There cannot be many people in our generally affluent world unaware of the discrepancies between their existence and those for whom starvation is still a reality. In some developed countries, the poorest citizens eat the most processed foods while the wealthy eat fresh produce. Well-intentioned government policies and food industry contributions sometimes misfire. It’s a skewed food world we live in, as Bernice Hurst reports.
Go deeper with GlobalData
In some countries, the poorest eat the most processed foods because they are cheaper and more widely available than fresh produce. In New York City, Bronx residents cannot afford to purchase fresh fruit and vegetables from the nearby Hunters Point market which supplies the city’s most expensive and upmarket restaurateurs. Instead, they subsist on fastfood from outlets on virtually every street corner. If they are truly lucky, as indeed some are, small local shopkeepers will traipse downtown to Manhattan farmers’ markets, buy whatever they can and then sell it on for little or no profit.
Increasingly, residents of inner cities across both the US and UK complain that there is no fresh food available to them. Supermarkets that can’t make enough profit out of the poor do not open outlets in areas where customers cannot afford their prices. Instead, they are opening smaller units, with higher prices and higher margins, in the hopes that their very existence will pull in the punters.
There is, however, some hope. Small groups scattered around the country are taking matters into their own hands, using mobile units and central distribution points to sell produce purchased from farmers’ markets. Unfortunately they are still few, far between and only in the very earliest stages of development and spreading such good practice (and funding it) will be a long and tedious business.
Nutritional balance lacking
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataIn other areas, rice and grains are staples but with little to supplement them to provide a nutritionally balanced diet. Fresh fruit and vegetables, meat and poultry can be unimaginable luxuries. And eating what the family produces means being left without further supplies for successive seasons. If there are no seeds to keep and sow, there may not be enough money available to buy more. Unless animals are able to reproduce, any stock eaten cannot be replaced.
On top of this, of course, come man-made obstacles. According to the World Food Programme (WFP), “there is enough food in the world today for every man, woman and child to lead healthy and productive lives.” Unfortunately, logistics and politics frequently conspire to prevent this, with hunger affecting one in seven.
Politics gets in the way of food flows
Links between hunger and political corruption are not new. Government officials have frequently been accused of keeping or selling donations of aid rather than feeding their people. Robert Mugabe has declared that Zimbabwe is growing enough in its own right and has severed international contracts. Meanwhile, both the WFP and Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) believe agricultural production has collapsed, leaving almost half of the population facing hunger.
According to FEWS NET, “cattle and goat prices in the majority of the grain deficit rural areas have risen by over 100% since April 2004 but not more than 60% of households in these areas have sufficient animals to enable them to take advantage of these higher prices.”
Similarly, investigations into United Nations audits of the Oil for Food programme in Iraq revealed a failure to stop Saddam Hussein manipulating the sanctions system to luxuriously furnish his own residences while vast chunks of the population suffered serious food shortages.
Controversy also rages about strings attached to aid, frequently by faith groups who either include bibles and religious tracts in parcels or insist on attendance at church services. The Bush administration withdrawal of aid to groups who support policies not approved by the administration, notably birth control and abortion, has also caused concern.
Can we halve global poverty by 2015?
Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) worldwide are significant players although in Australia, part of their role is to pressurise the government to do more. Australian aid agencies, through their Fair Share Campaign website, declares that insufficient official support has been given to achieving Millennium Development Goals intended to halve global poverty by 2015. Doing “our fair share”, the campaign declares, means significantly increasing aid as well as participating in “international initiatives to increase global finances for aid and development”.
International efforts vary in degree of activity with some being more hands-on than others. In many cases, governments sell or donate surplus commodities, particularly through the WFP which reached some 104 million people in 81 countries during 2003. Relying entirely on voluntary contributions from governments and businesses, it works with more than 1000 NGOs to distribute the food at grass roots level. Operating in tandem with the UN Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), WFP tackles near term crises, “feeding the hungry poor and helping them break the cycle of hunger and poverty” while FAO “leads long-term international efforts to defeat hunger”. Rations supplied by WFP can include cereals and cereal-blended foods, pulses, vegetable oil, salt, sugar, high energy biscuits and bread.
Food industry contribution
The US has its own system administered by the Department of Agriculture and the Foreign Agriculture Service. In addition, the food industry “contributes significantly” through America’s Second Harvest, according to Grocery Manufacturers of America (GMA) spokesperson, Stephanie Childs.
America’s Second Harvest relies on donations of food and the wherewithal to distribute it to the poor through local charities within the US. Some is used to cook healthy meals at shelters for the homeless and some is given directly to people to feed themselves and their families.
A similar organisation in the UK, FareShare, is supported by food manufacturers and retailers working together to “help homeless and vulnerable people to improve their health and well being. In supplying surplus food to other charities, the money saved can be used to provide vital services.” In addition, the End Child Poverty coalition comprised of more than 40 different organisations are cooperating in efforts to halve child poverty in the UK by 2010.
Government funding split
Funding for charities is inevitably a problem, however, with governments prioritising to divide available amounts amongst more worthy causes than they can accommodate.
FareShare, for example, recently lost its assistance from the government’s Landfill Tax Credit Scheme. Established in 1994 by homelessness charity Crisis, it now has eight schemes across the UK, working with 150 companies to supply 250 local charities with food for the homeless. Their aim is to feed people nutritiously while simultaneously distributing good quality food that would otherwise go to landfills. Department of the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) spokeswoman Susannah Baker insists that there are alternative sources of funding for FareShare to which they have been directed but asserts that government money will be put to better use by supporting local authorities’ projects on all types of biodegradable waste, not just food. It is DEFRA’s brief, she says, to deal with environmental issues rather than social deprivation.
While arguments about aid versus trade rage on, people continue to starve. While arguments about personal responsibility versus marketing by overly aggressive food manufacturers and fastfood outlets are fought out in the courts, obesity continues to fuel illness which is exacerbated by the high cost of healthcare. While political parties fight for points, and faith organisations for converts, poor people try to feed their children. Hunger is an ongoing result of poverty, both of which continue to thrive wherever in the world you look.
