1982-1992: 1992 Census of Agriculture

Table 4. Changes in Women Working Outside the Home in Durham Co, 1960 – 2010.

Labor Force Participation of Women

Source: U.S. Census 1960-2010.

Table 5. Charts of Corporate Consolidation in Food System.

beef

 

 

Source: “The Economic Cost of Food Monopolies.” Beth Hoffman, “Behind the Brands: Food Justice and the ‘Big 10’ Food and Beverage Companies” (Oxford: Oxfam, 2013).

Table 6. Jail and Prison Population Rates, 1978-2015 for North Carolina and Durham.

Sources: Prison Policy Initiative and Vera Trends

Table 7. SNAP Benefit Recipients in Durham County, NC 1989 - 2017.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Table 8. Chart of type 2 diabetes rates among adult population in Durham County across race, 2017.

Source: Durham Neighborhood Compass

Table 9. Wages for Food Workers in Durham County, 2019.

Durham County, 2019      
Occupation Estimated Employment Estimated Entry-Level Hourly Wage Estimated Mean Hourly Wage Estimated Median Hourly Wage Estimated Entry-Level Annual Wage Estimated Median Annual Wage
All Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations 17,610 $8.44 $12.12 $10.83 $17,546 $22,516
Fast Food Cooks ----- $9.04 $11.43 $11.93 $18,805 $24,811
Institution and Cafeteria Cooks 430 $10.28 $13.31 $13.16 $21,389 $27,370
Restaurant Cooks 1,760 $10.45 $13.35 $13.25 $21,735 $27,555
Short Order Cooks 90 $9.82 $12.86 $12.45 $20,435 $25,886
Food Preparation Workers 840 $8.41 $11.21 $10.60 $17,493 $22,048
Bartenders 420 $8.46 $14.67 $11.08 $17,601 $23,039
Cafeteria, Food Concession, and Coffee Shop 820 $8.75 $12.65 $12.81 $18,192 $26,648
Waiters and Waitresses 2,980 $8.41 $12.76 $9.88 $17,493 $20,543
Dishwashers 630 $8.75 $11.38 $11.24 $18,198 $23,378
Hosts and Hostesses 830 $8.28 $9.74 $8.94 $17,231 $18,593

Source: City of Durham Department of Economic and Workforce Development