Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Dealing With Food Insecurity in Canada

Canada needs food policies that target the chief determinant of hunger: poverty.


As Prime Minister Stephen Harper finished up his Latin and Central American tour in August, he announced a series of comprehensive food-security projects for his last country stop, Honduras. The projects range from nutritional support for vulnerable groups to agricultural diversification and development projects – most aligned with the policy goals of the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Food Programme.

On the domestic front, Canadians recognize that many people remain food insecure at home, too. Food insecurity means that people are worried about not having enough food, that they reduce the quality of their food because they cannot afford more expensive items, or that they often cut back on the amount they eat as a trade-off for meeting other basic needs.

Canadians seem to understand that food insecurity is bad for health, that it compromises nutritional intake, and that people are often eating “the wrong kinds of foods.” In other words, the way food insecurity is framed in Canada recognizes that it is a legitimate concern, that it is related to poverty, and that it has adverse effects on people.

This recognition should be sufficient to engender a thoughtful policy response from government. However, current food-insecurity policy in Canada is woefully confused with a vague, arguably indulgent policy framework based on what a food secure Canada should look like. That is, food-security policy in Canada is largely equated with agri-food policy, which is concerned with food sovereignty, a sustainable food supply, safe and healthy foods, and protection of domestic markets and producers. Consumer needs are expressed as a desire for local foods, organics, and value-added foods such as foodstuffs that are more nutritious than their unprocessed counterparts (e.g., calcium-enriched orange juice).



Stephen Harper's food fight: Will the Conservative government make Canada's agricultural industry competitive again? Read up on the issue here.



There is nothing wrong with agri-food policy, but it is important to recognize that associated programs and initiatives do not tackle the root cause of the food insecurity and hunger that still affect many Canadians: poverty. For example, over the last 20 years, the school meals movement has shifted away from a focus on feeding hungry children, and toward an emphasis on providing an opportunity for learning readiness, offering before-school support for families, and allowing people to experience a variety of foods (such as kiwi fruit and ethnic dishes). While these types of programs are educational and helpful in certain contexts, they are not aimed at fighting hunger or its root causes.

As has been the case with many social programs targeted at the poor, the middle class has embraced school meal programs, and, in doing so, has probably distanced those who actually experience food insecurity – those who were originally the intended recipients. My own work on children’s nutrition programs in the early 1990s raised concerns about the social stigma attached to these programs, and questioned whether the programs reached the children they intended to.

More recently, I examined whether household strategies for coping with child hunger changed over a decade (1996/97 to 2006/07), using the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth.

Two things emerged from this research. First, the determinants of child hunger did not change over that decade: The same factors, such as mother-led households, poverty, and living in rental accommodations, were associated with this severe child disadvantage throughout the given time frame. That said, the rate of child hunger has been halved since 1996/97, which shows how general economic conditions raise or lower rates of food insecurity.



Find out how the Arab Spring influenced food security in Canada here.



Second, despite a notable increase in the number of food banks, and in school meal access, over the 10-year period, we observed no increase in the use of such external supports among families reporting child hunger. In fact, the only thing that did change in terms of these families’ coping mechanisms was that there was a reduction in diet variety, which was likely a result of rising food prices. Other coping mechanisms that remained constant were skipping meals, getting help from relatives, going to a food bank, using school meal programs, and having a social worker.

I interpret these findings as a demonstration that food-assistance programming fails to reach an important segment of the population – the very people that such programs are designed to reach. However, I also consider these findings to be evidence of a socio-cultural shift toward a preference for the management of one’s poverty privately, at home.

In light of the apparent inadequacies, what food-insecurity policy is needed in Canada? The most obvious answer is that we need an anti-poverty policy and price controls on some food staples. We need to continue to advocate for, at the very least, increases in the incomes of those on welfare or disability supports to meet the rising cost of living. Furthermore, we should be especially aware of rising food insecurity among our elderly pensioners.

In terms of pricing policy, other countries support price controls on staples for their vulnerable citizens, and we may have to do the same here in Canada. We have been experimenting with this type of policy for our Arctic citizens, and, while such strategies are not perfect, it may be necessary to attempt them in other regions of Canada.

The bottom line is that Canada needs policies directed at reducing income-related food insecurity in Canada. We need to move beyond agri-food policies, developing initiatives that tackle the root causes of hunger over the long-term, rather than those that continue to rely on band-aid solutions, and that are often subsumed under local food movements. The array of projects that Harper announced for Honduras in August should be considered more carefully here at home: Food insecurity in Canada requires a similar approach.

A longer version of this article appeared in the August issue of Policy Options, the Institute for Research on Public Policy’s flagship magazine.

Origin
Source: the Mark 

No comments:

Post a Comment