Can government investment in food pantries decrease food insecurity?

IF 6.8 1区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY Food Policy Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102541
Brian T. Hamel , Moriah Harman
{"title":"Can government investment in food pantries decrease food insecurity?","authors":"Brian T. Hamel ,&nbsp;Moriah Harman","doi":"10.1016/j.foodpol.2023.102541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>About 10% of Americans are food insecure, lacking consistent access to enough food for a healthy lifestyle. One way that the federal government seeks to reduce food insecurity is by investing in charitable food providers, such as food banks and pantries. This paper highlights a limitation on the potential effects of these investments on food insecurity: some communities have more charitable food providers than others. We support this claim with an analysis of the Farmers to Families Food Box Program, a U.S. COVID-19 program which distributed about 175 million boxes of food worth $9 billion to food pantries from May 2020 to May 2021. Consistent with our expectations, we find that food was targeted primarily to food insecure counties, but that counties with high rates of food insecurity that lack many food pantries received significantly less food than counties with <em>equally</em> high rates of food insecurity but more food pantries. Moving forward, policymakers should focus on providing direct aid to those in need, and on building a charitable food system rather than only investing more resources in the existing system.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":321,"journal":{"name":"Food Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Policy","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919223001392","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

About 10% of Americans are food insecure, lacking consistent access to enough food for a healthy lifestyle. One way that the federal government seeks to reduce food insecurity is by investing in charitable food providers, such as food banks and pantries. This paper highlights a limitation on the potential effects of these investments on food insecurity: some communities have more charitable food providers than others. We support this claim with an analysis of the Farmers to Families Food Box Program, a U.S. COVID-19 program which distributed about 175 million boxes of food worth $9 billion to food pantries from May 2020 to May 2021. Consistent with our expectations, we find that food was targeted primarily to food insecure counties, but that counties with high rates of food insecurity that lack many food pantries received significantly less food than counties with equally high rates of food insecurity but more food pantries. Moving forward, policymakers should focus on providing direct aid to those in need, and on building a charitable food system rather than only investing more resources in the existing system.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
政府对食品分发处的投资能否减少粮食不安全?
大约10%的美国人处于食品不安全状态,无法持续获得足够的食物来维持健康的生活方式。联邦政府寻求减少食品不安全的一种方法是投资于慈善食品供应商,如食品银行和食品储藏室。本文强调了这些投资对粮食不安全的潜在影响的局限性:一些社区比其他社区拥有更多的慈善食品提供者。我们通过对“农民到家庭食品盒计划”的分析来支持这一说法,该计划是美国的一项COVID-19计划,从2020年5月到2021年5月,该计划向食品储藏室分发了约1.75亿箱食品,价值90亿美元。与我们的预期一致,我们发现粮食主要是针对粮食不安全的县,但粮食不安全率高且缺乏许多食品储藏室的县收到的粮食明显少于粮食不安全率高但食品储藏室较多的县。今后,政策制定者应该把重点放在向有需要的人提供直接援助,以及建立一个慈善食品体系上,而不是仅仅在现有体系中投入更多资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Food Policy
Food Policy 管理科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.60%
发文量
128
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: Food Policy is a multidisciplinary journal publishing original research and novel evidence on issues in the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of policies for the food sector in developing, transition, and advanced economies. Our main focus is on the economic and social aspect of food policy, and we prioritize empirical studies informing international food policy debates. Provided that articles make a clear and explicit contribution to food policy debates of international interest, we consider papers from any of the social sciences. Papers from other disciplines (e.g., law) will be considered only if they provide a key policy contribution, and are written in a style which is accessible to a social science readership.
期刊最新文献
Reflections on food policy in the context of healthy and sustainable diets The impact of pre-empting dual food quality regulation on product reformulation and packaging Autopsy of a futures market failure: Japan’s Dojima rice futures in the early 21st century Women improving nutrition through self-help groups in India: Does nutrition information help? Integrating system dynamics to value chain analysis to address price volatility in the Indonesian chilli value chain
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1