THE P WER OF FOOD COMMUNITY EXPERIENCES OF TACKLING FOOD INSECURITY - ROSE LASKO-SKINNER MAIYORAA JEYABRABA - Demos
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
THE P WER OF FOOD COMMUNITY EXPERIENCES OF TACKLING FOOD INSECURITY ROSE LASKO-SKINNER MAIYORAA JEYABRABA AUGUST 2021
Open Access. Some rights reserved.
Open Access. Some rights reserved. As the
publisher of this work, Demos wants to encourage
the circulation of our work as widely as possible
while retaining the copyright. We therefore have an
open access policy which enables anyone to access
our content online without charge. Anyone can
download, save, perform or distribute this
work in any format, including translation, without
written permission. This is subject to the terms
of the Creative Commons By Share Alike licence.
The main conditions are:
• Demos and the author(s) are credited including
our web address www.demos.co.uk
• If you use our work, you share the results
under a similar licence
A full copy of the licence can be found at
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by-sa/3.0/legalcode
You are welcome to ask for permission to use this
work for purposes other than those covered by the
licence. Demos gratefully acknowledges the work
of Creative Commons in inspiring our approach to
copyright. To find out more go to
www.creativecommons.org
This project was supported by the British Poultry Council
Published by Demos August 2021
© Demos. Some rights reserved.
15 Whitehall, London, SW1A 2DD
T: 020 3878 3955
hello@demos.co.uk
www.demos.co.uk
2
C NTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PAGE 4
FOREWORD PAGE 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGE 7
INTRODUCTION PAGE 10
CHAPTER 1 PAGE 12
THE VALUE OF FOOD
CHAPTER 2 PAGE 16
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT-LED FOOD SUPPORT TODAY
CHAPTER 3 PAGE 21
THE TRIPLE DIVIDEND OF COMMUNITY GROUPS
RECOMMENDATIONS PAGE 26
EXPANDING THE FOOD-FIRST APPROACH TO TACKLING FOOD INSECURITY
APPENDIX A PAGE 32
APPENDIX B PAGE 34
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report has benefited from the hard work and talent of a number of brilliant people.
First we would like to thank the British Poultry Council for their financial support that made this
piece of work possible.
We would also like to thank the experts we spoke with from Salford University, Scope and
The Trussell Trust. Particular thanks go to Dr Megan Blake for her indispensable guidance and
quality assurance throughout the project.
At Demos, huge thanks go to Heather Williams-Taplin, Harry Carr and Polly Mackenzie for
their exceptional guidance from start to finish. Thanks also go to Ben Glover for providing
thoughtful advice throughout. And finally, thanks go to Andrew Phillips, Maeve Thompson and
Josh Tapper for their help at the report’s crucial final stages.
Most importantly, we want to thank the individuals who took the time to tell us about their
experiences of being vulnerable to food, as well as the people and organisations that made it
possible, in particular Alicia Weston at Bags of Taste, Joseph Chow at Community Shop and
Fiona Williams and Mark Game at The Bread and Butter Thing.
Rose Lasko-Skinner
Maiyoraa Jeyabraba
4
FOREWORD:
HOW CAN WE WORK
TOGETHER TO PUT
FOOD ON EVERY
TABLE?
As we welcome the much-awaited part II of can afford to eat British food produced to British
the National Food Strategy, we want to start a standards. From a customer in a supermarket, a
conversation about the power of food and the role patient in hospital, a child in school, to someone who
of food producers in delivering a food system that needs help from a charity or foodbank, everyone
leaves no one behind. Maintaining a secure supply should have the privilege of eating British.
of food is essential to feeding the nation. We have
commissioned this report to help put British food British farmers have worked incredibly hard to build
back at the heart of our society at a time when it’s a food system that enhances British food values and
most needed. guarantees world class standards of production from
farm to fork. The Food Strategy’s recommendations
present an opportunity for us as a nation to bolster
A DICHOTOMY THAT MUST BE FIXED the heart of Britain’s food supply and secure it for
generations to come.
On one hand we are among the most affordable
nations in the world for food, and on the other we
have seen a year-on-year increase in the use of
FOOD BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER
foodbanks. British food must be at the forefront of
fixing that dichotomy. Now is the time for British The UK is brilliant at food and farming; climate, skills,
food producers and food society to come forward resources, attitude, and infrastructure mean that
and help the government in delivering a food we have world-class production standards turning
strategy that is built on a sustainable, secure and out high quality food, not least in poultry meat. We
trusted supply of food for all, produced to world- should be at the forefront of feeding our citizens, but
class standards. we sometimes forget what our products mean at a
human level. From the pleasure of a Sunday lunch,
With the economic and social pressures created by the school meals that feed the minds of our young
Brexit and Covid, access to food will become one people, the shared meals that bring people together,
of our nation’s biggest challenges. If we cannot and too often the life-saving hot meal for those who
find a solution to labour (over half of the poultry need it most.
meat workforce is non-UK) and trade (the value of
our exports has an effect on UK prices) then we run As a food sector, an industry, we should never be
the risk of creating a two-tier food system with the separate from society even if occasionally we lose
average citizen forced to rely on imported food. A sight of our social purpose. Food is an integral part
National Food Strategy must prevent the creation of our lives and our communities. It should remain
of a two-tier food system, in which only the affluent affordable, available and accessible across society
5and at standards that everyone deserves, whether
they have the luxury of choice or not. Food is about
health, jobs, security, social cohesion, mobility,
opportunities, trade, circular economy, sustainability
and wellbeing; but most of all it is about people, our
people, all of whom deserve safe, wholesome and
nutritious British food.
HUNGER MUST NOT BE NORMALISED
Everyday people go to bed hungry; parents make
the choice to forego a meal, so their children don’t
have to; a school dinner is the only hot food that
some kids get; more of us are driven to use food
banks; and in-work poverty is challenging the
affordability of even basic food. This is not, and
should never be, normal.
In hunger there has emerged a strong charitable
sector within communities. This is populated by a
lot of amazing people and organisations, all doing
fantastic work; not just in ensuring hungry people
eat, but in providing a gateway to services such
as financial or mental health support. Hunger is
currently being abandoned to whatever charities
and community groups can achieve. While these
organisations are doing some wonderful work, every
single one of them would happily cease to exist if
their services were no longer needed.
Richard Griffiths, Chief Executive,
British Poultry Council
6EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Ensuring access to good quality food is an essential • Too often this group has to make compromises on
part of eradicating food insecurity long-term. health and standards in order to eat. It is likely that
• People who are food insecure place significant further shocks or changes to the food system will
value on what they eat, in particular the quality create more acute forms of food insecurity if not
and nutritional value, although they often have to well managed.
compromise quality and health in order to meet • In the future, changes to the quality and standard
their costs. In our open access survey of people of food could seriously hamper their ability to
vulnerable to food insecurity we found the top access good food. This is particularly concerning
three values were: given our findings on how access to good quality
• Quality food is often the key to encouraging people to
access other services that can make them more
• Health
resilient long-term.
• Cost
• When able to access good quality food, Current government support for people facing
respondents explained how it had immediate and food insecurity, while providing a lifeline to people
positive impacts on their quality of life, mental in crisis, too often fails to provide a pathway out of
health, self-worth and confidence - in addition to food insecurity.
their physical health. As a result, the standard and
• Government support during the pandemic
quality of food this group is able to access has a
provided a vital lifeline to those experiencing food
significant impact on their capacity to make long-
insecurity, but too often failed to provide them with
term changes to their lives and become more
healthy or good quality food.
resilient.
• Many respondents in our open access
• In addition to personal capacity, food plays an
survey who received government assistance
important role in family and social lives and can
described eating poor quality food or
be an important mechanism for people to build
unhealthy food, or simply not receiving
relationships with new people. Without being able
enough food and skipping meals as a result.
to access good ingredients or good food, many are
at risk of further isolation and being disconnected • Receiving poor quality food through
from other services that can provide a pathway out government schemes or emergency food
of food insecurity. By contrast, the capacity to meet provision often made respondents in our
new people and build social networks can have open access survey feel worthless and
profound effects on people’s quality of life and disempowered.
resilience. • Most respondents to our survey that
received Universal Credit often struggled
Protecting the UK food system, including current to make their payments cover their rent,
food standards, is essential in preventing further bills and food, finding themselves having
inequity in the food system. to compromise on quality or health in order
to make ends meet. They often relied on
• People who are vulnerable to food insecurity are
community groups to help make their
on the frontline of changes or shocks in the food
money go further.
system.
7Community groups have developed a model that
uniquely tackles both food insecurity and the
systemic issues that drive food insecurity at the
same time.
• The community groups, which respondents were
part of, were set up to tackle food insecurity. The
groups are aimed at improving access to healthier
food through discounted prices or helping them
shift their behaviour to eat better.
• In addition to providing food, community groups
deliver - or link users up with - other support
services (such as employment support or mental
health training) that provide a pathway for users
to become more food secure long-term. The food
is the initial pull to get people interested in the
community groups that then encourage users to
try other services - in effect demonstrating the
importance of a ‘food first’ approach to tackling
food insecurity long-term.
• The community groups we worked with were often
successful in supporting users to make longer-term
changes because of the positive relationships they
were able to build with their users.
• Overall, we find this ‘food first’ approach has three
key ‘dividends’ for users and communities:
a. Improves diet and health. It helps users
immediately access better quality and
healthier food that would have been out
of their budget or unavailable in their local
area in a more dignified and empowering
way. This can, overnight, enable users and
their families to have a healthier and more
nutritious diet.
b. Improves mental health and confidence.
The atmosphere created by community
groups, where the users are empowered
and in better control of their diet, creates
the perfect platform for people to build
their confidence and improve their mental
health. Some groups also provide mental
health or resilience training on site, which
directly helps users build up their capacity.
c. Improves resilience and social infrastructure.
These spaces can also provide people with
a platform to meet and bond with others
in their local community. This is vital for
tackling food insecurity given the close
correlation between food insecurity and
isolation. In addition, the groups also either
provide other services on site, or directly
link people up with other services that they
might have previously not known or heard
about, helping them find a pathway out of
food insecurity.
8RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1: The government should pilot a
local Food Ladder Strategy.
Recommendation 2: The government should set up
a Community Infrastructure Grant for developing
social infrastructure, such as community hubs and
spaces for food groups to use.
Recommendation 3: The next Spending Review
should assess the capacity to ring-fence public health
spending for community groups that safeguard
access to healthy food for local communities.
Recommendation 4: National and local policymakers
should take a ‘Food First’ approach to tackling food
insecurity.
Recommendation 5: Local governments and public
sector organisations should pilot alternative ways
of procuring food services and community food
programmes that follow a Community Wealth
Building approach (CWB). Part of this should include
creating jobs for people at risk of food insecurity who
are looking for work.
Recommendation 6: HM Treasury should make the
£20-a-week increase in Universal Credit permanent.
Recommendation 7: The Department for Work and
Pensions should review the potential to make more
third-party support and guidance available to people
accessing the benefits system to prevent hardship as
a result of benefits going unclaimed.
Recommendation 8: The Department for Work
and Pensions should pilot a peer-to-peer support
incentive scheme in conjunction with Universal
Credit.
9INTRODUCTION
The debate on food insecurity is stuck. Attempts and confidence is deeply connected to their ability
to tackle the problem by national policymakers to access good food, and their social and family
have traditionally focused on direct food provision lives are often closely tied to what they eat. Yet
or raising income levels, and neither approach has approaches that focus on direct food provision or
worked: long before Covid-19, the UK had one of raising income levels alone fail to recognise the
the highest rates of food insecurity in Europe.1 complex needs that people who are food insecure
face.
As we come out of the pandemic, there is a clear
need to change tack. The National Food Strategy The organisations studied in this report - that provide
has made a series of recommendations to the access to good quality food first, before offering
government, some of which - with the campaigning other additional support services - are able to tackle
of the footballer, Marcus Rashford - have come into both food insecurity and some of the systemic issues
force. As the end of the Universal Credit uplift in that drive food insecurity at the same time. Dignified
September looms, Conservative MPs in the Blue access to good, nutritious food has a strong and
Wall have called for ministers to do more to prevent almost immediate impact on the way people
hunger in their constituencies. Yet relatively little feel about themselves. It can create the perfect
is understood about the experiences of people foundations to build trust, social networks and
vulnerable to food insecurity, how those experiences support people to access other services necessary
interact with the wider food system in the UK, and to tackle the root causes of food insecurity, such as
how they can inform strategies to end it. low income or poor health. This has the potential to
be transformational - a ‘food first’ but not ‘food only’
This report seeks to change that. Supported by the approach, that uses food as the gateway through
British Poultry Council, our goal has been to explore which to build capacity and resilience.
how the food system in the UK can become more
secure for the most vulnerable consumers, and to To do this well, we need a holistic approach that
better understand the experiences of people who goes beyond support service design by taking
are food insecure in order to build a more effective into account the role of the UK’s food system in its
approach to reducing food insecurity long-term. We entirety. The most vulnerable are on the frontline
partnered with three community groups or social when shocks in the food sector happen. This is a
enterprises who work to improve local access to fact that has become clearer during the pandemic:
healthy and nutritious food, Bags of Taste, The Bread food insecurity quadrupled in the first month of
and Butter Thing (TBBT) and Community Shop, to lockdown, mostly for those on low incomes or
reach 300 of their members who are at risk of food living with long-term health conditions. As the UK
insecurity. We asked them about their experiences creates new trade deals or makes changes to the
of food - including their preferences and values in food system, any reduction in quality or standards
the food system, and what they perceive as the most of food will inevitably hit the vulnerable consumers
important barriers and enablers to them and others hardest, with serious consequences for their quality
becoming more food secure. of life and their capacity to overcome food insecurity.
For this reason, if we’re serious about tackling food
For most of us, food is about more than calories and insecurity, it is essential that we support the food and
nutrition. We find that those who are food insecure farming sector to continue to deliver good quality
are no different - their sense of self-worth food at low cost to the British public.
1 The Food Foundation. Too Poor to Eat: 8.4 million struggling to afford to eat in the UK. 2016. Available at https://foodfoundation.org.uk/
too-poor-to-eat-8-4-million-struggling-to-afford-to-eat-in-the-uk [accessed 10/02/2021]
10This report draws on:
• An open access survey of 304 people using
community groups who are on forms of income
support (such as Universal Credit), disability
benefits or financial support during the pandemic;2
• A series of six one-to-one online interviews with
community group users;3
• An evidence review of grey and academic literature
on the characteristics and nature of food insecurity;
• A series of expert interviews with people across
academia and the food sector.
Chapter 1 explores the experience of people who
are vulnerable to food insecurity, including their
preferences regarding what they buy and the key
compromises they make in practice as a result of
physical and financial barriers. In addition we look at
how food impacts this group and how the pandemic
has affected what this group eats.
Chapter 2 reviews user experience of different types
of government support when experiencing food
insecurity. This includes support before and during
the pandemic, such as free school meals, vouchers
and Universal Credit. We explore the quality and
sufficiency of the food provided, the impacts it has
had on users and the policy implications.
Chapter 3 focuses on the work conducted by
community groups to tackle food insecurity long-
term. We look at the holistic impact community
groups have on individuals, in addition to the impact
on diets and access to food.
The final chapter puts forward a series of
recommendations aimed at national and local
policymakers to work with the food sector to deliver
better support services to tackle food insecurity.
These provide opportunities for the government
to enable local governments and community
organisations to provide support services that enable
better access to food alongside pathways out of
food insecurity altogether.
2 Quotes from the open access survey have been used throughout the report. To protect the anonymity of our respondents, we have
attributed these to their Gender, Age and Region as provided.
3 These interviews have been used to form our case studies. To protect the anonymity of our interviewees we have given them aliases which
we use to cite them throughout the report.
11CHAPTER 1
THE VALUE OF FOOD
“[Good quality food] it’s everything, isn’t it?”
Male, 65+, Hartlepool
“... it is almost impossible for people on a very low
income to eat healthy.[..] Food banks are an amazing help
- but even the poor want to eat healthy.”
Female, 65+, North East England
Too often, the relationships people who are FIGURE 1: CONSUMER VALUES OF
vulnerable to food insecurity have with food are PEOPLE VULNERABLE TO FOOD
overlooked by national policymakers as they focus INSECURITY
on ‘calories in’. Yet despite the challenges those
who are vulnerable to food insecurity face, food
remains an important part of their lives, representing
ITEM TOTAL OVERALL
a lot more than simply fuel to keep going. This SCORE* RANK
chapter explores the experiences of people who are Quality 2243 1
vulnerable to food insecurity, highlighting the things
they value in food, beyond calories. We also explore Healthiness 2212 2
the key compromises they have to make when
buying food as a result of their financial or physical Cost (including special 1857 3
circumstances. offers)
Our open access survey indicated that respondents Habit (including what you 1480 4
aspired to prioritise quality, healthiness and cost or your family are used to
as their three most important factors when making eating)
decisions about the food they bought (as shown in Sustainability 1400 5
Figure 1 below). However, in practice they often had
to compromise on both quality and healthiness in Animal welfare 1256 6
order to buy or access food. In addition, at a national
level, we found unsurprisingly that cost tends to Convenience (e.g. how 1229 7
be the priority for those who earn under £20,000 close the shop is or how
per year: four in ten (42%) said that cost is the most long it takes to prepare)
important factor in determining what they eat. This Brand 1159 8
was a lot higher than the population average (26%)
and those who earn over £40,000 (18%). In the same Source (where the food 844 9
survey, we also found that 60% of those earning is from e.g. the UK or
under £20,000 per year said that food was important France)
to their family and social life, lower than the national * Score is a weighted calculation. Items ranked first are valued higher
average (71%). than the following ranks, the score is a sum of all weighted rank
counts (See Appendix B).
12For most of our survey respondents, good quality 35-44, North East England). One respondent who
food is extremely important to their quality of life. is disabled explained eating a meal in a cafe was
Many define quality as ‘fresh’ and ‘unprocessed’ often the only time they were able to meet anyone,
food, including whole grains, meat, fruit and as otherwise they were “isolated” (Male, 55-64,
vegetables - some mentioned a variety of colours London). As these survey respondents explain,
was also an important part of eating good quality preparing, cooking or eating food with others is one
food. A smaller number wanted to prioritise where of the key ways of bonding and building important
the food was sourced to be ‘as local as possible’. relationships with others.
Some respondents explained how they would ideally
buy British as they could trust the farmers’ standards Food insecurity, nonetheless, has an acute impact on
and the freshness of local produce (Female, 45- what people eat and means that they are the most
54, North East England), and for some this was vulnerable to eating unhealthy or poor quality food.
felt especially in the context of meat (Male, 65+, In the case of personal financial shocks or national
North East England). The experience of eating this shocks to the food market, they are likely to find
kind of food for most of our survey respondents themselves unable to follow through with the diets
had a direct impact on the way they felt and their they described above.
own assessment of their quality of life. This is not A House of Lords report published in 2020 said
surprising given the important relationship between that low-income families were left with “little or no
what you eat and your health and wellbeing.4 choice” about diet, forced to eat unhealthy food or
Beyond the value of good food itself, respondents go without.5 This conclusion is true for many of our
often explained how food was an important part of respondents in our open access survey, who reported
their family and social lives. Some described food as having to make difficult decisions about what they
a “love language” (Female, 35-44, London) or a way ate in order to make their budget stretch or access
to “bond and learn” with other members of their food with a disability or health condition. We found
family about how to cook and new cultures (Female, two key compromises that they tended to make were
healthiness, and quality and standards.
COMPROMISE 1: HEALTHINESS
A key compromise when buying food was nutritional content. Many people explained how they had to
be “really careful” with what they spent on food, especially as over time the cost of food had gone up
while their incomes had remained the same. Additionally, some reported that fluctuating prices and their
fluctuating income meant that some weeks they couldn’t afford fresh fruit and vegetables, while other
weeks they could (Female, 55-64, North West England).
One respondent, who works part-time and receives a top-up from Universal Credit, explained that she
likes buying fruit for her baby but often has to make the difficult decision of not buying it in order to pay
for gas and electricity - having already cut her TV subscription and other things she refers to as “luxuries”
(Female, 25-34, North East England). Others explained how being made redundant from their job
immediately meant they had to go without meals and provide their children with tinned food as it was the
cheapest and safest option - ‘safest option’ meaning that it wouldn’t go off (Female, 25-34, North West
England).
COMPROMISE 2: QUALITY AND STANDARDS
In addition to compromising on nutritional content of food, many have to compromise on food standards.
Indeed, many felt particularly frustrated by the standard of food they were able to afford in supermarkets
and shops. One respondent explained that they were recently given two organic chicken breasts that
tasted much better than the “cheap rubbish” that they buy, leaving them feeling angry. Others talked
about the frustration of having to buy foods with yellow stickers that were always processed or ready
meals (Female, 55-64, North West England), or white bread and Coca-Cola because they were the
cheaper, filling options.
4 Yau, A., Adams, J. and White, M. Food insecurity in the UK – why we need a new normal. The Bennett Institute for Public Policy, 30 April
2020. Available at www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/blog/food-insecurity-uk-why-we-need-new-normal [accessed 10/08/2021]
5 Connors, C. and others. The lived experience of food insecurity under Covid-19. Food Standards Agency, July 2020. Available at www.food.
gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/fsa-food-insecurity-2020_-report-v5.pdf [accessed 21/06/2021]
13FIGURE 2
THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON PEOPLE WHO ARE VULNERABLE TO
FOOD INSECURITY DIETS
Some also explained how factors such as equipment THE IMPACTS OF THE PANDEMIC ON
and time were compounding factors. For example, FOOD INSECURITY
those with long working hours were often left tired
We can see that the most recent shock to the food
and “without the energy” to cook wholesome
sector, the Covid-19 pandemic, hit those vulnerable
meals, but were also unable to afford an option that
to food insecurity hardest, that is low income groups
was both healthy and convenient (Female, 35-44,
and the physically vulnerable. This was picked
North West England). Others noted how difficult it
up in the significant increase in the proportion of
was to buy healthy food on a budget and the need
people needing emergency food aid. Leading food
for better education on nutrition and budgeting
aid charities, including The Trussell Trust and the
(Female, 65+, London). In addition, respondents
Independent Food Aid Network (IFAN), reported
explained that they would not try new foods for fear
a 177% increase in demand for emergency food
that the food would be wasted as their family might
assistance between March 2019 and March 2020.6
reject the food.
The challenges experienced by these groups came
A final key experience we heard was one of
through in our data. Yet this was to some extent
isolation and physical barriers that were often felt
a mixed picture: there were positives for those
simultaneously. This was particularly felt by those
who have had more time, cooked more and eaten
with physical disabilities or high levels of anxiety,
with their family more. This is consistent with other
who found themselves unable to work or socialise.
research – such as that published by Institute of
These people often struggled to physically access
Grocery Distribution – which suggests the public
healthy food in the shops close to their home, which
consciously took opportunities to make their diets
were either more expensive than big supermarkets
healthier during the first lockdown.7 Nonetheless too
or simply didn’t stock the types of food they needed.
many struggled to access food (33% of people
6 Independent Food Aid Network. IFAN data since the outbreak of Covid-19. 2020. Available at www.foodaidnetwork.org.uk/ifan-data-since-
covid-19 [accessed 10/08/2021]
7 IGD. Appetite for change - how to shift consumers’ mindsets around fruit and vegetables. 29 January 2021. Available at www.igd.com/
charitable-impact/healthy-eating/content-library/article/t/video-appetite-for-change---how-to-shift-consumers-mindsets-around-fruit-and-
vegetables/i/27576 [accessed 21/06/2021]
14in the open access survey). For some respondents engage with wider services to address the other
this was because they had lost their job (due to the challenges they face, including low incomes.
pandemic or health issues) and for others - who were It follows that ‘food only’ approaches to food
already struggling to access affordable food in their insecurity, including direct food provision, that
area - this was the result of their normal techniques, focus only on calories, fail to take advantage
such as shopping at multiple places, no longer being of this effect to achieve wider holistic benefits.
possible under restrictions. Equally, if the food provided is unhealthy, for
many there are adverse effects on their self-
We also heard from many respondents who were esteem and resilience, making it more difficult for
shielding or disabled that they had a particularly them to address underlying issues.
difficult time, having to rely on government packages
or local shops that failed to cater to their needs. 2. The challenges of accessing healthy food on
Many, as a result, described how they simply had to a budget are clear. We argue that this has
eat unhealthy food that they didn’t like. Inevitably an important implication beyond the basic
these experiences had significant impacts on how observation that people experiencing food
respondents felt about themselves and their mental insecurity would be less likely to if they had more
health. In addition to feeling isolated, many felt money in their pockets. While ultimately true,
worthless because of the poor food they were it is important to recognise that the cost and
eating. As we explore further in Chapters 2 and 3, availability of good quality food is determined
food support during the pandemic had significant as much by the health of the UK’s food system as
impacts on this group’s sense of self-worth, a whole as by demand. Ensuring that our food
confidence and health. system is able to provide good quality food at
relatively low cost must therefore be central to
These findings reveal two important considerations any serious attempt to tackle food insecurity,
for policymakers. or we risk any attempt being undermined by a
1. The quality of food people eat has a direct market flooded with low quality and unhealthy
impact on their quality of life in a way that they food. As we build trade deals post-Brexit and
are very much conscious of. People who have respond to the National Food Strategy, it is vital
access to good quality, healthy and nutritious to consider how changes to food standards in
food aren’t just physically healthier; they also the UK will inevitably impact what this group eats
feel better, about themselves and about their and their quality of life.
lives, putting them in a much better position to
15CHAPTER 2
THE EFFECTIVENESS
OF GOVERNMENT-
LED FOOD SUPPORT
TODAY
In 2020 and 2021 the types of support for people experiences of government support had a negative
who are food insecure changed in response to the impact on people’s wellbeing and sense of self-
pandemic. Overnight the pandemic increased food worth.
insecurity because of three main factors: reduction or
loss of income, requiring the clinically vulnerable to The responses led by the government have generally
stay at home or shield and the shift in the availability fit into the following categories:9
of food in supermarkets across the UK. Combined, • school food;
these factors precipitated the quadrupling of
food insecurity in the first month of the lockdown • emergency finance for local authorities and
(April 2020).8 We have seen a variety of support charities;
mechanisms from government, industry and the third • emergency food; and
sector across the four nations of the UK in response. • grocery box schemes for those shielding.
This section reviews the evidence of the success On the ground services have been delivered at
of government schemes before and during the a local level by local government, charities and
pandemic and retells some of the experiences schools.10 This has meant the roll out of policy
we heard through our qualitative research. We has significantly differed by local authority. For
found that these services have provided many with example, emergency finance in England - called
a lifeline, but have had varied success: at times the Emergency Assistance Grant for Food and
schemes have delivered insufficient or poor quality Essential Supplies - was rolled out at the discretion
services, while other people have been left without of the local authority. Those with pre-existing
support from the government completely. Similar infrastructure to deliver welfare support had more
to our findings in Chapter One, we found that poor success.11 Nonetheless, the local-led approach has
8 Loopstra, R. Vulnerability to food insecurity since the Covid-19 lockdown. The Food Foundation, 14 April 2020. Available at https://
foodfoundation.org.uk/publication/vulnerability-to-food-insecurity-since-the-covid-19-lockdown [accessed 15/06/2021]
9 Loopstra. Vulnerability to food insecurity. 2020.
10 Loopstra. Vulnerability to food insecurity. 2020.
11 Lambie-Mumford, H., Gordon, K. and Loopstra, R. Monitoring responses to risk of rising household food insecurity during the Covid-19
crisis across the UK. Sheffield Political Economy Research Institute, December 2020. Available at http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/food-vulnerability-
during-covid-19 [accessed 15/06/2021]
16been praised by experts, and is considered the “...they say the kids need nutritious food, but
more effective approach to reducing food insecurity, it’s more processed stuff that they give[...]they
given the significant differences in the nature of food shouldn’t just give fish fingers and waffles”
insecurity across local areas.12 Female, 35-44, London
According to our survey respondents, government The vouchers scheme, while experiencing
schemes (see Figure 3) - some of which existed pre- administrative problems initially, has also been
pandemic - have had mixed success in helping them criticised for specifying shops that were too far away
access good quality food.13 In addition, the majority from where recipients live or could not be used
didn’t feel the government is doing very much to online.15 This is reflected in the responses from our
help (74%), indicating the degree to which this group survey too, as many respondents described having
feels excluded. to spend a significant proportion of their vouchers
on the delivery cost for online orders (Female, 25-34,
North East England) or were not able to use them
FREE SCHOOL MEALS: VOUCHERS AND online at all.
HOLIDAY BOXES
The merits of vouchers versus direct cash transfers
Many in our open access survey described the
in replacement of free school meals have been
vouchers, cash transfers and food boxes provided
extensively debated. The different approaches
as alternatives for free school meals as “a godsend”
during the pandemic theoretically have provided
or a “life saver” without which they could not have
a large-scale experiment to evaluate different
coped. Some respondents explained that the free
approaches, although due to limited data collection
school meal vouchers or vegetable boxes had
and the differences in delivery it is difficult to make
been particularly useful because they had enabled
any strong conclusions. However, the benefits of
them to buy or access better quality food than they
direct transfers have been noted as giving families
would normally have been able to. For example,
more choice and flexibility over where and how to
one respondent (Female, 35-44, Yorkshire and the
spend the money - with some, for example, being
Humber) with children eligible for free school meals
able to use the money to cover the cost of cooking
explained that the vouchers had enabled her to buy
equipment.16 By contrast, schemes that gave
better food than usual, such as fresh vegetables that
direct bank transfers excluded those without bank
she had then been able to slow cook. Others praised
accounts.17
the vouchers irrespective of the quality, because
without them they simply would have gone hungry.
For example, one young woman (25-34, North
West England) explained she had lost her job as a
FOOD BOXES FOR PEOPLE SHIELDING
dental trainee and initially didn’t qualify for Universal We often heard complaints in our open access survey
Credit, so her primary need was to feed her family regarding the standard and quality of the food
regardless of how healthy the food was. provided through government food box schemes for
those shielding. For example, one respondent who
These experiences, however, were not necessarily has been shielding during the pandemic (Female,
representative of the experiences of using 55-64, North West England) explained that they
alternatives to free school meals. Data collected received almost exactly the same food each week,
during the pandemic suggests that the quality of with limited fruit and vegetables and almost no
food provided by free school meals dipped during meat. In addition, one respondent said that the only
the pandemic.14 Some of our interviews highlighted meat they were given was a tin of meatballs, that felt
a tension between government policy and delivery, “closer to dog food” than human food (Male, 55-64,
where the government stipulates healthy food North West England). Others described being sent
is important but then provides poor quality or tinned beans, white bread, margarine and a pint of
unhealthy food to those who are food insecure: milk that wouldn’t cover the week, let alone provide
a nutritious meal (Male, 55-64, London).
12 Expert interviews.
13 Survey respondents are not representative of people on benefits or those vulnerable to food insecurity (see Appendix for demographic
makeup of survey respondents).
14 Lambie-Mumford, Gordon and Loopstra. Monitoring responses to risk of rising household food insecurity. 2020.
15 Lambie-Mumford, Gordon and Loopstra. Monitoring responses to risk of rising household food insecurity. 2020.
16 Lambie-Mumford, Gordon and Loopstra. Monitoring responses to risk of rising household food insecurity. 2020.
17 Lambie-Mumford, Gordon and Loopstra. Monitoring responses to risk of rising household food insecurity. 2020.
17FIGURE 3
EXPERIENCE OF GOVERNMENT SUPPORT OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS
18These experiences, unfortunately, seem Some respondents in our survey relied on their
representative of the schemes, substantiating the local networks during the pandemic: for example
stories heard via the media and conclusions made one respondent (Male, 55-64, London) explained
in various government reports.18 An evidence review that their neighbour, a paramedic, brought him hot
monitoring the success of the scheme summarises: meals from his canteen to supplement the food he
was delivered through the food boxes, which alone
“The contents of the grocery boxes delivered would not have sustained him.
were generally not adequate. They did not
provide sufficient fresh food of good quality, In addition, many of the respondents used the
and the boxes were generally not appropriate community groups in conjunction with UC or food
for meeting the nutritional, cultural or dietary banks. For example, some explained how the skills
needs of their recipients.”19 they learnt in Bags of Taste helped them cook more
with less. Others used the Community Shop or TBBT
to access better quality food at a lower price, in
UNIVERSAL CREDIT
particular fresh meat and vegetables that meant their
A further source of support throughout the pandemic benefits could go further (see Chapter 3).
was an uplift to Universal Credit, increasing
household budgets by £20 per week. Our data
suggests that those who have received Universal IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICYMAKERS
Credit (UC) have found it relatively useful (see
There are four key learnings for policymakers from
Figure 3), but those receiving UC were not always
this chapter.
able to access good quality food - with or without
the uplift. This is likely reflective of a more systemic 1. Government support in these case studies has
problem, that many UC recipients generally are been essential and should not end abruptly for
far more likely to be food insecure and unable recipients. As our research shows, the people
to cover their housing costs, bills and food with receiving food parcels, vouchers and free school
their monthly payments. The Family Resources meals have relied on them to eat. As restrictions
Survey 2019/2020 revealed that as many as four in ease and the government considers how to peel
ten (43%) of households on UC experience food back support it must do so cautiously and avoid
insecurity.20 Further, areas that move onto UC from additional hardship from a lack of provision or
the old benefits system are likely to see increases access to good food.
in food bank use.21 This played out in our one-to-
one interviews. Laura, who suffers from anxiety and 2. There is a need to ‘level up’ (that is, improve
poor mental health, explained that support from the overall) the standard of food provided by the
government often didn’t cover the cost of food in central government to people who are food
local supermarkets: insecure. Many respondents in our open access
survey who received government assistance
“I get £350-odd a month. That [has to cover] described eating poor quality food, unhealthy
all my bills, my rent, my water, Council Tax, TV food or simply not receiving enough food and
licence. By the time all your bills have come skipping meals as a result. This experience
out, you’ve got less than £100 for yourself for often made respondents in our survey feel
the month. With that, you have to buy food worthless and disempowered, as well as meaning
shopping. So, it is quite hard.” people went without basic necessities. This will
Laura likely require additional standards and better
regulation of food services provided directly by,
However, others fell through the net altogether. or on behalf of, the government.
These respondents in our survey explained how
they found themselves struggling to afford food for 3. Local governments and local institutions have
themselves or their family on their wages, but were played an important role in delivering food
ineligible for UC. For those unable to access support services during the pandemic. The need to
through the government, many rely on food banks mobilise support quickly, and the various levels
and community groups.
18 Rayner, J. Government attacked for ignoring expert advice on nutrition in food parcels. The Guardian, 21 June 2020. Available at www.
theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/21/government-attacked-for-ignoring-expert-advice-on-nutrition-in-food-parcels [accessed 10/08/2021]
19 Lambie-Mumford, Gordon and Loopstra. Monitoring responses to risk of rising household food insecurity. 2020. p. 59.
20 GOV.UK. Family Resources Survey: financial year 2019 to 2020. 25 March 2021. Available at www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-
resources-survey-financial-year-2019-to-2020 [accessed 10/08/2021]
21 The Trussell Trust. Universal Credit and food banks. 2021. Available at www.trusselltrust.org/what-we-do/research-advocacy/universal-
credit-and-foodbank-use [accessed 15/06/2021]
19of infrastructure available to provide support
across different local authorities led to patchy
delivery overall. While the local approach should
be commended - as the local organisations had
the best local knowledge and were best able
to deliver on the ground - there is a clear call
to action to ensure that all local authorities are
equally well resourced to ensure people in their
local communities have access to good food in
an emergency and beyond.
4. The benefits system needs to better respond to
food insecurity. Often people find themselves
unable to access good food because their
benefits don’t cover their bills. Most respondents
who received Universal Credit often struggled to
make their payments cover their rent, bills and
food, finding themselves having to compromise
on quality or health in order to make ends meet.
They often rely on community groups to help
make their money go further in their local area.
The findings from our survey reinforce the need
for policymakers to re-evaluate the benefits
system and its capacity to deliver to people who
are at risk of food insecurity.
20CHAPTER 3
THE TRIPLE DIVIDEND
OF COMMUNITY
GROUPS
The community groups we partnered with - Bags of Improves mental health and confidence. The
Taste, The Bread and Butter Thing and Community atmosphere created by community groups, where
Shop - have been set up to improve people’s access the users are empowered and in better control of
to good, nutritious meals. For most of these groups, their diet, creates the perfect platform for people
their long-term aim is to no longer need to exist, to build their confidence and improve their mental
and have eradicated food insecurity in the UK. In health - some groups also provide mental health or
addition to providing food, community groups resilience training on site, which directly helps users
deliver - or link users up with - other support services build up their capacity.
(such as employment support or mental health
training) that provide a pathway for users to become Improves resilience and social infrastructure. These
more food secure long-term. In that sense, food is spaces can also provide people with a platform to
sometimes the initial pull to get people interested meet and bond with others in their local community.
in the community groups that can then encourage This is vital for tackling food insecurity given the
users to try other services - demonstrating one of the close correlation between food insecurity and
positives of a ‘food first’ approach to tackling food isolation. In addition, the groups also either provide
insecurity long-term. other services on site, or directly link people up with
other services that they might have previously not
In contrast to the government schemes discussed known or heard about, helping them find a pathway
in the previous chapter, the community groups we out of food insecurity.
worked with were often successful in supporting
users to make longer-term changes because of the The longer-term aim is consistent with the Food
positive relationships they were able to build with Ladder approach: an evidence-based approach
their users. Overall, we find this ‘food first’ approach to tackling food insecurity that aims to develop
has three key ‘dividends’ for users and communities: positive engagements with food for those who are
food insecure and help local communities build their
Improves diet and health. It helps users immediately areas into more resilient places where people want
access better quality and healthier food that would to live, raise their children and grow old.22 Within
have been out of their budget or unavailable in their this approach is the need for social services and
local area in a more dignified and empowering way. emergency access to food, but as something that
This can, overnight, enable users and their families to then directs people onto other services such as the
have a healthier and more nutritious diet. community groups we discuss in this report that help
tackle the root causes of food insecurity.
22 Blake, M. Food Ladders: A multi-scaled approach to everyday food security and community resilience. GeoFoodie, 19 June 2019.
Available at https://geofoodie.org/2019/06/19/food-ladders/#more-48713 [accessed 10/08/2021]
21FOOD LADDERS APPROACH
Food Ladders have three levels of intervention:
• Rung 1: Catching. This first rung provides a starting point for those who are in crisis. Such
interventions might include emergency food aid, mental health support, access to social services,
and so on. Catching enables the ability to cope with a shock, whether that be the loss of a job, an
unexpected large payment, debt, longer-term illness or relationship breakdown.
• Rung 2: Capacity building to enable social innovation. This second level supports those not currently
in crisis, but who may be struggling to afford and/or access good food. Activities include training
programmes, shared cooking and eating activities, food pantries, children’s holiday clubs, and
voucher schemes. Done in a manner that celebrates difference and is not stigmatising, activities
provide residents with accessible choices that relieve the stresses which co-exist with low incomes,
expand skills and enable the recognition of personal and local assets. These interventions connect
people together by creating networks of trust and reciprocity through shared activity around food.
This sort of intervention enables people and communities to be more adaptable by expanding their
pool of assets.
• Rung 3: Self-organised community change. This third rung supports communities to realise goals
through self-organised projects that capitalise on local assets. Projects meet community needs as
communities themselves identify them. Examples include developing a social enterprise based on
community cooking knowledge that provides employment, cooperative food growing and food
procurement that increases the local availability of good food, and regular social cooking and eating
activities to overcome loneliness, cross social divides and create intergenerational knowledge transfer.
DIVIDEND 1 - ACCESS TO GOOD QUALITY their budget in their local area, and in turn help them
FOOD maintain a healthier diet.
Community Shop (see Case Study 2) and The Bread
“[TBBT] helps a lot, because they do get
and Butter Thing (see Case Study 3) fill in the gaps
some really good quality food, to be fair. And
by providing better food at a discounted rate,
we pay £7.50, I think it is, a week. So, when
compared to what people would normally buy in
it boils down to that, I’m able to get more,
a supermarket or shop close to their home. These
nicer, healthier food than what I was able to
organisations work with the food sector to reuse
get before Bread and Butter. Because I know
surplus food and resell it at a discounted rate. Users
that prices have gone up as well, since the
who qualify for the service (because they are food
pandemic. So, it just makes it a bit easier for
insecure) are then able to buy grocery bags or use
me to have that healthy balance, instead of
a shop that sells good quality food for a fraction
just buying what I can afford.”
of the price. For example, one survey respondent
Laura (Female, 45-64, Yorkshire and the Humber) explained
The most immediate aim of the community groups is how using Community Shop had enabled her to
to help people who are vulnerable to food insecurity buy spinach and sourdough bread that normally
access better quality food and as a result have a would have been out of their price range; another
healthier and more diverse diet. As discussed in the respondent said she had been able to buy more than
previous chapters, those who are vulnerable to food just a bag of carrots and onions, instead buying more
insecurity often find it challenging to access good diverse vegetables (Female, 45-54, North West).
quality food. Many of those in receipt of government Indeed, interviewees also explained that they were
support find themselves in a dilemma where they able to buy much better food than they would have
would ideally buy better quality food, but go without if they shopped in supermarkets. For example,
enough or buy lower nutritional quality food in order Debbie is on Universal Credit and before using the
to eat. A limited budget is often compounded by Community Shop had found it challenging to buy
other factors, such as living in a location that lacks good food for her and her son on the budget. She
affordable supermarkets. These schemes, however, explained the kinds of decisions she would have
support those who are food insecure to immediately previously struggled to make:
gain access to food that would have been outside of
22CASE STUDY 1: BAGS OF TASTE
Bags of Taste helps people in poverty achieve an improved and healthier diet on a low budget long-
term. Their beneficiaries include, but are not limited to, vulnerable adults, or people suffering with
mental health issues, physical or mental disability, unemployment, insecure housing, debt, addiction or
other issues.
Through a structured cooking and behavioural change programme, Bags of Taste motivates participants
to independently source and cook homemade meals at just £1 a head. Their programme delivers
participants a bag of equipment and ingredients, and provides a personal mentor to lead them through
the first stage of the training, helping them to address their individual barriers. Following on from that
they are provided long term support through social media groups with significant video and specialist
resources.
The organisation targets deprived areas with high concentrations of fast food outlets where poor diet
and household food insecurity are highly prevalent. In turn, they minimise chronic disease and financial
difficulty. Their hyper-local community-led approach allows people to overcome social and financial
barriers.
“Like we went to Farm Foods yesterday and how to cook and make the most of more affordable
there were two packets of biscuits for £1, food in their local area. This programme addresses
and we went to Sainsbury’s and there was a barriers to healthy eating for people including
watermelon for £2.50. Now, if you’ve only physical access, transport, economic access,
got a couple of pounds, what are you doing? cultural access and knowledge and time through an
Because you’re not going to buy watermelon intervention that builds confidence in cooking on a
– you know, it’s a bit fun, it’s nice, it’s tasty, it’s a budget. Mitsy, who recently started using Bags of
bit fun – against the biscuits.” Taste, explained how it improved her ability to make
Debbie the most of food:
Now, though, through the Community Shop she is “I learned quickly, like the basic ingredients
able to buy a wider range of foods - like a neck of to nutritious and cheap chickpea curry with
lamb that she can cook into a stew - and open up rice because I didn’t really make lentil stuff.
a wider variety of foods for her son to try, including [...] I didn’t really know how to cook. And I’ve
cuts of meat that would normally be too expensive. actually started to learn to cook better.”
As she went on to explain: Mitsy
“It’s the accessibility. It’s not these grand
gestures of things, it’s being able to walk DIVIDEND 2 - CONFIDENCE AND MENTAL
down the road and get some fruit and veg
HEALTH
for a couple of pounds, that is good quality.
[...] I mean, the fruit and vegetables and the “For me, I get that sort of feel good feeling
bread, because of obviously being 20p, it’s just - ooh, we’re having Daylesford lamb for tea
amazing.” – but it only cost me £2. So, it scratches both
Debbie itches, if you like.”
These findings are reinforced by the program’s Rachel
impact evaluations. For example, the members of Many in our open access survey described that being
TBBT report trying new foods (86% of members), the recipient of poor quality or unhealthy food from
cooking more healthily at home (77%) and eating food banks and/or direct government schemes had
more fruit and vegetables (77%).23 negative effects on their confidence and self-worth.
In contrast to the food surplus schemes described By contrast, many also described how having access
above, Bags of Taste (see Case Study 1) helps to good quality food and being able to cook better
people access better quality food by teaching them food has had the opposite effect, helping to boost
23 The Bread and Butter Thing. Impact Report 2020. 2021. Available at https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f452e5078bf4f32c97a8045/t/
606c504d21a1543550d3c9b2/1617711188561/The+Bread+and+Butter+Thing+Impact+Report.pdf [accessed 10/08/2021]
23You can also read
