February 3, 2012
Food Deserts Are Part Mirage
There’s a perception that many urban communities in the U.S. are devoid of places to buy groceries. According to research, however, the issue isn’t about quantity, it’s about quality.
A new University of Southern California (USC) study found that many poor neighborhoods in cities actually have many grocery options, with large numbers of mom-and-pop food stores. The problem is those businesses, for the most part, do not offer the selection and prices that would benefit locals most.
“Having access to bigger stores could mean a larger range of produce and lower prices,” said Jenny Schuetz, a professor with the USC Price School of Public Policy and the study’s lead author, in a press release.
“Low-income households presumably have the most to gain from lower prices made possible by economies of scale, yet are less likely to benefit from them,” Prof. Schuetz said.
The research, published in Regional Science and Urban Economics, looked at retail services in 58 major metropolitan areas around the U.S.
According to 2009 U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics, 11.5 million people with low incomes (roughly 4.1 percent of the country’s total population) live in poorer areas more than a mile from a supermarket.
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Discussion Questions: How important is it for the country to deal with the food desert issue in light of the associated public health challenges associated with poor nutrition? What is your answer to the food desert issue in the U.S.?
Poll
If there was business to be had (or profit to be made), the larger retailers would be there with more nutritious offerings. That they are not suggests that doing business in these neighborhoods would not be profitable. Create the demand — the supply will follow.
This is an issue near and dear to my heart since I have lived in a food desert in Detroit. First of all, there weren’t an abundance of mom & pops and secondly, the ones that were there represented threats to public health.
It wasn’t just that they did “…not offer the selection and prices that would benefit locals most.” It was that the product they sold was often centuries past the date code or gave off odd and questionable odors.
Were there … “alternatives”? Sure, if you belonged to the coop some of the younger residents set up — but that required that you donate labor to be a member. Or … you could travel less than three miles to the Eastern Market, (Detroit’s main produce terminal and meat packing district) where food was incredibly fresh and prices, assuming you bought in bulk, were — and are — still amazingly low.
So, what was the problem? In a word — transportation. Those two to three miles might as well have been 200,000 to 300,000 miles for most of my neighbors who lacked reliable transportation — public or private. And so they “food” shopped with exploitatively priced retailers operating what amounted to liquor stores with expanded offerings, (all, by the way, conveniently “merchandised” behind bulletproof plexiglass).
In terms of what could have been practically done, stiffer and more frequent health and safety inspections would have been a good start. But the problem runs deeper than that. Retailers stayed out of the neighborhood because of concerns about shrink, outright theft, liability and the difficulty finding employees.
Meanwhile, the residents raised children who regarded Twinkees, Slim Jims and Coca-Cola as the three food groups. Many people had no clue about nutrition and/or cooking so giving them access to food only solved the “supply side” part of the problem. Go to any poor neighborhood in America and you’ll see obese kids, many of whom are suffering to some degree from forms of malnutrition. It’s a HUGE problem and not one solved by a tax abatement here or a community grant there.
If you really want to eliminate food deserts you better first figure a way to eliminate poverty and its many handmaidens — lack of education, crime, unemployment and insufficient or high cost day care, just to name a few. If you can’t “fix” the plight of the poor, you’ll never stop people from exploiting them.
I concur with these findings. Food deserts are often related to health and wellness issues. In fact, the city where the university is located, Philadelphia, has the unwanted distinction of statistically being the most obese among the ten largest cities in the US. This notoriety is no doubt a reflection of the high proportion of low-income families living in the city who often rely on fast food or snack foods in lieu of the more expensive nutritious foods, such as fruits, vegetable and whole grains.
So the number of outlets in these food deserts is less important than the access to these sources of foods that insure a balanced diet at a reasonable price. Supermarkets need to be encouraged to address these needs, and under-served markets. One mile from the university, Jeff Brown opened a terrific Shoprite, which is a model for all to consider when developing options for consumers in need of healthy, affordable food alternatives.
Without the subsidies being offered to stores to locate in the food deserts, it would be unlikely anyone would want to risk a fortune setting a store up in these areas. Security risks alone and the cost to maintain a safe level for the customers and employees is a huge chunk of money, and first-of-the-month business is the only good week of the month, which creates a staffing problem. Perhaps a neighborhood co-op, which are now becoming more popular, and getting the neighborhood involved with ownership, plus incentives to teach good working skills to those who want to be a part of something new, would be a good start as well.
It is a difficult situation in urban areas, but there are some rich takers out there, who could rise up to the challenge.
Yes, this is a critical problem. And as with all problems they are intended to point to the possibilities.
First, there are many easy ways to grow one’s own vegetables that are remarkably productive and economical. Go to Vermisoks.com for starters.
Second, there are incredible advances in the science of energetics that enables water to become ‘super-water’ with no chemicals involved. 30% increase in yields have been reported. Unfortunately this looks like woo woo to many in the agriculture community. If something doesn’t come in a powder and color the water, it’s not real.
Third, I’ve got to admit to wondering to what degree a lot of this is being managed by the major food growers. Food production is moving alarmingly close to a monopoly. We’ve got to free the farmers!
Yes the food dessert is real and having a small food store next door has not solved the problem. Neither will building a 55,000 square foot supermarket solve the problem. Food is available, otherwise we would have a lot of starving people and that has not happened. The existing small stores do not have sufficient selection to prepare a complete meal. Prices are high and perishables limited. Home delivery will not work as the order size is not economically viable. A new business model is required. I think online ordering with customer pickup at a store/depot within 3 hours is a real solution.
There is a growing list of important issues arising in America and one of them is the uncultivated food desert, caused by quality food accessibility and affordable pricing. Good nutrition is a vital issue, since too many Americans are having to exist with poor nutrition, which in turn creates additional issues.
Good nutrition strengthens the fabric of our society. It is an issue that always needs attention and lots of money for acceptable education and follow-though.
That brings forward the issue of delivery. Who is really responsible for setting priorities that make sure that quality food is affordably offered to citizens everywhere? Department of Agriculture, educational institutions, Congress, the President, retailers, food manufacturers, or the discerning and/or affected public? The answer rests, in part, with all of those constituencies, but only one entity seemingly can bring us all together.
There is a fundamental flaw in the proposition that if consumers have access to fresh vegetables and healthier options then they will buy them.
If this were true then the obesity rate in America wouldn’t be on the trajectory it is.
Consumers buy what they want, what tastes good, and what they want is usually not very healthy.
First, if people are low income they get Food Stamps and WIC, so there groceries are basically free. If you look at the item movement reports at supermarkets that are in low income areas, they are not buying healthy food. Meat sales are usually much higher than normal because you can use Food Stamps for pet food so customers buy meat for their pets.
For a multitude of reasons, grocers simply prefer not to open stores in difficult areas. First, it’s hard to make a profit and second they just don’t like being there even if they can make a profit. It’s hard to get good employees to venture into those neighborhoods to work and the people who live in those areas are basically unemployable. You can’t force feed people to eat healthy. All we can do is educate and hope for the best. There are plenty of small independents doing a great job in providing healthy food to these neighborhoods. Supermarkets are in the business to make money so if they do open, they have to raise prices in poor neighborhoods to cover the increased security, shrink, loss prevention and combat pay expense.
Food desserts do indeed exist, and they most certainly need to be addressed by providing incentives to supermarket retailers that can provide the vegetables, fruits, fresh meat and dairy products that are essential to a healthy lifestyle. One of the quoted studies refers to “mom-and-pop” stores (bodegas) as a not particularly good shopping alternative for healthy foods. In actual fact, they are no alternative at all, and many are grimy, greasy and dirty, do not provide any kind of healthy food, frequently have outdated products on the shelves, and charge high prices. There are formats for opening stores in neighborhoods deemed food desserts that include understanding how to garner federal and state funds and support, and establishing community relationships, both of which are essential to successfully opening up a store in a food dessert. The burden is on local government to set up such programs and help supermarket operators take advantage of them. The burden on the supermarket industry is to take these programs seriously.
“Food desert” is a metaphor that might be just evocative enough to motivate corrective action. I’m heartened to see the dialog is gaining a place on the American agenda.
As we wrestle with this challenge it is important to remember that it persists in small rural communities as well as the inner cities. Here’s what PBS had to say last June. The issues of poverty, transportation, and fast food are very much the same.
Retailers are unlikely to find the economic motivation to champion change in this area, even if they sense a moral motivation. That leaves grass-roots efforts (like community gardens) and government incentives to engage the private sector.
The former make great news copy, but can only move the needle a little bit. Government intervention will be unpopular with many based on political ideology. If we can frame a program as an investment in national prosperity, it might win more adherents. If we can frame national nutrition and health as a matter of national security (as I believe it is), then more folks might jump on the farmwagon.
For the health of children living in poverty, whether urban or rural, finding a new solution for accessible, affordable nutritous food is a must. It will take new thinking to bring the community support and retail initiatives necessary for change to occur, as well as education in food slection and preparation. There are no easy solutions in sight … local partnerships seem the likely place to start to develop new models for healthier living.
Correction, you CAN’T use Food Stamps to buy pet food and that is one reason meat sales are a higher percent of sales in Food Stamp areas. Children are fed free lunch and breakfast at schools so this cuts into the supermarket business. Food Stamps are often bartered away for other services and people, or simply to the food banks when the cash runs out. If you look at the obesity problem in the low income areas, we know something is out of whack.
More Discussions
How Timely Is the Planned Lowe’s Website Renovation Focusing on Personalization?
Is Lowe’s being timely with its website reno, and is it right to be placed as…Should Costco Be Opening Members-Only Gas Stations?
Is this the right move for the warehouse club?As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…
If there was business to be had (or profit to be made), the larger retailers would be there with more nutritious offerings. That they are not suggests that doing business in these neighborhoods would not be profitable. Create the demand — the supply will follow.
This is an issue near and dear to my heart since I have lived in a food desert in Detroit. First of all, there weren’t an abundance of mom & pops and secondly, the ones that were there represented threats to public health.
It wasn’t just that they did “…not offer the selection and prices that would benefit locals most.” It was that the product they sold was often centuries past the date code or gave off odd and questionable odors.
Were there … “alternatives”? Sure, if you belonged to the coop some of the younger residents set up — but that required that you donate labor to be a member. Or … you could travel less than three miles to the Eastern Market, (Detroit’s main produce terminal and meat packing district) where food was incredibly fresh and prices, assuming you bought in bulk, were — and are — still amazingly low.
So, what was the problem? In a word — transportation. Those two to three miles might as well have been 200,000 to 300,000 miles for most of my neighbors who lacked reliable transportation — public or private. And so they “food” shopped with exploitatively priced retailers operating what amounted to liquor stores with expanded offerings, (all, by the way, conveniently “merchandised” behind bulletproof plexiglass).
In terms of what could have been practically done, stiffer and more frequent health and safety inspections would have been a good start. But the problem runs deeper than that. Retailers stayed out of the neighborhood because of concerns about shrink, outright theft, liability and the difficulty finding employees.
Meanwhile, the residents raised children who regarded Twinkees, Slim Jims and Coca-Cola as the three food groups. Many people had no clue about nutrition and/or cooking so giving them access to food only solved the “supply side” part of the problem. Go to any poor neighborhood in America and you’ll see obese kids, many of whom are suffering to some degree from forms of malnutrition. It’s a HUGE problem and not one solved by a tax abatement here or a community grant there.
If you really want to eliminate food deserts you better first figure a way to eliminate poverty and its many handmaidens — lack of education, crime, unemployment and insufficient or high cost day care, just to name a few. If you can’t “fix” the plight of the poor, you’ll never stop people from exploiting them.
I concur with these findings. Food deserts are often related to health and wellness issues. In fact, the city where the university is located, Philadelphia, has the unwanted distinction of statistically being the most obese among the ten largest cities in the US. This notoriety is no doubt a reflection of the high proportion of low-income families living in the city who often rely on fast food or snack foods in lieu of the more expensive nutritious foods, such as fruits, vegetable and whole grains.
So the number of outlets in these food deserts is less important than the access to these sources of foods that insure a balanced diet at a reasonable price. Supermarkets need to be encouraged to address these needs, and under-served markets. One mile from the university, Jeff Brown opened a terrific Shoprite, which is a model for all to consider when developing options for consumers in need of healthy, affordable food alternatives.
Without the subsidies being offered to stores to locate in the food deserts, it would be unlikely anyone would want to risk a fortune setting a store up in these areas. Security risks alone and the cost to maintain a safe level for the customers and employees is a huge chunk of money, and first-of-the-month business is the only good week of the month, which creates a staffing problem. Perhaps a neighborhood co-op, which are now becoming more popular, and getting the neighborhood involved with ownership, plus incentives to teach good working skills to those who want to be a part of something new, would be a good start as well.
It is a difficult situation in urban areas, but there are some rich takers out there, who could rise up to the challenge.
Yes, this is a critical problem. And as with all problems they are intended to point to the possibilities.
First, there are many easy ways to grow one’s own vegetables that are remarkably productive and economical. Go to Vermisoks.com for starters.
Second, there are incredible advances in the science of energetics that enables water to become ‘super-water’ with no chemicals involved. 30% increase in yields have been reported. Unfortunately this looks like woo woo to many in the agriculture community. If something doesn’t come in a powder and color the water, it’s not real.
Third, I’ve got to admit to wondering to what degree a lot of this is being managed by the major food growers. Food production is moving alarmingly close to a monopoly. We’ve got to free the farmers!
Yes the food dessert is real and having a small food store next door has not solved the problem. Neither will building a 55,000 square foot supermarket solve the problem. Food is available, otherwise we would have a lot of starving people and that has not happened. The existing small stores do not have sufficient selection to prepare a complete meal. Prices are high and perishables limited. Home delivery will not work as the order size is not economically viable. A new business model is required. I think online ordering with customer pickup at a store/depot within 3 hours is a real solution.
There is a growing list of important issues arising in America and one of them is the uncultivated food desert, caused by quality food accessibility and affordable pricing. Good nutrition is a vital issue, since too many Americans are having to exist with poor nutrition, which in turn creates additional issues.
Good nutrition strengthens the fabric of our society. It is an issue that always needs attention and lots of money for acceptable education and follow-though.
That brings forward the issue of delivery. Who is really responsible for setting priorities that make sure that quality food is affordably offered to citizens everywhere? Department of Agriculture, educational institutions, Congress, the President, retailers, food manufacturers, or the discerning and/or affected public? The answer rests, in part, with all of those constituencies, but only one entity seemingly can bring us all together.
There is a fundamental flaw in the proposition that if consumers have access to fresh vegetables and healthier options then they will buy them.
If this were true then the obesity rate in America wouldn’t be on the trajectory it is.
Consumers buy what they want, what tastes good, and what they want is usually not very healthy.
First, if people are low income they get Food Stamps and WIC, so there groceries are basically free. If you look at the item movement reports at supermarkets that are in low income areas, they are not buying healthy food. Meat sales are usually much higher than normal because you can use Food Stamps for pet food so customers buy meat for their pets.
For a multitude of reasons, grocers simply prefer not to open stores in difficult areas. First, it’s hard to make a profit and second they just don’t like being there even if they can make a profit. It’s hard to get good employees to venture into those neighborhoods to work and the people who live in those areas are basically unemployable. You can’t force feed people to eat healthy. All we can do is educate and hope for the best. There are plenty of small independents doing a great job in providing healthy food to these neighborhoods. Supermarkets are in the business to make money so if they do open, they have to raise prices in poor neighborhoods to cover the increased security, shrink, loss prevention and combat pay expense.
Food desserts do indeed exist, and they most certainly need to be addressed by providing incentives to supermarket retailers that can provide the vegetables, fruits, fresh meat and dairy products that are essential to a healthy lifestyle. One of the quoted studies refers to “mom-and-pop” stores (bodegas) as a not particularly good shopping alternative for healthy foods. In actual fact, they are no alternative at all, and many are grimy, greasy and dirty, do not provide any kind of healthy food, frequently have outdated products on the shelves, and charge high prices. There are formats for opening stores in neighborhoods deemed food desserts that include understanding how to garner federal and state funds and support, and establishing community relationships, both of which are essential to successfully opening up a store in a food dessert. The burden is on local government to set up such programs and help supermarket operators take advantage of them. The burden on the supermarket industry is to take these programs seriously.
“Food desert” is a metaphor that might be just evocative enough to motivate corrective action. I’m heartened to see the dialog is gaining a place on the American agenda.
As we wrestle with this challenge it is important to remember that it persists in small rural communities as well as the inner cities. Here’s what PBS had to say last June. The issues of poverty, transportation, and fast food are very much the same.
Retailers are unlikely to find the economic motivation to champion change in this area, even if they sense a moral motivation. That leaves grass-roots efforts (like community gardens) and government incentives to engage the private sector.
The former make great news copy, but can only move the needle a little bit. Government intervention will be unpopular with many based on political ideology. If we can frame a program as an investment in national prosperity, it might win more adherents. If we can frame national nutrition and health as a matter of national security (as I believe it is), then more folks might jump on the farmwagon.
For the health of children living in poverty, whether urban or rural, finding a new solution for accessible, affordable nutritous food is a must. It will take new thinking to bring the community support and retail initiatives necessary for change to occur, as well as education in food slection and preparation. There are no easy solutions in sight … local partnerships seem the likely place to start to develop new models for healthier living.
Correction, you CAN’T use Food Stamps to buy pet food and that is one reason meat sales are a higher percent of sales in Food Stamp areas. Children are fed free lunch and breakfast at schools so this cuts into the supermarket business. Food Stamps are often bartered away for other services and people, or simply to the food banks when the cash runs out. If you look at the obesity problem in the low income areas, we know something is out of whack.