In my last post, I posed a series of practical questions for those involved in food banking, ending with a set of more fundamental questions. This post begins with some common criticisms of food banking, many of which are found in the publications mentioned in section 2. Section 3 draws attention to new models of food aid which maintain dignity and regard those experiencing food poverty as the real experts.

1. Common criticisms of food banks

• They are stigmatising – while some give (food and money) others take food (for nothing)
• They are a form of sticking plaster (like BandAid) since they address symptoms, not causes
• They let the government off the hook by seeking to take responsibility for ensuring people get enough food
• They allow the food industries to get rid of the food they don’t need by giving surplus to charities, and thereby gain much-needed PR
• They think in terms of charity, not solidarity, much less the human right to food
• They do not take sufficient account of the fact that food poverty is only the tip of a large ice-berg: low pay, unemployment, disability, illness, mental health problems, housing problems
• They do not challenge the changing public perception of citizens’ entitlements in a supposedly welfare state: from a ‘cradle to grave’ safety net paid for by national insurance, to ‘scroungers’ battening on the tax-payer.

2. Some recent work on food poverty:

 Andrew Fisher’s book ‘Big Hunger’ (MIT Press 2017)

• Food banks have become an intrinsic part of north American society
• They are inextricably tied up with the food industry and the waste it produces
• They are also tied to ‘looking good’ and requirement for all companies to be seen to fulfill their CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) policy
• They let government and the public off the hook, comfortable in the knowledge that people are getting fed by charities

Graham Riches’ book ‘Food Bank Nation: Poverty, Corporate Charity and the Right to Food’. (Routledge 2018)

• The right to food is a human right in international law ratified by most nations
• In other words, everyone is entitled to sufficient food of good quality
• This right is not being observed in many rich nations in the West, where food banks or similar schemes have been set up to deal with food poverty
• This is caused by growing inequality and growing poverty which governments are unwilling to tackle

3. Some moves towards new kinds of organisations addressing food poverty

While both Fisher and Riches make mention of some organisations in north America which are rather different from the standard food banking model, I found particularly inspiring the report below from two Scottish organisations which work (with the support of their governmen) to make good food available to all. It contains a set of important principles and practical advice for food banks which want to transition to something different.

1. Nourish Scotland and the Poverty Truth Commission: ‘Dignity in Practice: Learning, tools and guidance for community food providers.’ (2018)

Scotland has a devolved government which pursues progressive policies in relation to healthy food for all. However, it does not have the powers to operate a different benefit system or set a higher minimum wage than elsewhere in the UK and there are many in Scotland who live in poverty and suffer from food insecurity. Unsurprisingly, systems of alleviating food poverty similar to those elsewhere in the UK have developed, including food banks, but some community initiatives have tried to move beyond a standard food bank model.

• Nourish argues that ‘Dignity should be placed at the heart of all community action around food poverty’ and
• ‘Involving people experiencing food insecurity is where we will find the solution’
• The four dignity principles are:
  • Involvement in decision-making of people with direct experience
  • Recognise the social value of food
  • Provide opportunities to contribute
  • Leave people with the power to choose
• This means asking staff, volunteers and others taking part how the project supports people to feel
  • A sense of control
  • Able to take part
  • Nourished and supported
  • Involved in decision-making
  • Valued and able to contribute
• In this report, Nourish adduces examples of community actions which already go beyond the standard FB model, and include maintaining gardens for growing vegetables, providing community meals which are open to all, increasing the choice of affordable fruit and vegetables, provision of fresh food vouchers, operating in places where people go regularly
• In the second part of the report, Nourish suggests ways in which food banks may transition to different kinds of organisations which respect the principles above