Exploring the practical relevance of food aid rationales in Belgium: Lessons from applying in‐kind transfer valuation methods

Abstract

Charitable food aid is gaining new relevance in mature welfare states: the number of beneficiaries increases while the subsidization by and collaboration with the state intensifies. We distinguish three rationales to this further institutionalization: poverty mitigation, and ecological and paternalistic reasonings. In this explorative study we assess the validity of these rationales in the actual set‐up of food aid in Belgium. Specifically, we apply three different in‐kind transfer valuation methods (production cost, market and recipient value) to robustly estimate the value of food aid. This mixed‐methods study builds on purpose‐collected field work data on distributed food aid packages, Household Budget Survey data on common consumption patterns, and a thorough document analysis into food aid spending data. The estimated value of food aid strongly depends on the valuation method: the annual total value of food aid in Belgium ranges from 57 to 148 million euros. Importantly, we observe a discrepancy between prevalent rationales and the actual set‐up of food aid. In contrast to the ecological reasoning of fighting food waste, large part of the total value stems from new food purchases, which involve paternalistic choices. Yet, the composition of food aid packages only partly complies with nutritional recommendations. Moreover, they do not fully meet recipients' preferences and needs, which generates a welfare loss. Food aid may nonetheless seem efficient from a policy perspective: a ‘charity multiplier effect’ appears to translate the government production cost in a higher market value. Still, its unpredictable and mismatched nature likely reduces its poverty mitigating effect.