Many people working in hunger relief lament the difficulty of eliminating hunger, a problem that seems like it should be easily resolved, given the world of plenty that we live in. But few respond to the issue by taking on a global research project involving travel to more than 90 organizations in 24 cities across six countries and two continents.
That’s the project that Kayleigh Garthwaite, Associate Professor in Social Policy at the University of Birmingham in the U.K. took on, resulting in her latest book, Hunger Inc., Building Solidarity Beyond the Food Bank. The odyssey generated plenty of quirky findings of both the high and low variety – live mice, a rotten turkey and liquid smoke, but also a delicious three-course meal made from surplus food in California and a proper espresso at an Italian food bank. The more serious point of the project was to highlight shortcomings of the traditional charitable food system and lift up alternatives centered around food justice.
That espresso in Italy underscores one of the big issues bedeviling charitable food aid – it often meets the needs of corporations more than the vulnerable populations it is intended to serve. The espresso pods at the Italian food bank come from a big company that regularly sends donations, but because the pods require a fancy coffee machine, they are hardly suitable for people seeking basic sustenance. Too often, contends Garthwaite, corporate donors get what they want out of the charitable food system – a convenient way to get rid of food they can’t sell, a tax deduction, and a reputational boost – while hungry people are left with useless items, like espresso pods they can’t access.
That’s not to say that food banks and charitable food aid are bad. Garthwaite contends, “Right now they’re one of the only ways that people on a low income are able to feed themselves and their families.” But, she says, charitable food aid should not be seen as a solution to poverty and inequality. Everyone she encountered on her travels agreed: charitable food aid is “at best a passing relief and at worst an undignified, inadequate solution.”
Even so, hunger relief professionals in every city Garthwaite visited wrestled with a common dilemma. Should they take steps to improve the charitable food system, despite its warts, by doing things like creating more welcoming spaces, offering healthier options, and providing more agency and choice? Or should they put more energy into advocating for food justice?
Is there a way to split the difference by building entities like social pantries, community kitchens and food clubs that may improve the system while also addressing root causes? Garthwaite acknowledges a reality that’s all too familiar to people working in the field: “It’s incredibly challenging to meet the ever-growing demand for help while also dedicating energy to advocacy and system change.”
Ultimately, Garthwaite advocates for an approach that encompasses food justice, and helpfully describes two big related ideas: rights and solidarity. A rights-based approach demands that governments take responsibility for ensuring access to food, without requiring anyone to go through any qualifying hoops. While powerful, the right to food can get caught up in endless policy delays, making its impact feel distant. Solidarity, on the other hand, starts from the ground up, Garthwaite writes. It’s about collective care in the form of mutual aid networks, community kitchens, food co-ops and the like. These efforts, however, can be underfunded and overstretched, minimizing their impact.
The most powerful movements are finding a way to do both, Garthwaite asserts. They are demanding rights and building radical alternatives. “Rights without solidarity can become distant and bureaucratic,” she writes. “Solidarity without rights can risk burnout and fragility. But together, they can build the foundations of a different kind of future.”
It’s certainly food for thought. – C.C.
Like what you’re reading?
Support Food Bank News
