Food Desert vs. Food Apartheid: What’s the Difference?
Photo by Mark Eder/Unsplash
In the United States, one of the richest countries in the world, a staggering 44.2 million people were food insecure, meaning they struggled to get enough food, in 2022. That accounts for about one in eight households in the country. We also know that lack of access to proper nutrition results in poorer health outcomes for families who struggle with food insecurity.
You might hear some people chalking these injustices up to “food deserts,” which the 2008 Farm Bill defined as “area[s] in the United States with limited access to affordable and nutritious food, particularly such […] area[s] composed of predominantly lower-income neighborhoods and communities.” The idea is that some people don’t have access to quality food in the U.S. simply because they live too far from adequate grocery stores or other food retailers.
But some critics argue that the term “food desert” obscures the reality of the flaws in our food system and incorrectly diagnoses the problem at hand. A 2014 study of SNAP (food stamps) participants found that geographic access wasn’t actually correlated with the number of food-insecure households. Research has also indicated that most people don’t necessarily source the majority of their food from the closest food retailer; they often travel farther to a preferred grocery store, which indicates that proximity isn’t necessarily the most important factor when it comes to securing food for a healthy diet.
According to Feeding America, the most common cause of food insecurity is, simply, low income. Some people aren’t making enough money to buy healthy food; building a Whole Foods directly next to their homes isn’t going to solve their access problem if they have to choose between a $4 bag of carrots and paying their electricity bills. And who are the people most likely to suffer from low incomes? Predictably, it’s people of color, women and disabled people who struggle the most.