This is something that I've been thinking about with regards to higher education. In the last 5-10 years it has become very common for campuses to open food shelves or food pantries in recognition of the fact that there are a lot more food insecure college students than many people thought there were.
I'm glad there is easily accessible food more places for college students but the need for them is, I think, exacerbated by the fact that we don't properly fund public higher education in this country. Food shelves are helpful (and relatively easy to fill and run for campuses) but Pell grants that actually cover the full cost of tuition and with higher income caps would help even more.
Thanks for bringing this up, Wendy! That's a perfect example of addressing the symptom (which is good and necessary in the short term), and all that action and good feeling obscuring the larger, more difficult to solve problem.
This is also happening at the public school level. Teachers keeping snacks (they buy themselves) in the classroom to feed hungry kids. Some schools are providing clothes and opening gyms earlier so unhoused students can shower & change clothes. Public schools in many places are providing more social services than ever before while root causes remain unresolved.
Wow! I have got some books to order. I have been thinking about this topic and your article gave me more to chew on! I am very curious about Fresh.com, which is a food voucher system that would by-pass the need for a physical place to store food. Additionally, I am interested in having the Food is Medicine folks consider a WIC like program for chronic disease. I work in diabetes so this would mean that my clients with diabetes could qualify for a diabetes food voucher to decrease the gap. Food insecurity is so much more than money - I am seeing how the elderly are impacted because of packaging. Many foods are not going to work because they have packages that they can't open, or require a level of prep that they can't complete (due to age, ability and stamina.) This is a huge issue and I hope you will keep the conversation going.
So appreciate your commentary and the resources you pulled together on this topic! I read Big Hunger and Sweet Charity while researching emergency food access in rural and semi-rural Indiana. I also presented my research at a conference calling people into the fact that food charity is not a sustainable method nor is it working in the present. Dropping my own research paper for a bit more on this because it is so rarely actually relevant in daily conversations :)
I was delighted to find your newsletter via the (fantastic) Decolonizing Diets webinar and have been devouring your posts! This one in particular is very thought-provoking for me. I absolutely 100% agree that the charity model is not working and that we should be focusing on the root causes and anti-oppression/advocacy efforts instead. But! I'm also a long-time volunteer at my local food bank in a South Seattle neighborhood that is diverse but still very segregated. I've always enjoyed the on-the-ground work because the volunteers come together from a wide variety of racial/cultural/economic/political/religious backgrounds in service of a common goal, which feels like an increasingly rare feat these days. (Not to say this is some magical place where everyone gets along all the time—there are tensions and challenges, of course—just that I feel there is tremendous value in bringing together people who may not interact otherwise.)
Wouldn’t it be amazing if we could channel that people power into eradicating poverty?? But if this particular org were to shift to advocacy work, I doubt this same volunteer base would persist. Right now, the work and the rewards are tangible and immediate, and advocacy work isn’t nearly as straightforward or immediately satisfying. To be clear, this isn’t an argument to keep things the way they are! But maybe we also need to ask questions like: how can we make advocacy work more appealing/accessible to people with varying backgrounds and skill sets? How can we build truly diverse communities that help get people’s immediate needs met while simultaneously working to dismantle the system? Can we use this opportunity to create a culture where everyone’s hands, hearts, and minds are engaged long-term, despite the setbacks and incremental gains inherent in policy change work? Also, why stop at food banks? Can we mandate that billionaire-founded charitable foundations redistribute their wealth instead of engaging in philanthrocapitalism that harms the communities they purport to help? Haha now you’ve got me dreaming 😊
Anyway, thanks for this generative post and for your newsletter in general! I will definitely be sharing it with my fellow RDN’s.
Thank you, Alanna! You might be interested in this report from a foundation in Colorado, which is exploring how to make policy advocacy "more inclusive, equitable and racially just": https://coloradohealth.org/reports/colorado-policymaking-processes-summary-conversations-advocacy-organizations I think it is an interesting new direction for advocacy work, and one that has the potential to make that kind of work more satisfying, community-centered, and connected to real life.
So happy to have you here and I appreciate this thoughtful comment!
I grew up in a family that relied on SNAP “food stamps” to eat, and went on to work with and for several local organizations aiming to meet basic needs, introducing advocacy for systems change as a critical part of our vision. I don’t believe there is ever a panacea, but I deeply resonate with the need to look at the system, what result it is designed to produce, and to make radical changes to achieve different results if the underlying issues are not being addressed. Our systems in the U.S. were built to perpetuate inequities along lines of race, ability, gender, sexual orientation, etc...if you aren’t a cis-het white able-bodied male, the system was not designed for your benefit, it was designed to exploit you. So, I’d love to see the funding be (re)directed to families in order to create a basic income floor with which everyone can afford the food and everything else they need. Charity inherently maintains helpers and those who need help, rather than equals with agency.
I would say the charitable food system is necessary but not sufficient. Someone who is hungry today isn't able to wait until our entire system revolutionizes. And at least in my corner of the world, the people who are hungry are not going to favorably view activists that they perceive to be naive. Call it imagining a future where no one goes hungry. Have the call for food to be a human right. Talk about the many, many, many inequities in our current food system, both for the labor and the end user. But any call to defund the charitable food system right now will sound like a call to let people go hungry. And we have enough voices arguing for that in today's world.
Yes, I completely agree that saying "defund" anything is polarizing...but there may be value in that shock, for a system that is deeply entrenched in its ways. And I actually do think shifting the focus from hunger to economic inequality and injustice would be a welcome change for many of the people I know who do or have experienced food insecurity. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
The food charity system doesn’t work for so many people especially disabled people who can only eat certain foods and often can’t physically access food banks. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard things like “poor Black people don’t have the ‘luxury’ of having a peanut allergy or celiac disease.” Neither of which are a luxury and demonstrate that way too many people don’t think these are legitimate medical concerns that poor Black people can have, falling into stereotypes about strength of Black people. It makes me so angry but also structurally I do understand that people are trying to communicate that the systems won’t meet the needs of poor Black disabled people.
Absolutely, disabilities make it so much more difficult to access the current system. And everyone can have food allergies or celiac! What an unfortunate and harmful stereotype.
I'm curious about this too. I've always felt weird about TT because they have a policy of not offering baby formula. The intention is of course increasing breastfeeding rates but I'm not sure that plays out in reality. I bet there's a lot of collateral damage though.
While I appreciate the perspective, I think there are some serious trauma-informed language that should be incorporated into some of these articles. Stating something like "defund food banks" is incredibly triggering and does not consider how much privilege it takes to make that statement. Food banks are also critical elements of care when disasters strike or for populations that may not qualify for government aid. The system itself is also designed to keep people in poverty. The moment you make too much, although it isn’t enough to subsist in today’s economy, you lose support. In addition, the agreements presented by the author make the same mistake the author is arguing against which is not targeting the root cause. The food banks are only one component of a very convoluted and difficult system to navigate for populations that may be experiencing food insecurity.
I think we agree on a lot, Ana. Food banks and the current "emergency" food assistance system were intended to be short-term, as you would need after emergency...but because they are not addressing the root issue of poverty, there is no recovery possible. It will not end. I would completely be in favor of this style of aid in the aftermath of an actual disaster.
And I agree that there are extreme limitations to the current government aid that is available, which is why I don't think "put more money into SNAP or WIC" is the answer either. I think it is about a reframing of the issue entirely, one that is centered on economic justice, not just food security.
And thank you for the feedback on the title -- I will definitely think about potentially triggering impacts more carefully next time. Thanks for sharing your point of view!
I think also putting time frames like “short term” aren’t helpful. Poverty isn’t something that can be solved sometimes even within a lifetime. There are deep generational inequities that have persisted that will take generations to change. We need things to persist in different timeframes to be able to make sure immediate, short term and long term impact can be achieved and sustained. And food insecurity issues move well beyond organizations providing access to meals. Climate change, food chains and world wide food inequities that persist are also part of a very complicated issue. I think the danger with the article is highlighting the food banks as a cause to be rethought even though what should be considered is reframing the way we exist as a society and as citizens of this world.
I agree, the fact that poverty persists over lifetimes or even generations IS the problem. And yes, it is complicated and food banks are just one part of it -- "reframing the way we exist as a society and as citizens of this world" is a beautiful thesis of what I'd like this newsletter to be. This essay is just one tiny piece of creating that larger picture.
I’m so glad to find a space where other folks working through these questions. I work in food systems planning and policy advocacy in two red states. I agree that poverty is a root cause that most public programs and private charities don’t address. But public and many private funders don’t allow advocacy activities while our states are piling on restrictions for public programs and trying to ban UBI. It’s unlikely that we’ll get universal school meals here. Ballot initiatives are the only way we’ve enacted increases to the minimum wage. If we can’t address the cause then we have to work to fill the gaps until it is possible.
I've been thinking about this a lot in relation to my internship with an organization that does primarily serve as a food pantry. However, the organization is a bit more multifaceted – also providing access to healthcare, assistance with housing, and more. It even has an advocacy department that works at all levels of the government to advance social justice initiatives for the community it serves!
To me, this seems like an appropriate balance – continue providing immediate relief while participating in systems-level changes. However, it is a large organization in a big city with lots of employees and support, so I'd imagine it isn't so simple for all food banks to transition to doing more systems-level work. It seems unlikely that food banks will just quit providing food and pivot to advocacy, so what do you think is a reasonable transition for the average food bank?
This is something that I've been thinking about with regards to higher education. In the last 5-10 years it has become very common for campuses to open food shelves or food pantries in recognition of the fact that there are a lot more food insecure college students than many people thought there were.
I'm glad there is easily accessible food more places for college students but the need for them is, I think, exacerbated by the fact that we don't properly fund public higher education in this country. Food shelves are helpful (and relatively easy to fill and run for campuses) but Pell grants that actually cover the full cost of tuition and with higher income caps would help even more.
Thanks for bringing this up, Wendy! That's a perfect example of addressing the symptom (which is good and necessary in the short term), and all that action and good feeling obscuring the larger, more difficult to solve problem.
This is also happening at the public school level. Teachers keeping snacks (they buy themselves) in the classroom to feed hungry kids. Some schools are providing clothes and opening gyms earlier so unhoused students can shower & change clothes. Public schools in many places are providing more social services than ever before while root causes remain unresolved.
Wow! I have got some books to order. I have been thinking about this topic and your article gave me more to chew on! I am very curious about Fresh.com, which is a food voucher system that would by-pass the need for a physical place to store food. Additionally, I am interested in having the Food is Medicine folks consider a WIC like program for chronic disease. I work in diabetes so this would mean that my clients with diabetes could qualify for a diabetes food voucher to decrease the gap. Food insecurity is so much more than money - I am seeing how the elderly are impacted because of packaging. Many foods are not going to work because they have packages that they can't open, or require a level of prep that they can't complete (due to age, ability and stamina.) This is a huge issue and I hope you will keep the conversation going.
Yes, I am really interested to see where the Food is Medicine work goes. I talk a bit more about the other components beyond food that go into food security in this post, which you might be interested in! https://anjaliruth.substack.com/p/food-security-is-good-but-who-provides
So appreciate your commentary and the resources you pulled together on this topic! I read Big Hunger and Sweet Charity while researching emergency food access in rural and semi-rural Indiana. I also presented my research at a conference calling people into the fact that food charity is not a sustainable method nor is it working in the present. Dropping my own research paper for a bit more on this because it is so rarely actually relevant in daily conversations :)
https://rdcu.be/cNl8g
Yay! Can't wait to read it.
I was delighted to find your newsletter via the (fantastic) Decolonizing Diets webinar and have been devouring your posts! This one in particular is very thought-provoking for me. I absolutely 100% agree that the charity model is not working and that we should be focusing on the root causes and anti-oppression/advocacy efforts instead. But! I'm also a long-time volunteer at my local food bank in a South Seattle neighborhood that is diverse but still very segregated. I've always enjoyed the on-the-ground work because the volunteers come together from a wide variety of racial/cultural/economic/political/religious backgrounds in service of a common goal, which feels like an increasingly rare feat these days. (Not to say this is some magical place where everyone gets along all the time—there are tensions and challenges, of course—just that I feel there is tremendous value in bringing together people who may not interact otherwise.)
Wouldn’t it be amazing if we could channel that people power into eradicating poverty?? But if this particular org were to shift to advocacy work, I doubt this same volunteer base would persist. Right now, the work and the rewards are tangible and immediate, and advocacy work isn’t nearly as straightforward or immediately satisfying. To be clear, this isn’t an argument to keep things the way they are! But maybe we also need to ask questions like: how can we make advocacy work more appealing/accessible to people with varying backgrounds and skill sets? How can we build truly diverse communities that help get people’s immediate needs met while simultaneously working to dismantle the system? Can we use this opportunity to create a culture where everyone’s hands, hearts, and minds are engaged long-term, despite the setbacks and incremental gains inherent in policy change work? Also, why stop at food banks? Can we mandate that billionaire-founded charitable foundations redistribute their wealth instead of engaging in philanthrocapitalism that harms the communities they purport to help? Haha now you’ve got me dreaming 😊
Anyway, thanks for this generative post and for your newsletter in general! I will definitely be sharing it with my fellow RDN’s.
Thank you, Alanna! You might be interested in this report from a foundation in Colorado, which is exploring how to make policy advocacy "more inclusive, equitable and racially just": https://coloradohealth.org/reports/colorado-policymaking-processes-summary-conversations-advocacy-organizations I think it is an interesting new direction for advocacy work, and one that has the potential to make that kind of work more satisfying, community-centered, and connected to real life.
So happy to have you here and I appreciate this thoughtful comment!
Oooh thank you for this, very glad that there is some conversation around the topic and can't wait to check out the report!
I grew up in a family that relied on SNAP “food stamps” to eat, and went on to work with and for several local organizations aiming to meet basic needs, introducing advocacy for systems change as a critical part of our vision. I don’t believe there is ever a panacea, but I deeply resonate with the need to look at the system, what result it is designed to produce, and to make radical changes to achieve different results if the underlying issues are not being addressed. Our systems in the U.S. were built to perpetuate inequities along lines of race, ability, gender, sexual orientation, etc...if you aren’t a cis-het white able-bodied male, the system was not designed for your benefit, it was designed to exploit you. So, I’d love to see the funding be (re)directed to families in order to create a basic income floor with which everyone can afford the food and everything else they need. Charity inherently maintains helpers and those who need help, rather than equals with agency.
Yes. This is it. Thank you for sharing your story.
I would say the charitable food system is necessary but not sufficient. Someone who is hungry today isn't able to wait until our entire system revolutionizes. And at least in my corner of the world, the people who are hungry are not going to favorably view activists that they perceive to be naive. Call it imagining a future where no one goes hungry. Have the call for food to be a human right. Talk about the many, many, many inequities in our current food system, both for the labor and the end user. But any call to defund the charitable food system right now will sound like a call to let people go hungry. And we have enough voices arguing for that in today's world.
Yes, I completely agree that saying "defund" anything is polarizing...but there may be value in that shock, for a system that is deeply entrenched in its ways. And I actually do think shifting the focus from hunger to economic inequality and injustice would be a welcome change for many of the people I know who do or have experienced food insecurity. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
It was interesting to read your article. Your thoughts on this problem gave me something to think about.
The food charity system doesn’t work for so many people especially disabled people who can only eat certain foods and often can’t physically access food banks. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard things like “poor Black people don’t have the ‘luxury’ of having a peanut allergy or celiac disease.” Neither of which are a luxury and demonstrate that way too many people don’t think these are legitimate medical concerns that poor Black people can have, falling into stereotypes about strength of Black people. It makes me so angry but also structurally I do understand that people are trying to communicate that the systems won’t meet the needs of poor Black disabled people.
Absolutely, disabilities make it so much more difficult to access the current system. And everyone can have food allergies or celiac! What an unfortunate and harmful stereotype.
There's a similar debate in the UK about the activities of The Trussell Trust. They sit on massive reservoirs of cash.
Oh, interesting. Thanks for sharing that -- I'll look into it!
I'm curious about this too. I've always felt weird about TT because they have a policy of not offering baby formula. The intention is of course increasing breastfeeding rates but I'm not sure that plays out in reality. I bet there's a lot of collateral damage though.
I think so too. Fed is best. Alienating parents who use formula milk is not ideal.
While I appreciate the perspective, I think there are some serious trauma-informed language that should be incorporated into some of these articles. Stating something like "defund food banks" is incredibly triggering and does not consider how much privilege it takes to make that statement. Food banks are also critical elements of care when disasters strike or for populations that may not qualify for government aid. The system itself is also designed to keep people in poverty. The moment you make too much, although it isn’t enough to subsist in today’s economy, you lose support. In addition, the agreements presented by the author make the same mistake the author is arguing against which is not targeting the root cause. The food banks are only one component of a very convoluted and difficult system to navigate for populations that may be experiencing food insecurity.
I think we agree on a lot, Ana. Food banks and the current "emergency" food assistance system were intended to be short-term, as you would need after emergency...but because they are not addressing the root issue of poverty, there is no recovery possible. It will not end. I would completely be in favor of this style of aid in the aftermath of an actual disaster.
And I agree that there are extreme limitations to the current government aid that is available, which is why I don't think "put more money into SNAP or WIC" is the answer either. I think it is about a reframing of the issue entirely, one that is centered on economic justice, not just food security.
And thank you for the feedback on the title -- I will definitely think about potentially triggering impacts more carefully next time. Thanks for sharing your point of view!
I think also putting time frames like “short term” aren’t helpful. Poverty isn’t something that can be solved sometimes even within a lifetime. There are deep generational inequities that have persisted that will take generations to change. We need things to persist in different timeframes to be able to make sure immediate, short term and long term impact can be achieved and sustained. And food insecurity issues move well beyond organizations providing access to meals. Climate change, food chains and world wide food inequities that persist are also part of a very complicated issue. I think the danger with the article is highlighting the food banks as a cause to be rethought even though what should be considered is reframing the way we exist as a society and as citizens of this world.
I agree, the fact that poverty persists over lifetimes or even generations IS the problem. And yes, it is complicated and food banks are just one part of it -- "reframing the way we exist as a society and as citizens of this world" is a beautiful thesis of what I'd like this newsletter to be. This essay is just one tiny piece of creating that larger picture.
I’m so glad to find a space where other folks working through these questions. I work in food systems planning and policy advocacy in two red states. I agree that poverty is a root cause that most public programs and private charities don’t address. But public and many private funders don’t allow advocacy activities while our states are piling on restrictions for public programs and trying to ban UBI. It’s unlikely that we’ll get universal school meals here. Ballot initiatives are the only way we’ve enacted increases to the minimum wage. If we can’t address the cause then we have to work to fill the gaps until it is possible.
I've been thinking about this a lot in relation to my internship with an organization that does primarily serve as a food pantry. However, the organization is a bit more multifaceted – also providing access to healthcare, assistance with housing, and more. It even has an advocacy department that works at all levels of the government to advance social justice initiatives for the community it serves!
To me, this seems like an appropriate balance – continue providing immediate relief while participating in systems-level changes. However, it is a large organization in a big city with lots of employees and support, so I'd imagine it isn't so simple for all food banks to transition to doing more systems-level work. It seems unlikely that food banks will just quit providing food and pivot to advocacy, so what do you think is a reasonable transition for the average food bank?