The term “food insecurity” refers to the financial and societal state of households with a scarce or unpredictable availability of sufficient food. According to recentrecent data, approximately 12.3 percent of American households, or 15.6 million, experienced food insecurity at least once in the previous year (Long et al., 2020). Food insecurity has been linked to several detrimental social, bodily, and mental outcomes that have been extensively studied. These effects are especially evident in families where there are kids, where there are greater incidences of high blood pressure and diabetes, self-reported poor or average well-being, depression among mothers, behavioral issues and delays in growth throughout childhood life, and low school achievement. The results are bad for society and harmful to the well-being and wellness of specific children and familie Finncial impact of food shortages is projected to amount to more than $167.5 billion a year due to several factors, including decreased employee efficiency, rising medical and public school expenses, and the expense of urgent food delivery (Long et al., 2020). The USDA has been the federal agency responsible for assessing and tracking food insecurity for over 20 years (Long et al., 2020). Throughout this time, there have been ups and downs in food shortages. Still, the tendency has remained constant: the difference in food shortages between individuals of diverse backgrounds, including race and white people. The intricate connection connecting ethnic background or race and food scarcity is entwined with other well-established factors contributing to food shortages, such as low income, joblessness, detention, and impairment.
Higher rates of food shortages are undoubtedly primarily caused by a high level of financial and social deprivation among individuals with racial or ethnic backgrounds throughout their lives. There have traditionally been significant disparities in wealth between white Americans and individuals of color. However, some research indicates that a greater likelihood of food scarcity among individuals of a certain race persists even after removing these additional socioeconomic and economic variables, considering the interrelated nature of ethnic background or race and other socio-economic variables.
Technical Theories
Although developed capitalist countries are incredibly wealthy, many nations nevertheless experience significant suffering. How come poverty and inadequate food levels remain so high in many developed capitalist nations when these nations have elevated mean economic output (GDP) per individual estimate relative to other parts of the globe? The implementation of neoliberalism, economics, and politics-driven regulations, as well as income disparity, are the main causes of hunger and associated societal issues in wealthy nations, even though this can be an extremely complicated issue. Neoliberalism is a theory based on political economics that holds that the greatest way to enhance the welfare of people is to liberate personal entrepreneurship rights and abilities in a legal structure that is typified by strong rights to private property, open markets, and commerce (Navarro, 2020). It is the government’s responsibility to establish and maintain a legal structure suitable for these kinds of activities. Distributing products and services is better accomplished by the open market than by government involvement.
A major goal of the macroeconomic safety state programs that defined the period following World War II in the US was to avoid a second Great Depression. Other regions of Europe’s west also followed comparable measures, though to a lesser degree than Britain. Hyperinflation and stagflation—the confluence of prices and sluggish industrial growth—rose sharply in the 1970s, even though the state intervention plan proved successful for several decades to come. When the inflation problem started to worsen in 1979, many looked to the theories of neoliberal economics for help.
To lower price increases, “supply sector” policies took on the role of achieving the ultimate objective of monetary policy, drawing inspiration from Keynes. (Navarro, 2020), inequalities and poverty rose due to the rising rate of joblessness and a significant reduction in welfare assistance brought about by the tiny state philosophy supported by neoliberalism’s advocates in the United States and the United Kingdom. A corresponding debate on the significance of personal accountability for mistakes instead of root causes tied to capitalism emerged within the theoretical framework of the neoliberal system of capitalism. Competitiveness permeates various facets of existence and fosters an aggressive mindset in the population of capitalist nations. Competitiveness is considered essential to effective capitalist market operation and growth in the economy. Individuals are frequently held responsible for being impoverished and expected to solve the issues they face due to a mix of decreased humanitarian service and a competing mindset. This story makes sense when considering a strategy of little government involvement. The leading proponents of neoliberalism paired the appeal for more community charity to assist people struggling with the requirement for minimal state interference and personal accountability. It is the responsibility of the common people, not the many tiers of administration, to provide for those in need. The so-called neoliberal rebellion of the years 1979 and 1980 not only proved that the government did not constitute the primary agency for helping people in dire straits but also that legal communities and philanthropic organizations—which increasingly indicated to the state—were more accountable for doing so (Cummins, 2018). This increased the inequalities and poverty that come with economics in the developed capitalist world.
Policies based on neoliberalism widen the gap in earnings. Furthermore, fundamental features of neoliberal economics, such as disparity and income redistribution, contribute to preserving or rebuilding the authority held by financial leaders (Cummins, 2018). The economy and disparity are intrinsically intertwined, even though neoliberal approaches frequently make disparity worse. The economy and disparities have always been linked. (Alvaredo et al., 2018). As a result of the wealthy amassing excessive assets and possessions, unequal income distribution typically indicates a large, impoverished population. The highest decimal of earners across Europe possessed thirty-seven percent of the continent’s assets in 2016, while the wealthiest decimal in the United States and Canada owned forty-seven percent of the continent’s assets, based on the 2018 Global Inequality Report (Alvarado et al., 2018). In 2016, the top ten percent of the population’s national income distribution was 37 percent across Europe and 47 percent in the United States and Canada (Alvarado et al., 2018).
Since 1980, when the United States and the United Kingdom started their neoliberal socioeconomic rebellion, there has been a global growth in income disparity. Wealth disparity has grown significantly in countries such as India, China, and the Russian Federation since 1980. The European level of disparity has increased somewhat. This disparity rise, seen in the larger context of history, signals the end of the post-egalitarian order. Put another way, disparities in earnings rose everywhere, even in wealthy nations, as neoliberal approaches began to gain traction and replace Keynesian approaches as the preferred course in the industrialized capitalist economy (Alvarado et al., 2018). These rises have mostly persisted into this moment. The shortcomings of neoliberal socioeconomic practices and the issues of inequality and impoverishment in the developed capitalist world were brought to light by the global financial crisis between 2008 and 2009 (Alvarado et al., 2018). The working class and disadvantaged groups suffered the most as a result of the failure of neoliberal capitalism’s banking systems across industrialized countries. Scholarly investigations have commenced to demonstrate the extent to which the financial crisis escalated the food shortage, which notably impacted lower-income families and thus raised the bar for food scarcity and overall impoverishment. In conclusion, poverty and injustice have historically been linked to economics (Davis & Geiger, 2017). However, as the sections before it have indicated, neoliberal economic principles have ruled the modern capitalist globe for the past forty years, increasing poverty, hunger, and disparities in earnings while consolidating money in the grasp of a select group of people and companies.
Food Insecurity
When everyone, everywhere, has financial, social, and physical access to sufficient, nutritious, and secure food that satisfies the nutritional requirements and a life of wellness and activity, food security is attained. Therefore, those with limited access to “safe and nutritional foods” who obtain “sufficient meals to satisfy the nutritional energy needs for leading a healthy life” are considered to be experiencing food insecurity. (Long et al., 2020), food insecurity has systemic and socioeconomic roots, although this phrase only sometimes fully conveys the scope of those factors. Since food insecurity is often discussed using the term “food poverty,” this is the case. Food poverty is known as inadequate financial means to purchase enough food in adequate amounts and of sufficient quality to sustain a socially and nutritionally acceptable diet (Kerins et al., 2023). Despite the conceptual distinction between them, food insecurity and poverty are frequently used interchangeably in research. This analysis treats food shortages and poverty as synonymous concepts due to the emphasis on structural factors linked to economics, neoliberalism, and injustice. Food insecurity resulting from poverty caused by modern economics is the main focus of this assessment. Families are typically the places where choices about finances and sustenance are made. Hence, a shortage of food frequently arises there. Examples of how parents deal with food scarcity, according to the study, include buying inexpensive, unwholesome foods, not eating themselves, and not paying for electricity or water.
Components of Food Insecurity
Assessing Food Insecurity
Given the delicate character of the issue, its complexity, and the fact that families might fluctuate between periods of dietary safety and uncertainty throughout the years, quantifying food scarcity can be challenging. Currently, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) inquiry component is one of the most widely used tools for evaluating the food shortage. There are Ten versions of the whole section, shorter forms of the eighteen questions that make up the entire section, in case the full version needs to be validated. Ten of the complete version’s inquiries are focused on the home, and eight expressly address the food of kids’ circumstances. Investigators have also employed altered editions of the United States Department of Agriculture poverty questionnaires to investigate particular facets of food scarcity (Graham et al., 2019). The UN has created a more accessible but comparable tool. The eight inquiries comprising the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization Food Scarcity Experiences Scale delve into numerous aspects of poverty and hunger, including the USDA Food Safety Modules. However, it lacks particular inquiries regarding children’s dietary encounters. Additional metrics comprise measurements of kids’ size and weight, polls of family consumption, and an FAO index of malnutrition using multiple calorie intake indicators. The empirical and theoretical research on measuring food scarcity makes one thing abundantly evident: there is no widely used official technique for measuring food insecurity. This has policy consequences because there is no globally accepted way to assess dietary poverty. However, researchers have started looking at several ways to quantify the idea and the advantages and disadvantages of each method.
Right to Food and Human Rights
A rising body of research examines if the entitlement to eat is a fundamental human right and, if it is, how families and people might be assured of it. The UN Declaration of the Rights of Humans, which was adopted in 1948, comprised a language about one’s right to nourishment (Furey, 2019). It states that every individual is entitled to the right to have a livelihood sufficient for one’s and their family’s welfare and health, such as dwellings, food, clothing, healthcare, and essential support services (Furey, 2019). Nevertheless, as this proclamation lacks legal force, it is of little use in guaranteeing everybody in a nation that has ratified it has access to food.
While countries have been widely aware of the issue of food insecurity—160 countries have recognized the right to food—the situation nevertheless persists. The bulk of rich countries’ blatant disregard for disadvantaged people’s “right to food” and the need to honor, safeguard, and implement this fundamental right pose serious concerns about the role that policymakers should play in combating national malnutrition and food insecurity. Food insecurity is a cultural construct across Canada as well as the developed capitalist globe (Hutchinson & Tarasuk, 2022). Poverty is an issue that has to and will be resolved by charity and compassionate citizens in a neoliberal economic society. A fundamental human right to enough and nourishing nourishment is clearly at odds with this strategy. As a result, food is no longer regarded as a fundamental human privilege, and countries are no longer in charge of providing for people who are food in need. The shortage of food in the developed capitalist economy unavoidably results from this.
It is necessary to go beyond simply controlling for ethnic background and race in investigations and look at exposures that might affect persons from minority backgrounds different than Whites, as racial and ethnic gaps in food scarcity have persisted for more than ten years. The disparity regarding medical actions and outcomes is mainly caused by prejudice and racial profiling, as is becoming increasingly acknowledged in the medical disciplines, especially the field of public health (Bowen, Elliott & Hardison‐Moody, 2021). Racial discrimination is defined as treating individuals or groups differently because of the ethnic background or racial background. Racial prejudice consists of two things. “Discrarate treatment” refers to “differential treatment based on ethnicity that affects an ethnic group.” In contrast, “distinct effect” refers to “treatment based on insufficiently explained reasons apart from ethnicity which affects a ethnic group.” In connection with the first element, “disparate treatment,” research has demonstrated that racial prejudice prevents people of color from pursuing educational and career opportunities, which has adverse repercussions in society and the economy that could end up in an insufficient food supply. The latter element, “disparate impact,” may contribute to racial and ethnic differences in food scarcity. For instance, the rate of incarceration of African Americans in federal jails is five times higher than that of White inmates (Bowen, Elliott & Hardison‐Moody, 2021). Therefore, laws that limit work opportunities for those with criminal histories may penalize those of racial or ethnic color and increase the shortage of food. The entirety of methods by which civilizations promote prejudice against races through mutually strengthening unjust structures (such as living conditions, job incomes, rewards, loans, mediums, medical treatment, law enforcement, etc.) is known as structural racism. Structural prejudice goes beyond racism between individuals; it recognizes the impact of past and present deeply ingrained laws and behaviors. While it is crucial to battle relational prejudice as part of measures to tackle gaps in shortages of food, institutional racism must also be addressed to achieve balance in the supply of food and enhance associated outcomes for people of color.
Numerous effective strategies have been put up to combat food shortages. These include strengthening and simplifying the process for households to link to the government nutrition and food safety program, expanding and enhancing the availability of government financial assistance incentives, boosting job prospects and the capacity for people to work for an adequate salary, training medical providers to identify signs of shortages of food and refer patients and their households to the right resources, and—most recently—the necessity of adopting the viewpoint of human rights. However, to tackle the ongoing racial inequalities in food scarcity, investigators and campaigners for equitable access to food must also consider the possible effects of employing strategies that target institutional sexism and prejudice more widely. By tackling the impact of race, ethnic background, and socioeconomic disparities, these attempts will probably open the door for developing legislative and operational approaches that support fairness in food availability and well-being.
The Effects of Food Insecurity
Studies have indicated that kids and individuals experiencing a shortage of food have many physical, social, and psychological difficulties. The industrialized capitalist globe has several evaluations covering various aspects of food scarcity studies. Dietary scarcity as a kid decreases interpersonal skills—including higher levels of agitated, hostile, disagreeable, and distracting behavior—which are associated with linked social issues (Pourmotabbed, et al., 2020). The fear of being perceived as impoverished by other families and kids is another reason why children with food insecurity are less inclined to interact with other kids beyond schooling. Studies have indicated that kids who experience hunger are more likely than those who do not to experience academic setbacks in math and spelling. Starvation affects kid’s mental and physical health. Children are more likely to acquire weight because kids eat more unfit, inexpensive meals than fruits, veggies, and protein-rich foods. Studies have shown that kids who experience food insecurity are more likely to experience medical conditions, cavities, and gingivitis; kids are also more likely to experience migraines and diarrhea, anemia, allergies, a greater incidence of long-term diseases, and frequently have worse medical conditions as adults (Gallegos et al., 2021). Hunger can also affect children’s mental health. Kids who experience food insecurity have higher rates of depressive disorders, anxiety, and various mental health issues. Moreover, the majority of kids raised in food-poor homes might retain into adults the poor eating practices that were imposed upon them as kids, perpetuating the socio -economic class and wellness disparities that they encountered as kids on their kids. Food scarcity has numerous detrimental effects. Not only is the cost of food essential but so is the importance of having constant access to a variety of wholesome, inexpensive foods. The results of the studies on kids’ dental problems were more common in families with no food than in nourished families, so there is plenty of information on the effects of food insecurity on adults’ psychological and physical well-being (Gallegos et al., 2021). Depression among mothers has been linked to food insecurity in pregnancy, moms, and food aid recipients, according to research. Female overweight and shortages of food are associated. Food insufficiency may need to be improved for elders to be able to engage in daily routines, according to studies focused on adult food insecurity.
Dietary Deserts
Only some have equal access to reasonably priced, wholesome food. Numerous research investigations into food shortages demonstrate that minorities and the impoverished must travel further to find healthy, nutritious food on a typical basis. In Britain, the term “food desert” was first used at the beginning of the 1990s to describe a region where individuals have no convenient availability of fit, nutritious foods, especially when they are disadvantaged or have restricted movement.” The word “simple accessibility” is typically used to describe travel in both distance and time. For example, while studying food deserts, experts frequently look at the distance residents must cover to travel to a store to buy food. Furthermore, the method of travel utilized to get to stores matters. Getting wholesome, nutrient-dense food may vary significantly depending on whether one drives, strolls, or uses public transit. Transit has long been associated with disparities in race and wealth in nations like the United States of America, which exacerbates inequality in society. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that residing in an alimentary desert is frequently correlated with racial discrimination and unemployment. Studies have shown explicitly that neighborhoods with high concentrations of economically disadvantaged people and members of racial and ethnic minorities usually have fewer alternatives for obtaining healthy foods and that inhabitants of these neighborhoods have to commute farther to stores. Studies on food deserts are divided into eleven sections. This featured research that looked at the effects of factors such as store accessibility, racial/ethnic background, income/socioeconomic position, concentration among food shops, price, setting, kind of shop, accessibility, awareness, and general effect. Investigations that show how food shortages occur, what they do, and how disadvantaged people deal with various obstacles to obtaining enough food are included in each area. Although others view the occurrence of food deserts as an indication of the shortcomings of neoliberal capitalism as embodied in the global capitalist system, food is primarily a commodity—that is, an item that can be consumed to satisfy hunger and sustain life (WILLIS & FITZPATRICK, 2018). Dietary supplement deserts may be seen as a marketplace collapse or an unraveling in the United States’ commercial alimentary system. This approach to the issue ignores the main reason there isn’t any healthy food in these areas: the current United States dietary system regards food mainly as a product. According to this perspective, areas like food-insecure regions are recognized as successes of market processes rather than mistakes or unintentional consequences. Put another way, food desert residents are more likely to experience food shortages due to the revolutionary capitalists’ effective allocation of assets (such as grocery stores) to areas where the most significant revenue could be made (WILLIS & FITZPATRICK, 2018). This is why the places are not thought to be sufficiently lucrative to warrant owning a shop. Although stores offer a consistent source of wholesome food, they are only one of many choices for many individuals. To lessen food poverty, localities that might otherwise be classified as food crises are now showing that they can effectively employ tiny neighborhood food shops and other locally owned non-supermarket alternatives (Brinkley, Raj, & Horst, 2017). After summarizing the studies on the different facets of food shortages, I now move on to a review of the efforts made by affluent nations to lessen the problem. Many are left to deal with nourishing those in need since neoliberal economic strategies have methodically decimated most publicly financed welfare initiatives across modern capitalist countries, creating shortages of food in the meantime.
Interventions and models of food aid
Food assistance and charitable giving have predominantly responded to food shortages in neoliberal-developed capitalist countries. The abundance of charitable giving is a factor in the culture’s inability to address hardship effectively. Put differently, it enables the provision of food to people in need while ignoring the underlying reasons for impoverishment. The intrinsic conflict and challenging character of a food assistance solution to the food shortage were acknowledged by urgent food givers.
Food distribution and charitable giving as a means of addressing food shortages present several issues. Firstly, poverty is politicized; that is, leaders pretend that since others are providing for people in need in the nation, they are absolved of duty. To put it simply, the leaders of a large number of developed capitalist countries act as though they are not accountable for protecting the fundamental right of every person to eat. Secondly, food assistance organizations frequently need more authority over the foods that are provided. Therefore, most of the food provided is undesirable, which results in low levels of nutrients. Thirdly, different places may have other access to food assistance, leaving certain highly impoverished regions with limited choices (Mann et al., 2018). Fourth, food aid groups frequently impose restrictions on the frequency at which individuals can access the funds, resulting in an insufficient amount of assistance. The users of dietary handouts also often lose the freedom to choose what they eat since, in some instances, they are handed food boxes instead of having the opportunity to buy the necessary supplies to create nutritious meals (Caspi et al., 2019). Notwithstanding, extant literature explores strategies to mitigate these primary concerns, and local food initiatives are now dedicating a more significant portion of their efforts to nourishment compared to previous years.
The initial purpose of what was formerly known as “crisis foods” was to provide temporary respite during periods of desperate need. Otherwise, the aid was intended to be momentary. However, the framework and food assistance givers have established themselves as a way for those who are perpetually starving to assist in providing for those around them (Hoxie, Mercier, & Smith, 2022). Poor individuals are being pushed farther into hardship by neoliberal policies intended to maintain minimal benefits for people experiencing poverty in an attempt to encourage them to leave aid and find work. Aid clients rely on food charities to make up frequent gaps in the family’s diets instead of paying for urgent supplies.
Models of Food Aid
This part covers three primary categories of food help: government support, feeding initiatives run by nonprofit organizations, and supply pantries or banks. Food banks, often known as food pantries, are places where people who are starving can get a couple of days’ worth of nourishment (typically after proving their necessity). Customers can often visit food pantries a few times each week to pick up a certain amount of nourishment, although each charity organization operates independently. In developed capitalist nations, food pantries are the most extensively researched kind of food assistance. Food pantries are becoming more prevalent worldwide, and academics have written about this phenomenon. Researchers have also discussed how using food pantries is not a reliable sign of shortages of food, how food banks are expanding in universities, and the shame associated with obtaining food from these kinds of groups (Lambie-Mumford & Green, 2017). Food pantries fight poverty head-on and provide food for multitudes of individuals annually in the developed capitalist world. Still, many individuals agree that it is only a band-aid solution to much more severe issues of structure.
The developed capitalist countries are home to a wide variety of activities that are known as “supplying initiatives.” The groups that run such initiatives utilize the resources to provide food for those in need firsthand. Lately, nonprofits and charitable groups have started to establish locations where undernourished kids and occasionally relatives can visit to have a bite to eat and frequently interact with different households. The majority of people who oversee food pantries and food initiatives do so via nonprofit institutions (Price & Sampson, 2018). Such hunger-related reactions are typical neoliberal ones that prey on people’s kindness. People who are comfortable with their diets have numerous possibilities to participate in nourishing those in need and, as a result, experience a positive self-image that frequently leads to people volunteering again. However, according to current studies (Denning, 2021), donors who are consistently involved report experiencing donor weariness, which raises additional concerns about the future viability of this kind of program.
Contributions, along with other charitable contributions, are used to run and finance a large portion of food distribution. Certain governments do offer methods for ongoing support for food, in addition to standard social services like school meals for free. Furthermore, there are examples of governments in rich countries supporting feeding initiatives from time to time, which are often not long-term initiatives that are at the discretion of budget holders. No government in the developed capitalist world has been able to effectively ensure that everyone has access to food. Neoliberal economic theory has been more successful in minimizing government assistance for feeding the underprivileged.
Food Sovereignty and Food Justice
There are many interpretations of food justice, similar to what there are for food insecurity. Essentially, food equity is about equitably sharing the advantages and hazards associated with where, what, and how food is cultivated and created, delivered and dispersed, and accessible or consumed. A critical examination that acknowledges the agricultural economy as a racist enterprise and challenges the impact of socioeconomic status on cultivation, transportation, and food consumption is vital to the sustainable food campaign. Poor communities of color frequently need more access to modern resources necessary for growing food. often need help to follow the diet the Food Revolution recommends because of store locations and costs. Economically disadvantaged neighborhoods with racial backgrounds want to establish regional alimentary systems that can satisfy their nutritional needs using equitable food advocacy. The research on food safety needs to be placed within a comprehensive analysis of agro-food structures, as food justice makes evident. In contrast to food scarcity studies, which focus primarily on the quantity of starvation and methods to minimize it, food justice research usually concentrates on more general questions of fairness in national and international agricultural systems (Glennie & Alkon, 2018). Despite significant differences, the food rights movement’s issues and the rights-based viewpoint on food found in the research on poverty and hunger are comparable. Nonetheless, there are criticisms about implementing food justice. One way to practice food equity is by establishing communal gardens in underprivileged areas. Nevertheless, society members involved in these kinds of initiatives are typically families of color, while those in charge of these initiatives are generally wealthy white people. Academics note that since highly racial power relations and other forms of injustice are frequently at the center of these efforts, explaining how this is justice is vital.
Experts argue that although customer and community backing is essential in mobilizing the fight for food justice, it cannot bring about long-lasting reforms at a larger scale (Herrington & Mix, 2020). Thus, more work must be done to tackle the underlying structural factors that cause inequality in the food industry (Glennie & Alkon, 2018). As a result, more research examines how the food system perpetuates, upholds, and challenges racial, class, and gender disparities.
Another new addition to the discourse on the food industry that draws attention to and seeks to address inequities associated with food is the concept of food sovereignty. Food independence is a strategy for recovering individuals’ land, sustenance, lives, and cultures amid corporate agricultural monopolists. In contrast, food justice is an upward trend, and adequate nutrition is a societal situation. The strong neoliberalism capitalist trend regarding farming in developing nations, especially in Latin America, led to the creation and development of food independence during the 1980s and 1990s. Food independence is “the socioeconomic entitlement of an area or country to establish its own rules pertaining to the availability of food and the environmentally friendly, social interactions, and historical settings whereby it is maintained.” Food independence is an initiative primarily focused on emerging economies, but it is also becoming increasingly oriented in the United States alongside other established capitalist nations. For proponents of food sovereignty, being able to make choices about one’s diet and food supplies locally is crucial. This is viewed as a more successful strategy to lower food poverty and a means of giving neighborhoods and areas back ownership of the availability of food, which has not always been possible because of the agricultural exporting system supported by neoliberal economics.
Currently consisting of 182 regional and national groups from 81 nations across Europe, Asia, Africa, and South and North America, Vía Campesina is the world’s most renowned food independence association. Small-scale farmers and other economically disadvantaged agricultural laborers are united to fight for food independence and resist neoliberalism in commercial agribusiness. Apart from hosting global meetings on food independence regularly, Vía Campesina also plans local food advocacy incidents, like demonstrations against unfair layoffs of food workers, demonstrations against deeper problems in the food structure like business agricultural price-setting, and celebrations of the achievements of disadvantaged agriculturalists. The opposition to capitalism’s criticism of the present agricultural system, which is essential in tackling Vía Campesina to food independence, is crucial since the remedies to general hunger, particularly among disadvantaged people and communities, have probably emanated from away from the emerging neoliberal capitalist structure. For the most part, the viewpoints regarding food independence and fairness have significantly advanced the field of study on food insecurity since they prioritize local rights as well as equity.
Conclusion
Even in wealthy nations with sufficient food to satisfy every person’s requirement, there is nevertheless food insecurity. Scholars have produced a staggering number of studies on food shortages due to this circumstance. Considering the fundamental basis of the starvation issue, it is not unexpected that a food shortage is receiving this much focus. The extent of food scarcity in developed capitalist countries and the volume of research devoted to characterizing, clarifying, forecasting, and mitigating that food shortage may surprise readers who need to become acquainted with this body of work. As mentioned in the introduction, there is too much research on food insecurity in industrialized nations to cover in detail. Instead, the address summarizes the main areas of this discipline’s studies, highlighting pertinent donations. Although researchers have conducted several in-depth evaluations of different facets of food scarcity, food assistance, equitable nutrition, and other associated fields, this study provides a more comprehensive overview of the area of food scarcity research as well as reactions in developed capitalist countries. The first argument made in this piece is that rising disparities in income and impoverishment are direct results of the industrialized globe’s transition to a model of neoliberal capitalism. Elevated rates of insecurity regarding food are a consequence of rising income disparities and poverty. Regretfully, the reaction to increased food shortages is likewise grounded in neoliberalism regulatory frameworks that have prioritized food assistance as an option. When the state steps in to mitigate food shortages, it usually comes in the shape of food assistance instead of tackling the systemic reasons behind food shortages and people experiencing poverty. Secondly, a summary of the literature on food scarcity makes it abundantly evident that it is a highly interdisciplinary topic with a wealth of scholarly work that confirms the presence of food poverty and its effects and provides insightful analysis regarding how to solve this significant problem. Although this corpus of study is excellent, findings from numerous developed capitalist nations indicate that many families in these nations still struggle with food scarcity. It is still necessary to conduct more studies, engage in action, and advance fairness in food.
References
Navarro, V. (2020). Neoliberalism,” globalization,” unemployment, inequalities, and the welfare state. The Political Economy of Social Inequalities, 33-107.
Cummins, I. (2018). Poverty, inequality and social work: The impact of neoliberalism and austerity politics on welfare provision. Policy Press.
Alvaredo, F., Chancel, L., Piketty, T., Saez, E., & Zucman, G. (Eds.). (2018). World Inequality Report 2018. Belknap Press.
Davis, O., & Geiger, B. B. (2017). Did food insecurity rise across Europe after the 2008 crisis? An analysis across welfare regimes. Social Policy and Society, 16(3), 343–360.
Long, M. A., Gonçalves, L., Stretesky, P. B., & Defeyter, M. A. (2020). Food insecurity in advanced capitalist nations: A review. Sustainability, 12(9), 3654.
Kerins, C., Furey, S., Kerrigan, P., McCartan, A., Kelly, C., & Vaughan, E. (2023). News media framing of food poverty and insecurity in high-income countries: a rapid review. Health Promotion International, 38(6), daad188.
Graham, P., Stretesky, P., Long, M., Mann, E., & Defeyter, M. A. (2018). Holiday hunger: feeding children during the school holidays. Feeding children inside and outside the home (pp. 87–106). Routledge.
Bowen, S., Elliott, S., & Hardison-Moody, A. (2021). The structural roots of food insecurity: how racism is a fundamental cause of food insecurity. Sociology Compass, 15(7), e12846.
Pourmotabbed, A., Moradi, S., Babaei, A., Ghavami, A., Mohammadi, H., Jalili, C.,… & Miraghajani, M. (2020). Food insecurity and mental health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Public health nutrition, 23(10), 1778–1790.
Gallegos, D., Eivers, A., Sondergeld, P., & Pattinson, C. (2021). Food insecurity and child development: A state-of-the-art review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(17), 8990.
WILLIS, D., & FITZPATRICK, K. M. (2018). Health among youth. Food and Poverty: Food Insecurity and Food Sovereignty among America’s Poor, 79.
Brinkley, C., Raj, S., & Horst, M. (2017). Culturing food deserts: recognizing the power of community-based solutions. Built Environment, 43(3), 328–342.
Mann, E., Long, M. A., Stretesky, P. B., & Defeyter, M. A. (2018). A question of justice: are holiday clubs serving the most deprived communities in England? Local Environment, 23(10), 1008–1022.
Caspi, C. E., Canterbury, M., Carlson, S., Bain, J., Bohen, L., Grannon, K.,… & Kottke, T. (2019). A behavioral economics approach to improving healthy food selection among food pantry clients. Public health nutrition, 22(12), 2303-2313.
Hoxie, P. G., Mercier, S., & Smith, V. H. (2022). Food Aid Cargo Preference: Impacts on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Emergency Food Aid Programs. The Journal of Law and Economics, 65(2), 395-421.
Lambie-Mumford, H., & Green, M. (2017). Austerity, welfare reform, and the rising use of food banks by children in England and Wales. Area: 49, 3, 273-279. Viitattu 27.2. 2018.
Price, C. E., & Sampson, N. R. (2018). Food pantries on college and university campuses: an emerging solution to food insecurity. Food and Poverty: Food Insecurity and Food Sovereignty among America’s Poor; Hossfeld, L., Kelly, EB, and Waity, J., Eds., 245-258.
Denning, S. (2021). Persistence in volunteering: An affect theory approach to faith-based volunteering. Social and cultural geography, 22(6), 807-827.
Glennie, C., & Alkon, A. H. (2018). Food justice: cultivating the field. Environmental Research Letters, 13(7), 073003.
Herrington, A., & Mix, T. L. (2020). “Building a Bigger Table”: Mobilizing Social Capital to Develop a Community Food Resource Center. Sociological Inquiry, 90(4), 794-822.
Furey, S. (2019). Food poverty: Zero hunger and the right to food. In Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer Cham.
Hutchinson, J., & Tarasuk, V. (2022). The relationship between diet quality and the severity of household food insecurity in Canada. Public Health Nutrition, 25(4), 1013-1026.
write