A Sociology of Food and Nutrition ebook The Social... - (4 Food Insecurity in Australian Households From Charity to Entitlement PDF

Preview

Summary

Download A Sociology of Food and Nutrition ebook The Social... - (4 Food Insecurity in Australian Households From Charity to Entitlement PDF

Description

5

CHAPTER 4 Food Insecurity in Australian Households: From Charity to Entitlement

55

CHAPTER

4 FOOD INSECURITY INAUSTRALIAN HOUSEHOLDS:FROM CHARITY TOENTITLEMENT Danielle Gallegos, Sue Booth, Sue Kleve, Rebecca McKechnie and Rebecca Lindberg

Copyright © 2016. Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

OVERVIEW › What is food insecurity? › Why is food insecurity an issue in high income countries? › What does a human rights approach look like in alleviating food insecurity? Food and nutrition security exists when all people at all times have physical, social and economic access to food, which is safe and consumed in sufficient quantity and quality to meet their dietary needs and food preferences. It is underpinned by four pillars: availability, access, stability and utilisation. A neoliberal government approach to the alleviation of food insecurity is conceptualised as an individualised responsibility. As a result, emergency food relief agencies are the primary safety net for food insecure households in Australia, with the dominant response provided by charitable food relief through soup kitchens, meals, vouchers and food parcels. While the efforts of the charitable sector are admirable, they are also problematic as they are based on a moral responsibility to help needy people and are ineffective in addressing the issue of food insecurity. The heavy emphasis on food philanthropy and humanitarian

assistance work has undermined government responsibilities regarding the right to food. This chapter will identify social and environmental determinants of food insecurity: the measurement of food insecurity and its social and physical outcomes. It will critique current responses practised to alleviate food insecurity at an individual household level, and explore the nature of a human rights approach that moves food from a need to an entitlement and ensures human dignity is maintained.

KEYTERMS charitable food organisations consumerism coping strategy deficits-basedmodel foodaccess food availability food insecurity food security food stability food utilisation humanrights neoliberalism productivism safetynet social security welfare

DANIELLE GALLEGOS AL. appetite. ProQuest Ebook Central Germov, J., & Williams, L. (2016). A sociology of food and nutrition ebook : The social appetite : ET the social http://ebookcentral.pro Created from flinders on 2021-03-20 00:00:21.

6 5

56

PART 2 THE FOOD SYSTEM: FOOD POLITICS, PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION

Introduction The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has defined food security as ‘when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets the dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life’ (Committee on World Food Security 2012; Pinstrup-Andersen 2009). This definition links food security with nutrition security and is supported by a framework that identifies the four pillars of food security outlined in Box 4.1. The definition is further underpinned by international law and the Right to Food, where an active and healthy life is defined as one that is fulfilling, dignified and free from anxiety (Ziegler 2008).

BOX 4.1 THE FOOD SECURITY FRAMEWORK:THE FOUR PILLARS Availability refers to a reliable and consistent source of enough quality food for an active and healthy life. At a macro level, this has been the primary focus of nation-states; however, simply increasing production is not enough to ensure availability at a household level. The availability of food may include home food production, transport systems to ensure food is available away from where it is grown, and exchange systems for food. Food needs to be available in socially acceptable ways that meet the definition of human dignity. Availability does not necessarily predict access. Access acknowledges the resources required in order to put food on the table, and could be economic or physical (transport). It refers to the food needed by all household members to meet dietary requirements and food preferences, and to achieve and maintain optimal nutritional status. This takes into consideration prioritisation of food by the household over other goods and services as well as intra-household distribution offood.

Copyright © 2016. Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Utilisation refers to the intake of sufficient and safe food that meets individual physiological, sensory and cultural requirements. It also refers to physical, social and human resources to transform food into meals. It encompasses food safety as well as sanitary and hygienic conditions. Stability recognises that food insecurity can be transitory, cyclical or chronic. If food security is to exist, then availability, access and utilisation need to be stable over time and not subject to weather variations, food price shifts or civil conflict. (Carletto etal. 2013; Ecker & Breisinger2012)

______ Emerging initially as a way of conceptualising the production of enough food on a national scale to remove the spectre of hunger, food security has, with the rise of neoliberalism, had a stronger focus on the household and individual (Jarosz 2011). The concept of food security is complex and multifaceted where agriculture, gender, poverty, equity, economics, climate change and health intersect (Jarosz 2011). High-income countries such as Australia, New Zealand, the United States and Canada have worked to build strong agricultural infrastructures so that they can produce a surfeit of food. The rise of neoliberalism has seen a concurrent increase in agribusiness where productivism and the expansion of agriculture and the value-adding to foods post-production (irrespective of social and environmental cost) is seen as the solution to food insecurity (Lockie 2015, Lawrence et al. 2013; Department of Agriculture 2012). However, despite this excess of food there are members of the population that still struggle to put food on the table and, as a result, have compromised social, physical and emotional health (Cook et al. 2013; Seligman et al. 2010). The emphasis,

Germov, J., & Williams, L. (2016). A sociology of food and nutrition ebook : The social appetite : the social appetite. ProQuest Ebook Central http://ebookcentral.pro Created from flinders on 2021-03-20 00:00:21.

7 5

Copyright © 2016. Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

CHAPTER 4 Food Insecurity in Australian Households: From Charity to Entitlement

57

however, is shifting away from a focus on quantity-only to a more nuanced approach where quality (nutritionally, culturally and from a safety perspective) is considered. Importantly for high-income countries and countries undergoing the nutrition transition, there is recognition that quality is not only about adequate energy and protein. Access to energy dense–nutrient poor foods and limited access to nutrient-rich foods that contribute to an ‘active and healthy life’ is now considered an integral element of food insecurity. Food security is ostensibly underpinned by the right to food enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). However, with political systems where the mantra is personal responsibility within a market-driven economy, the focus has shifted from ‘human rights’ to the ‘rights of the consumer’. Initially, food insecurity was regarded as being based on an ‘individual’s ability to produce or purchase food and . . . not [as] a human right’ (Jarosz 2011, p. 120). More recently, in line with other discourses around consumerism, the argument has been that the consumer has the power to shape the food supply and make demands on the food system to meet individual needs (Kneafsey et al. 2013). In other words, failure to do this is a deficit of the individual, whether it is a lack of nutrition knowledge, or a reduced capacity to procure foods (Dowler & O’Connor 2012). A rights-based approach, after Amartya Sen, argues that hunger is not an involuntary lack of food but rather entitlement failure (Sen 2000). In the case of famine, these entitlements include four main legal sources of food: production-based entitlement (growing food); trade-based entitlement (buying food); own-labour entitlement (working for food); inheritance and transfer entitlement (being given food by others) (Sen 1981). In environments where famine is not looming, Mariana Chilton and David Rose (2009) argue that ‘a rights-based approach focuses on ways in which conditions and environments can be altered so that people take an active role in procuring food’ (p. 1207). Good nutrition, therefore, should not be something reliant on acts of charity but is, rather, ‘the duty and obligation of a country to its people’ (p. 1207). The rights-based approach focuses on accountability and transparency from government, public participation and addressing vulnerability and discrimination (Chilton & Rose 2009). This chapter will examine, within the Australian context, how we measure food insecurity, who is experiencing food insecurity and its prevalence. It will also explore the determinants and health outcomes of food insecurity, critique current responses employed to alleviate food insecurity at a household level and explore the nature of a human rights approach.

Measuring and monitoring food security The collection of large population data sets from a deficits-based model can be seen as continuing to marginalise certain groups. The data has the potential to create a binary between normative and deviant behaviour, which can be used ‘to inform political and administrative decisions about interventions to improve health and reduce deviance’ (Couch et al. 2015, p. 129). Alternatively, a data vacuum or lack of well coordinated data or inadequate data could mean the issue fails to have any political traction and there is no recognition that interventions are required. From a human rights perspective, an interagency approach could collect data on food security that would monitor the situation; educate and encourage public participation; set goals for action; tailor advocacy efforts; and inform nutrition and poverty-related policy (Chilton & Rose 2009). The varied and complex nature of food security creates significant challenges in its measurement. This is reflected by a lack of consensus (within countries and internationally) regarding the core household indicators that are required to assess food security status. As a

DANIELLE GALLEGOS AL. appetite. ProQuest Ebook Central Germov, J., & Williams, L. (2016). A sociology of food and nutrition ebook : The social appetite : ET the social http://ebookcentral.pro Created from flinders on 2021-03-20 00:00:21.

8 5

Copyright © 2016. Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

58

PART 2 THE FOOD SYSTEM: FOOD POLITICS, PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION

result, a number of tools (both direct and indirect measures of food security) are utilised that vary in the pillars of food security they assess, the content they measure, and the quantity and quality of data collected (Carletto et al. 2013; Coates 2013). In Australia, efforts to monitor food insecurity at the household and community levels are, at best, ad hoc. With limited collaboration or consensus across organisations working to address the issue, a variety of measures to assess food insecurity have been adopted, which have limited opportunities for comparisons and the identification of prevalence. Lack of measurement keeps a potentially politically embarrassing problem essentially invisible. However, for those at the frontline, working in the welfare sector, emergency food relief and academia, the issue is visible, salient and growing. At the community level, two of the main indicators of food insecurity are indirect measures, and include healthy food access baskets (which provide an indication of food affordability, but not food insecurity), and the number of individuals accessing emergency food relief. The latter serves to underestimate the true burden of food insecurity, only assessing those at the most severe ends of the food insecurity spectrum. As a coping strategy, accessing charitable food relief is recognised as the strategy of last resort (Lambie-Mumford & Dowler 2014; Loopstra & Tarasuk 2015). At the household level, formal data collection by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) every three years directly assesses food insecurity via the use of a single item that asks ‘in the last 12 months, have you run out of food before you had money to purchase more?’ (ABS 2013). For respondents who answer affirmatively, this item is followed up by a question assessing whether household members went without food. This attempts to provide an indication of the level of severity of food insecurity experienced (ABS 2013). This data is collected in the National Health Survey (NHS). It should be noted that one, or even two, items are unable to capture the full spectrum of such a complex phenomenon (Bickel et al. 2013). In the case of food insecurity, it provides a simplistic view, suggesting the issue to be one of quantity alone and failing to consider quality and the ability to obtain food via socially acceptable means. The sole focus of the indicator is on ‘running out of food’; thus it is only able to assess ‘food insufficiency’ (the more severe end of the food insecurity spectrum), and fails to capture the largest proportion of food insecure households—those who may be experiencing the phenomenon in its milder forms. Less severe food insecurity may manifest as stress or anxiety related to food acquisition or the household budget. This group includes those who may be utilising coping mechanisms such as adjusting normal food intakes, supplementing with lower quality foods, and eating smaller portion sizes. Families that have not reached, nor may ever reach, the more severe end in which food in the household is depleted, may still have compromised health and human rights (Bickel et al. 2013). Research has consistently shown that the use of this single-item may result in an underestimation of up to ten percentage points when compared to the prevalence of food insecurity ascertained by more comprehensive multi-item tools. The predicted prevalence of food insecurity among the general Australian population may, therefore, be closer to 15 per cent (Nolan et al. 2006), rather than the 4 per cent reported for the general population in the findings of the most recent NHS (ABS 2015a, p. 6). In addition, this prevalence is likely to be further underestimated due to underrepresentation of the groups at highest risk of food insecurity, because of a reliance on landline telephone sampling and data collection from households (Grande & Taylor 2010; Turrell & Najman 1995). Underestimation of the true prevalence of food insecurity has resulted in the perception that it is not a highly significant problem among the Australian population except for those most disadvantaged. Under this assumption, and with claims that the neoliberal welfare system is

Germov, J., & Williams, L. (2016). A sociology of food and nutrition ebook : The social appetite : the social appetite. ProQuest Ebook Central http://ebookcentral.pro Created from flinders on 2021-03-20 00:00:21.

9 5

CHAPTER 4 Food Insecurity in Australian Households: From Charity to Entitlement

59

sufficient to meet the basic financial requirements of living, successive federal governments have successfully relegated the responsibility of addressing food insecurity to non-government organisations (NGOs), most commonly emergency food relief (EFR) providers. To truly encapsulate the extent of food insecurity and its social and health outcomes, monitoring and surveillance efforts require a coordinated approach using comprehensive and frequent measurement at the household, community and national levels. No existing tools (including the single-item currently used in the NHS and the widely used, multi-item US Department of Agriculture Food Security Survey Module) successfully assess the four pillars of food insecurity. Rather, the majority of tools have a sole focus on food ‘access’, specifically financial access, failing to assess other barriers to food access, or any factors pertaining to food availability, food utilisation or food stability. As such, there are no existing measures able to comprehensively identify the barriers to food security, thus limiting opportunities for the development of effective policy and interventions. Surveillance would ideally connect data on income, housing affordability, food security, food pricing and affordability, nutritional adequacy and diet quality to provide a comprehensive picture. This approach would clearly identify food as one of the cornerstones of human rights and inform a long overdue anti-poverty strategy in Australia.

Copyright © 2016. Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Who is food insecure inAustralia? Food insecurity in high-income countries disproportionately affects those experiencing a higher level of relative disadvantage. Disadvantage is usually conflated to mean ‘low income’, and these households are more likely to be food insecure. The majority of people on low incomes tend to rely on social security and pensions as their primary income source, and can struggle to afford food and other basic needs (King et al. 2012). Highly marginalised individuals, such as people experiencing homelessness (Booth 2006; Crawford et al. 2015), refugees, asylum seekers (McKay & Dunn 2015; Gallegos et al. 2008) and Australians who identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander—especially those living in regional and remote areas (ABS 2015b)—are at the greatest risk of food insecurity and are the most likely to experience the issue long-term. For some of these groups low income is only one factor contributing to food insecurity. Lack of access to household equipment for food preparation and storage, housing shortages, overcrowding and lack of food availability (due to infrastructure or culture) are also known contributors (Bailie et al. 2010). With the affordability of housing and utilities on the decrease there appear to be growing numbers of the ‘working poor’ and ‘low/low-middle income’ Australian households at risk of food insecurity (Ramsey et al. 2012). Melbourne households in medium socioeconomic areas have been reported as experiencing food insecurity at levels similar to or above national data (Kavanagh et al. 2007). This is supported by recent analysis of the Victorian Population Health Survey food security data indicating that low-middle income Victorians are experiencing food insecurity, and for some households this a weekly or fortnightly occurrence (Kleve et al. 2015).

What is theprevalence offood insecurity inAustralia? As mentioned previously, the 2011–2012 NHS reported that approximately 4 per cent of people were living in a household that, in the previous 12 months, had run out of food and had not been able to afford to buy more. Of these, 1.5 per cent went without food (ABS 2015a). Based on this

DANIELLE GALLEGOS AL. appetite. ProQuest Ebook Central Germov, J., & Williams, L. (2016). A sociology of food and nutrition ebook : The social appetite : ET the social http://ebookcentral.pro Created from flinders on 2021-03-20 00:00:21.

0 6

Copyright © 2016. Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

60

PART 2 THE FOOD SYSTEM: FOOD POLITICS, PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION

figure, which we know to underestimate the prevalence of food insecurity, 900,000 people in Australia would describe their household as food insecure. For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households, the same question identified 22 per cent were food insecure with 7 per cent going without food; in non-remote areas, the proportion was about 20 per cent, increasing to nearly 31 per cent in remote areas with two-thirds of these (21 per cent...