Content uploaded by Richard Bridge
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Richard Bridge on Mar 07, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
SID NO. 200617280
SLSP3051 Social Policy Dissertation
The institutionalisation of emergency food provision:
a danger to the social safety-net?
BA (Hons) Social Policy
2
3
ABSTRACT
Whilst emergency food provision has a long-standing international history, it has only
recently acquired policy salience within the UK. This research aims to contribute to an
understanding of the contemporary policy issues by utilising a social justice oriented
approach and drawing on the lessons and experiences of countries where the
redistribution of donated and surplus food forms are institutionalised forms of
charitable help. Employing empirical qualitative research conducted in two cities in the
North of England, it compares the experience of recipients of different emergency food
models and local authority welfare assistance schemes. Findings suggest that whilst the
conditionality and efficacy of the benefit system are catalysts in triggering emergency
food referrals, the susceptibility to crisis is due to the inadequacy of low incomes,
particularly for young people. The overt linkages observed between the local state and
food banks, together with the decision to cut local welfare assistance funding in 2015,
suggest a neoliberal drift of state retrenchment in which emergency food providers
form a secondary and spatially uneven social safety net. It is argued that whilst shame
was internalised by emergency food users, the food bank is simultaneously experienced
as a symbolic space in which shame is projected through interpersonal interactions of a
punitive state but paradoxically also as a welcoming and trusting sanctuary. In
concluding, I argue that to achieve a strong public commitment to eradicating hunger, a
radical re-politicisation is required which may be achieved through adopting a clearer
food poverty measure as well as utilising the emergency food space as a platform for
collective self-help and political agency.
4
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................ 5
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 7
CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 11
The contemporary context of emergency food provision in the UK .......................................... 11
Food – an issue of social justice? ............................................................................................. 14
Food banks: lessons from abroad? .......................................................................................... 19
Upstream or downstream? ..................................................................................................... 22
Critical issues in UK emergency food provision ........................................................................ 24
Primary catalysts ........................................................................................................................... 24
Unintended consequences ........................................................................................................... 25
Sustainability of a charitable response ......................................................................................... 26
Local welfare assistance ................................................................................................................ 27
CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN ..................................................... 29
The sample ............................................................................................................................ 30
Ethical considerations ............................................................................................................ 31
Data-gathering and materials used ......................................................................................... 32
Limitations ............................................................................................................................. 34
CHAPTER 3 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS ............................................................................ 35
Primary catalysts ........................................................................................................................... 35
Unintended consequences ........................................................................................................... 38
The sustainability of the emergency food model ......................................................................... 42
Linkage between the state and emergency food providers ......................................................... 45
CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ................................................................... 49
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................... 57
APPENDIX A Ethics approval and correspondence ........................................................... 72
APPENDIX B – Participant Information Sheet .................................................................. 94
APPENDIX C – Consent form ........................................................................................... 96
APPENDIX D – Summary user table ................................................................................. 98
APPENDIX E – Sample shopping list and Voucher ............................................................ 99
APPENDIX F – Sample interview .................................................................................... 100
APPENDIX G - Dissemination......................................................................................... 111
6
7
INTRODUCTION
In recent months, food banks have been at the forefront of a wider debate on welfare
reform. On one hand, David Cameron (2014) suggests welfare reform is part of a ‘social
and moral mission’, which is about giving ‘new hope’ to those in receipt of it. On the
other hand, Cardinal Nichols argued ‘the basic safety net ... has been torn apart’ as well
as critiquing welfare reform as ‘too punitive’ with resulting destitution a ‘disgrace’ for a
‘country of our affluence’ (Bingham 2014).
Food banks now form part of the fabric of UK society. The drives for food bank
donations extend from supermarkets to protest marches to even Premiership football
matches (Betterway Demo 2014, Everton Football Club 2014). Their proliferation is
evident in the media (Johnston 2013, BBC News 2013). Debates though rarely go
beyond unsophisticated explanations or political point-scoring. Whilst the phenomenon
of food banks is relatively new in the UK, their existence in North America suggests a
dangerous precedent in their potential institutionalisation as an integral part of social
welfare (Riches 2002, Poppendieck 1998).
Research on food banking in the UK is relatively sparse, particularly from a user
perspective. This small-scale qualitative research project will interrogate the concept of
emergency food providers and more particularly assess whether the institutionalisation
of emergency and charitable food provision by a shadow state provides the means for
further state retrenchment.
8
The research compares the experience of participants in this field in two separate local
authorities in the North of England. A Trussell Trust foodbank in a small service-
dominated city (called Rownbrough) provides a comparison against a Fareshare model
in a housing-related support service for young adults in a deprived ward in a much
larger city (called Ellingham).
Research questions are focussed on determining the primary catalysts for emergency
food demand as well as interrogating the unintended consequences to more
mainstreamed food bank use. From the findings, the research questions the
sustainability of emergency food banks as a model to relieve hunger and further
inquires if its institutionalisation provides a depoliticised backdrop in which the state
can pare back welfare from a rights-based model to one determined by discretionary
benevolence.
The research is approached from a human rights and social justice perspective based on
the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and
specifically General Comments 12 and 14 which state respectively ‘the human right to
food is of crucial importance for the enjoyment of all rights’ and to ‘ensure equal access
for all to the underlying determinants of health, such as nutritiously safe food’ (CESCR
1999, CESCR 2000).
Whilst food poverty has historically been considered a ‘Cinderella subject within public
policy’ (Lang 1999: 1), the current media spotlight provides an opportunity to highlight
9
the issue as one of public interest, especially due to the dichotomy between the
apparent generosity of donors and the perjorative attitudes towards benefit claimants
(Park et al 2012).
Whilst the research is driven by Janet Poppendieck’s theory that emergency food
provision facilitates state withdrawal from social welfare by masking the impact of its
retrenchment, the framework is primarily abductive. Data arises that falls outside of the
original theoretical framework, which may be due to different cultural and social
contexts in the UK influencing models and users (Meyer and Lunnay 2013).
The first chapter provides a review of the contemporary context of food banking in the
UK before addressing the theoretical question of whether food is an issue for social
justice and moreover human rights. By exploring the international context, and a brief
case study of the Canadian experience, the institutionalisation of food banking can be
regarded as part of a neoliberal drift towards state retrenchment. The chapter finishes
by drawing attention to the recent localisation of emergency welfare assistance, a
different means of acquiring food in crisis, and how that links with food banks.
The next chapter focuses on the rationale behind the use of semi-structured
interviewing in order to obtain a richness of meaningful and detailed data. Brief
discussions on both the ethical implications and sampling technique are included before
reflecting on some of the methodological limitations of the project.
10
The third chapter presents the key findings and analysis of the data in the context of
both the theoretical framework that underpins the research but also uses a dialectical
process that interacts between the subjective and reflexive expression of experience by
interviewees as well as broader concepts and theories within the literature.
In the last chapter, the discussion analyses the points of similarity and difference from
the literature as well as providing a critical review of how the data has answered the
research questions. The conclusion contained within this chapter is necessarily
tentative due to the small-scale qualitative nature of the research but demonstrates the
need for further and more detailed research around this issue.
11
CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW
The contemporary context of emergency food provision in the UK
Whilst the historical global context suggests hunger has been depoliticised through
emergency food provision (Riches 1997, Tarasuk 2001), the emergence of mainstream
food banking in the UK is politically sensitive. Politicians on the left argue that it reflects
the failure of Coalition welfare reform and is inherently unjust whilst proponents of
Coalition welfare reform variously argue it reflects the Big Society in action, that
increased demand (of a ‘free’ good) follows increased supply or more controversially,
places the responsibility with poor individual life choices (Butler 2013a, Morse 2013).
These latter arguments form the basis of the political right’s viewpoint that there is no
research demonstrating a linkage between welfare reform and food bank usage (Butler
2014a), although the Scottish Government (2013) commissioned a study with the aims
of assessing the extent and potential causes of emergency food demand. The report
found a strong consensus of providers stating ‘welfare reform, benefit sanctions and
falling incomes have been the main factors driving the recent trend [of food bank
expansion]’ (Scottish Government 2013: 3). Arguably the ‘cost of living’ was omitted as
the IFS (2014) recently reported energy costs increasing by 60%, food costs by 30%,
and water costs by 30% for the period 2007-2013. The fact these items make up a
significantly higher proportion of expenditure for low income groups only amplifies the
effect on those households (Judge 2014).
12
Whilst this review interrogates the veracity of differing and perhaps more complex
explanations, the expansion of emergency food provision in the UK is striking. Trussell
Trust (2014), for instance, state the numbers of people they provided with emergency
food increased from 347,000 in 2012-13 to 913,000 people in 2013-14. This near
tripling of demand should however be seen in the light of a 45% increase in Trussell
Trust foodbanks opened (Trussell Trust 2014).
Models of emergency food provision vary. The predominant Trussell Trust model
(franchised to local churches and community groups) works on recipients being
referred by partner agencies for a three-day food parcel up to a maximum of three times
in a six-month period (Lambie-Mumford 2013) whilst FareShare aim to address both
food waste and food poverty by redistributing food surplus to charities who then
distribute to their client group (Nat Cen Social Research 2014). FareShare also reported
a 25% annual increase in the number of charities provided with surplus food (Williams
2013). Whilst these are the two dominant models, other models exist such as the non-
denominational Real Aid in Hull who provide food without the need for vouchers but for
a small £1.50 fee which they argue mitigates the stigma of charity (Rayner 2013). In
addition, there are a plethora of small-scale below-the-radar emergency providers. For
instance, in Ellingham there are 18 different providers whilst Rownbrough has 3. They
range from a church providing food parcels for destitute asylum seekers to a weekly
meal for street homeless people.
13
The expansion of the UK emergency food industry now encapsulates multinational
corporations and international NGOs as integral elements. Nearly all models are reliant
to some extent on collaboration with large supermarket chains. Trussell Trust (2013),
in their franchise offer, state ‘foodbanks are able to hold supermarket collections in
local Tesco stores and receive a “top-up” of 30% on what is donated’. Tesco recently
announced they would divert all surplus food from its distribution centres and online
grocery centres to FareShare (2013). Whilst it is beyond the scope of this research to
consider whether the corporate social responsibility of multinationals is adequately
served by distributing surplus food, the future reliability of supply and financial help by
multinationals (whose raison d’etre is profit) is certainly relevant in considering
whether charitable food provision is an appropriate mechanism for addressing poverty.
Growing institutionalisation and corporatisation of emergency food is evidenced by
NGOs, such as British Red Cross and Oxfam, forming partnerships with FareShare and
Trussell Trust respectively to aid in distribution but also to provide advice, training and
campaigning activity (Butler 2013b). Notwithstanding these developing relationships,
Australia provides a sombre warning of the vagaries and adequacy of ongoing corporate
funding and donations as 65,000 people were turned away by food relief charities each
month (Foodbank Australia 2013).
Evaluating the primary catalysts for food bank usage is not clear-cut. Whilst a report
commissioned by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs rebutted
government claims that increased supply of emergency food outlets explains increased
usage (Lambie-Mumford et al 2014), the ten month delay in its release for ‘a quality
assurance process’ meant the data (taken in March 2013) was out of date. The lack of
14
substantive independent research into emergency food provision in the UK is therefore
unhelpful in extrapolating definitive reasons for increased usage. More optimistically, a
new All Party Parliamentary Group was set up at the end of 2013 to specifically
investigate the ‘root causes of hunger and food poverty’ and the increase in British food
bank usage (House of Commons Library 2013: 1).
Food – an issue of social justice?
Whilst emergency food provision currently has a prominent policy profile, government
responses have historically approached food issues from a neoliberal perspective in
privileging ‘informed choice’ rather than a right to food (Dowler and O’Connor 2012:
44). This appears to breach international human rights obligations, most specifically the
International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), a multilateral
treaty ratified by 161 countries that looks to progressively realise social rights including
rights to work, social security, health, education and an adequate standard of living
(United Nations 2014).
Whilst Lister (2010) illustrates how the distinction between needs and preferences
have been shaped by capitalism, culture and context, there is nevertheless a degree of
consensus through time that food is a basic and absolute need (Rowntree 1901, Maslow
1943, Marcuse 1964). Moreover, the right to health is clearly dependent on the right to
a sufficient quantity of nutritious food. In a recent letter to the British Medical Journal,
Taylor-Robinson et al (2013: 347) draw attention to recent increases in malnutrition
cases and warn UK food poverty has ‘all the signs of a public health emergency that
15
could go unrecognised until it is too late to take preventative action’. This letter was
reinforced by a letter from twenty seven bishops who reported 5,500 people have been
admitted to hospital since Easter 2013 for malnutrition (Perry 2014). Dean’s (2010: 9)
concept of ‘thin’ and ‘thick’ needs allows a comparison of essential goods to survive (for
instance food, shelter, health) with the thicker needs (for instance, transport and IT)
that one requires to participate fully in society. Whilst crises may be short-term, the
thinness of a person’s need is so severe that at the point of referral they experience
deprivation of their basic needs. This thinness of needs can be aligned with absolute
poverty whilst thicker needs can be compared to relative poverty or even Joseph
Rowntree Foundation’s (2014) minimum income standard which relates to the
exclusionary consequences of not being able to participate in society.
If, as argued, food is a basic need and therefore a right underpinned by international
law, the question arises as to how a right to food is delivered and the consequences of
failure to meet that need. King (1989: 33) refers to the ‘tripartite nexus’ in which
welfare is delivered by a combination of the state, market and charitable sectors with
each having differing motives. Arguably, and potentially pertinent to the question of
emergency food, characteristics of familialism and clientelism that provide the
framework of the Southern Mediterranean welfare model enable the family and
religious institutions to also be seen as potential deliverers (Ferrara 1996, Castles and
Obinger 2008). The fact so much emergency food is delivered by religious institutions in
the UK (eg the Trussell Trust, the Salvation Army and most small scale organisations) is
relevant as users may make different judgments as to whether they are prepared to
receive emergency food from faith-based charitable organisations.
16
Historically, it is not disputed that provision of welfare in the UK has moved from
delivery by the state to a mixed delivery in which the market and voluntary and
charitable sector (VCS) play far greater roles (Lister 2010). As Buckingham (2012: 587)
suggests, the capacity of VCS organisations to ‘meet social needs depend to a great
extent on the resources and support made available to them’. For instance, using
Buckingham’s typology, ‘compliant contractors’ who are heavily dependent on state
funding with little or no voluntary input may struggle to resist the hegemony of
neoliberal ideology (Buckingham 2012: 579). Even smaller faith-based ‘cautious
contractors’, who retain a greater voluntary input, may experience similar tensions in
retaining their values whilst complying with the conditions of government contracts
(Buckingham 2012: 584). Furthermore, welfare pluralism does not necessarily provide
sufficiently to meet the diverse needs of postmodern society, particularly in relation to
issues of gender, disability, race and class (Williams 1992). This neoliberal shift in the
VCS not only marketises basic needs but also dilutes, and in some cases destroys, the
ethos and values of welfare charities.
This brings into light how needs – and specifically food - should be met in emergency
situations. Since the 1930s, there has been discretionary assistance for exceptional or
special expenses, latterly known as the Social Fund. The dilution of that discretionary
assistance by divesting its responsibility to local authorities (in 2013) is likely to
intensify the intensity of poverty experienced by people in emergency need (Grover
2012, Drakeford and Davidson 2013). The announcement that there will be no funding
for such local schemes from April 2015 (unless local authorities self-fund) suggests the
central state has divested any responsibility to a ‘right to food’ (Butler 2014b). This
17
research specifically engages with how the two local authorities engage with local crises
and emergency food provision.
The contrast of national law with the ICESCR (ratified by the UK in 1976) is marked.
Despite the recommendation of the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of
Lords and the House of Commons to incorporate the ICESCR into domestic law, the UK
refused to do so, arguing they are merely ‘aspirational policy objectives’ (Killeen 2008:
6). Presumably for similar reasons, the UK has not signed the Optional Protocol to the
ICESCR which would allow the UN Committee to consider individual complaints (United
Nations 2014). So whilst the current ‘right to food’ is unambiguously set out within the
ICESCR, Onora O’Neill (2002) neatly summarises the dichotomy between rights and
obligations : ‘It can be a mockery to tell someone they have the right to food when there
is nobody with the duty to provide them with food’.
Although the justiciability of the right to food is clearly absent in the UK, a rights-based
approach appears to be the most appropriate way to critique how needs are met
(Dobson et al 2001, Lambie-Mumford 2013). The alternative is a reliance on
beneficence which not only ignores power relations in making discretionary decisions
but moreover can never be a solution to resolving hunger as it fails to address the
political legitimacy of a system in which such want could be easily satisfied (Nagel
1977). As a rebuttal to this point, others will argue that given freedom, people will make
better choices than the state and as such, people will be enlightened enough to help one
another through what Burke (1910: 27) refers as the ‘little platoons’ in society we
18
purportedly belong to. Harris and Seldon (1987) similarly argued welfare is run better
by charities and indeed, today’s ‘Big Society’ relies on a similar concept (Blond 2012).
These arguments ignore that society may not always be warm and other-oriented and
instead may make rights highly conditional on compliance with a moral prescriptivism
defined by either politicians or benefactors (Driver and Martell 1997, Wright 2003). The
findings of the Scottish Government (2013) linking food bank use to benefit sanctions
suggests welfare conditionality plays a significant role in food bank use. If so, the
doubling of benefit sanctions under the Coalition (Wintour 2014) presents a deliberate
policy shift towards a more residualised and conditional form of social security in which
the state relies on faith groups and charities to provide a secondary safety net.
Whilst the Trussell Trust may argue part of their remit is to advocate for policy change,
Poppendieck (1998) suggests such a position is undermined by vested interests as their
continued existence is reliant on preserving the status quo. Further as the franchise
model means that the network of Trussell Trust foodbanks is arbitrarily located, some
areas have little or no provision. Research suggests voluntarism and fundraising are
perversely linked to the local prosperity of an area rather than its need (Mohan and
Gorsky 2001) although Fyfe and Milligan (2003) argue the theory may be overplayed
and targeting of area-based funding is perhaps more important. As the effect of
Coalition welfare reform has been disproportionately felt in more deprived locales (see
Beatty and Fothergill 2013), the spatial unevenness of emergency food providers means
supply may not match demand. The absence of food is a social marker and restricts self-
determination (Dobson et al 2001) and therefore the unevenness of provision
potentially compounds the loss of dignity experienced by those most affected.
19
The need for emergency food provision suggests a fundamental breach of the social
rights that are part of TH Marshall’s three legged stool of citizenship in which he
suggests one should have the right to a ‘modicum of economic welfare and security’
(Marshall 1992: 8). The concurrent residualisation and increased conditionality also
signifies an ideological shift in focussing on the perceived deficits of the individual
(Dwyer 2004, Standing 2011). This shift has not only been followed by a coarsening of
language by politicians (Unwin 2013) but also a mainstreaming within the media of
negative depictions of poverty (for instance, Benefits Street and Skint), creating a ‘social
distancing’ as reflected in the current pervasive ‘skivers and strivers’ rhetoric. For
instance, The Glasgow Media Group’s content analysis of media coverage of disabled
people provides compelling evidence of a significant increase in the use of pejorative
language and negative depictions of disabled people in receipt of benefits (Briant et al
2011). Hodgetts et al (2013: 5) suggest such characterisations occur in ‘symbolic spaces’
that allow for the distancing between ‘hierarchically dispersed groups’. If so, one such
space may be the ‘food bank’. Killeen (2008: 4) warns how such pejorative attitudes can
quickly become embedded in class and social relations through what he calls
‘povertyism’. This is often justified by a perceived ‘superiority’ of morals and values
through the institutionalisation of discriminatory services at a macro level (Wright
2003).
Food banks: lessons from abroad?
‘In countries where [food banks] are in their infancy, the question of whether to support
their development should be a matter of urgent public debate’ (Riches 2002: 648).
20
Accordingly, it is useful to consider some of the emergent patterns in countries with
more developed emergency food networks.
Emergency food has been an integral part of society in other OECD countries for over 20
years (Thiérault and Yadlowski 2000). The first recorded food bank in the US was in
Phoenix in 1967 whilst in Canada, Edmonton opened in 1981 (Riches 2002). Feeding
America, the national network, is now estimated to feed 25 million people annually
whilst usage in Canada increased by 90% between 1989 and 2001 with over 700,000
people using food banks in the month of March 2001 (Wilson and Tsoa 2001). Whilst
Australia and New Zealand were early adopters in the 1980s, food banks are now found
in East Asia, Central and South America (Riches 2011).
Using Canada as a case study, food banks were set up to provide emergency relief but
‘20 years later they have become an integral part of contemporary society’ (Theriault
and Yadlowski 2000: 206). Riches (2002) argues this can be attributed to an
interlinking web of institutionalisation, corporatisation and depoliticisation. He
provides examples of how corporates such as Heinz, Kraft, Kelloggs and the Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation form an integral part of emergency food provision by not only
being a major supplier and donor of surplus food but also simultaneously sponsoring
annual food drives (Riches 2002). Whilst this serves to highlight their corporate social
responsibility, it is problematic in not only legitimising the notion of hunger as a matter
for charity but curtails political debate on the right to food (Riches 1997). This
obscuring of subtle changes in social structures – in this case, the discretionary nature
21
of welfare provision – can be considered ‘structural violence’, a form of abuse with no
specific perpetrator (Galtung 1969: 171). Politicians are able to exert control at arm’s
length, the result being the most deprived in society are forced to surrender their
sovereignty to the arbitrary rules of external organisations. It is not suggested
emergency food providers deliberately form part of this process or that volunteers
should be characterised as the ‘willing handmaidens of neoliberalism’ (Wakefield et al
2013: 444); conversely, many advocate for a fairer distribution. The point is once food
banks become institutionalised into society, they have formed a secondary, albeit
imperfect, safety-net that the neoliberal state is reluctant to replace with something
more substantial.
The retrenchment of state provision – in countries such as Canada, the US, Australia and
now the UK - should be regarded as a key plank in a neoliberal evolution towards a
‘shadow state’ in which publicly provided services are replaced by private or not-for-
profit initiatives (Peck and Tickell 2002). Rather than viewing this as an inevitable and
disempowering shift, the emergence of new horizontal and fluid movements –
exemplified by social media, technology and creativity – provides grounds that
[i]ncorporation into the discursive framework of neoliberalism ... might instead be
more usefully understood as a process that calls upon activists and intellectuals to
rethink the parameters of political agency (Laurie and Bondi 2005: 398).
22
For example, a large organization called The Stop in Toronto has flourished with
gardens, kitchens, greenhouses and farmers’ markets and transformed itself from the
notion of a traditional ‘food bank’ to what Naomi Klein describes as ‘one of the most
visionary movements for justice and equality’ (CFC Canada 2012). It demonstrates the
importance of community participation and provides opportunities for members to
forge their own responses to hunger by fostering self-reliance and independence.
Upstream or downstream?
The key premise of Poppendieck’s ‘Sweet Charity’ book is that emergency food
provision looks downstream at the symptoms of poverty and hunger, rather than
upstream at the causes (Poppendieck 1998). In her analogy of a baby floating down a
river, she presents a compelling argument that downstream this creates a baby-saving
industry which creates jobs and simultaneously serves what she calls the ‘Wenceslas
syndrome’ in which volunteering serves the needs of the volunteer as much or more
than the service-user (Poppendieck 1998: 19). To that end, Poppendieck (1998)
illustrates the attraction of volunteering in a food bank – the investment of a low cost in
terms of time and commitment is repaid with emotional and religious reward. As one
volunteer said, ‘It’s almost like a high’ whilst another remarked ‘I feel so good leaving
here, knowing I’ve helped someone’ (Poppendieck 1998: 18). The extension of the
syndrome to society itself makes this concept especially persuasive. Donating some
pasta at a supermarket drive provides a more immediate reward than paying additional
tax from your income. Multinational corporations can enhance their public profiles
whilst meeting the requirements of their corporate social responsibility without deeper
scrutiny. Civic society obtains greater tangible rewards than through redistribution of
23
income. All this distracts and diverts from finding fundamental solutions to the
structural problems of deepening poverty.
By ignoring what goes on upstream, this decontextualises the prevalent issues which
lead to hunger, and moreover accepts their structural origins as a given. Whilst food
banks do see their role as both emergency relief (rather than providing permanent
solutions) as well as advocating for change (Trussell Trust 2013), the normative effects
of institutionalising emergency food as part of our social structure risks the substitution
of publicly provided welfare by the VCS (Peck and Tickell 2002). Penner (2004) argues
the baby-saving analogy creates a false dichotomy by proposing that one can save the
babies and go upstream in addressing underlying issues, and further suggests that the
acuteness of short-term need is sometimes so severe that it should be prioritised.
Arguably, if the likelihood of success in changing the underlying cause (in this case a
right to food) is remote, attention may be best focussed on achievable goals. All those
arguments have merit but the lessons from abroad suggest food banks are unlikely to be
temporary blights on our social landscape but more likely to become highly
institutionalised (Riches 2011).
Before moving on, it is striking to note the similarities between the current UK
economic context and that of the US described by Poppendieck (1998: 5) during her
research:
24
the cutbacks and reductions in public assistance benefits, along with declining
wages at the bottom of the pay scale, increasing shelter costs … are reducing people
to destitution
Critical issues in UK emergency food provision
Primary catalysts
Whilst acknowledged as politically contested, investigating reasons for emergency food
provision can be broken down into three areas. Firstly, the adequacy and efficacy of
social security can be interrogated. Secondly, economic conditions (for instance,
increasing living costs and the declining value of wages and social security) play a part.
Thirdly, the resurgence of charity through the creation of a ‘shadow state’ may
normalise philanthropy as an appropriate response to hunger.
The limited research in the UK suggests the primary catalysts for referrals to food banks
are benefit sanctions imposed for purportedly failing to adhere to jobseeking conditions
and delays in processing new claims (including switching between benefits) (Scottish
Government 2013, Lambie-Mumford 2014, Cooper and Dumpleton 2013). The data
from local authorities and Trussell Trust (2014) reports a broadly similar national
picture.
Whilst often overlooked, the increasing cost of food and fuel in particular, associated
with stagnant or falling wages, has certainly impacted on living standards and whilst
25
not necessarily the trigger for a referral, brings many more people into a potential
‘catchment’ who are only a crisis away from requiring emergency assistance. By using
the JRF Minimum Income Standard, a measure of what the public believe is an adequate
income upon which to maintain a socially acceptable quality of life, Padley and Hirsch
(2014) illustrate the impact on living standards. Numbers living below that threshold
rose by 900,000 (an increase of 20%) between 2008/9 and 2011/2. As the Institute of
Fiscal Studies (2014) predicts real income is unlikely to recover to 2009/10 levels until
2018/9, and that poorer households are disproportionately affected, it appears the
increased propensity of low income people to encounter crisis is likely to intensify.
Unintended consequences
Without a critical lens, charity is often conceived as an unproblematic good but I argue
that disguises the power relations inherent in its deployment. As Eduardo Galeano
(2003) said: ‘Charity is vertical, so it’s humiliating. It goes from top to bottom’. Whilst
that view precludes the positive impacts of charity, research conducted by Wakefield et
al (2013) found that the classed and faith-based nature of food banks was problematic
in stigmatising and ‘othering’ recipients. This is mirrored by Lambie-Mumford’s (2013:
83) findings in which some recipients and distributors regarded the process akin to
‘begging’ as well as being ‘humiliating’ and ‘degrading’. Whilst the research found this
was not necessarily a uniform experience, she also acknowledges the Christian focus of
Trussell Trust poses significant challenges (Lambie 2011).
26
Sustainability of a charitable response
Whilst McGlone et al (1999) illustrate how community food projects can have positive
outcomes in improving social capital and addressing social isolation, they also
acknowledge the difficulties of embedding a sustainable model due to funding
uncertainties which arguably has been exacerbated by the increased influence that the
state wields on the VCS through discourse and discipline. Such disciplinary measures
now include the so-called ‘gagging law’ which curtails the ability of Trussell Trust and
others to campaign (Toynbee 2013). Furthermore, Dowler and O’Connor (2012) caution
that some projects follow a neoliberal perspective in focussing on ‘individual deficit’
rather than structural change, an argument supported by Michael Gove’s recent
intervention that food bank use is as a result of ‘decisions by families’ that are ‘unable to
manage their finances’ (Berger 2013). Available academic evidence does not support
this assertion: indeed, the skill and resourcefulness of coping strategies by low income
households has been consistently highlighted over time (Lang 1997, Campbell and
Desjardins 1989, Travers 1996).
Some community food responses do provide other tangible benefits other than
alleviating hunger (Saul and Curtis 2013, Metcalf et al 2012) but once again, the
common critique is the ‘inability to overcome or alter the poverty that underpins this
problem [of food insecurity]’ (Tarasuk 2001: 487).
Whilst food banks currently appear to garner public sympathy, a further question arises
as to whether food banks may be susceptible to compassion fatigue, which may be
intensified if the pathological representation of benefit recipients continues. If
27
corporate and indeed donor interest wavers – or the 20 million tonnes of annual food
waste is better managed (Stuart 2009) - there is a real risk that the unstable and
haphazard nature of emergency food models proves lacking in capacity to respond to
deep-rooted food inequality.
Local welfare assistance
The devolvement of crisis assistance to local authorities in 2013 intensifies the pressure
on emergency food providers. Research from The Children’s Society suggests funding
cuts of £150m, much tighter qualifying criteria and replacement of loans with in-kind
support create new barriers to those who need support (Royston and Rodrigues 2013).
The narrow criteria, allied to poor publicising of the schemes, means that there are high
levels of underspend (Reed 2013). For example by the end of January 2014, half of local
authorities had spent less than 40% of their funds (Butler et al 2014).
Each local scheme is different: whilst some schemes refer or fund food banks, others do
not. Conversely, some emergency food providers accept referrals from local schemes
(and indeed jobcentres) whilst others refuse to link up (Lambie-Mumford 2014). This
demonstrates how parts of the state are devolving responsibility to emergency food
providers, something Lord Freud (Minister for Welfare Reform) encourages: ‘local
authorities ... may very well look at ramping up their support in kind.’ (Butler 2013a).
Indeed, there is a paradox in Freud’s comments that ‘Food from a food bank – the
supply – is a free good, and by definition there is almost infinite demand for a free good’
28
(Hansard (Lords) 2013). Whilst the voucher referral system demonstrates the flawed
nature of that argument, the availability to the state of food bank vouchers is quite
literally a ‘free good’ that allows it to substitute its own resources with those of charity.
So whilst the supply is free to the state, it is not unrestricted to the user.
29
CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN
An evaluative research design has been adopted in which semi-structured qualitative
interviews are primarily used to address research questions to users, managers,
volunteers and local authority officers responsible for the design of their welfare
assistance schemes. Document analysis of those schemes was also used to further
consider the interaction between the local state, indigent individuals and emergency
food providers.
As the literature review demonstrates, explanations of the catalysts of emergency food
provision are highly contested. The interactions between the local state, its newly
formed welfare schemes, differing models of emergency food providers and a diversity
of demographic groups provide for an assortment of processes and practices that
impact on human experience, and is accentuated by a dominant political and media
discourse that ideologically blames the poor for their poverty (see Taylor-Gooby 2013).
By using an abductive research strategy, a ‘bottom-up’ approach is adopted which
presents the understandings and meanings attributed to the experience of recipient and
privileges an understanding of the social world from the perspective of the ‘insider’
(Blaikie 2010). The use of semi-structured questioning aims to acquire ‘knowledge’ that
is not only interpretivist in its subjective articulation of experience but looks to
encourage social actors to act reflexively in going beyond the taken-for-granted nature
30
of everyday life (Blaikie 2010). That process will therefore probe for what is ‘silent’ in
accounts whilst iteratively drawing on previous interviews. Once collated into thematic
categories, abductive reasoning will allow for a dialectical method of moving between
the data generated, experience and broader concepts and theories (Coffey and Atkinson
1996).
The sample
As the aim of the research is to obtain a depth of insight, the sample size is not as crucial
as if a quantitative method had been adopted. A purposive sampling strategy is adopted
that looks to reflect relevant perspectives (Arksey and Knight 1999).
Participants were recruited through the two organisations partly due to the constraints
of time but also in the case of the housing support agency due to their position as a
comprehensive gatekeeper, reflecting their long-standing and trusting relationship with
service users (Greenhalgh 2012).
The aim is to achieve an ‘information richness’ (Patton 2002: 245) which not only
reveals the interactions and social processes that relate to emergency food provision
but also achieve more meaningful and detailed insights. For this reason the validity that
can be generated from qualitative interviews relates to its depth rather than any
generalisability that may be claimed from a larger sample. Interviews were conducted
with fourteen users, two managers, a volunteer, an administrator, four local authority
officers as well as the Head of UK Public Affairs of an international Christian charity. In
31
Rownbrough, interviews were conducted in three outreach venues on different days of
the week to widen the range of prospective perspectives.
Ethical considerations
The research was structured to mitigate the risks associated with the stress and
possible loss of self-esteem of service users in articulating the potentially distressing
experience of acute hunger as well as the referral process and receipt of emergency
food.
The recruitment of participants and the interview itself required careful consideration.
The nature of the project was explained to interviewees at the outset; its aims, the
extent of involvement (including time commitment), the risks associated (such as
potential distress and embarrassment), the anonymisation and confidentiality of
interviews, freedom to withdraw from the research as well as an explanation of how the
data will be used and kept (Arksey and Knight 1999). A participant information sheet
(Appendix B) was provided to all participants and a consent form signed (Appendix C).
This process complies with the Statement of Ethical Practice of the BSA as well as the
University of Leeds’ own guidance (BSA 2002, University of Leeds 2013). Acquiring
ethical approval (see Appendix A) provided the opportunity to reflect on whether
participants with mild learning difficulties should be included and if so, how to acquire
informed consent. I concluded that failing to include such participants would be
exclusionary and took the view that being accompanied by a ‘responsible other’ or
32
‘proxy’ would safeguard their interests (British Educational Research Association
2011). This does not detract from the importance of careful and sensitive monitoring of
vulnerability throughout an interview for all participants.
Whilst participants understood the research would be disseminated to policymakers
and politicians (see Appendix G), it was stressed that all names and identifiers are
changed to afford anonymity.
Data-gathering and materials used
Semi-structured interviews were chosen to reflect the situated nature of knowledge in
specific contexts and interactions (Mason 2002). In order to obtain nuanced
explanations that go beyond a set of standardised questions, the flexibility and leeway
afforded by semi-structured interviews allows for probes and prompts that allow one to
follow up on unexpected cues as well as obtaining more detailed and complex
responses. In doing so, an iterative building process was used in developing the
framework of issues upon which the interviews were loosely based.
The aim of achieving a ‘conversation with a purpose’ was not easily achieved (Mason
2002: 67). Whilst a professional but relaxed approach was intended to place
interviewees at ease, the lack of a prior relationship between researcher and
interviewee placed increased importance on the introductory part of the process. My
appearance was deliberately casual to minimise any perception of difference in status. I
used the skills derived as a Citizens Advice outreach adviser to ensure my approach was
33
open, non-judgmental and as a ‘listener’. Prior to the interview, I tried to engage in a
brief informal chat to place the interviewee at ease prior to explaining the interview
process and acquiring formal consent. Whilst semi-structured interviews allow for
some divergence and expansion, the prepared interview schedule formed the
foundation so that research questions could be addressed (Bryman 2012). An element
of triangulation was achieved: document analysis of local authority welfare assistance
was compared against service user experience as well as officers’ responses. The
difference in the objectives and aims of managers was similarly compared against
service user experiences.
Interviews were recorded using a digital recorder and transcribed verbatim and
analysed thematically which heightened awareness of commonalities, differences and
the interconnections between different accounts (for a sample interview, see Appendix
F). The adapted ‘constant comparative method’ proposed by Thomas (2013: 235) was
adopted to ‘label, separate, compile and organise data’ (Charmaz 1983: 186). This was
achieved by highlighting repeated ideas (known as ‘temporary constructs’) from which
‘second-order constructs’ were created after removing ideas that the remainder of the
data did not reinforce (Thomas 2013: 237). Whilst this created a literal reading of the
data, I reflexively considered the ‘silences’ before interpreting the data as part of the
broader social processes that made up the data.
34
Limitations
It would be disingenuous to suggest that there are not imperfections within the
methodology adopted. Clearly, the available resource places restraint on what was
possible to achieve. The focus on only recipients of emergency food implies that when
destitute, the rational response for everyone is to request a referral to an emergency
food provider. This over-simplifies the decision-making process: for instance pride,
stigma, gaps in provision, lack of awareness and accessibility play important parts.
The recruitment of interviewees in Rownbrough was undertaken at the point that users
had received their food in the same setting. Some users want to be in and out as quickly
as possible, not wanting to engage with food bank volunteers or by providing an
interview. One volunteer suggested that this may reflect a degree of embarrassment and
opens up the possibility that the close proximity of the interview setting [to the
emergency food provider] meant interviewees felt less able to be entirely open.
Despite stressing the independence and confidentiality of the research, participants
may retain a perception that their experiences will be ‘shared’. Arguably, these latter
issues are accentuated by the vulnerable position of users. Thus, the form of production
of interviews clearly impacts on findings (Skeggs et al 2008).
35
CHAPTER 3 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
The patchwork of UK emergency food provision is made up of distinct welfare
assistance schemes and contrasting levels and models of emergency food provision
making up a disparate ‘postcode lottery’ for users. Whilst the small-scale nature of the
research means it should be regarded as a snapshot of experience in two local
authorities, it was considered the two organisations used were not so anomalous that
insight gained from them would not be relevant to understanding issues pertaining to
the catalysts, consequences, sustainability and future policy direction of emergency
food provision. Names and identifiers are changed in order to afford anonymity.
Primary catalysts
The data gathered in the study suggests catalysts for emergency food referral broadly
mirror previous research (Scottish Government 2013, Lambie-Mumford 2014) in
consisting primarily of benefit changes (including sanctions), benefit delays and low
income (see Appendix D for a user summary). Arguably changes and delays, in their
benign language, place insufficient emphasis on the efficacy of a system in which some
participants had been waiting up to seven weeks for claims to be processed:
My paperwork for ESA ... they said they hadn’t received it so they are resending the
form back out so I’ve had to get another sick note. I am having to do this all over
again and still I’ve had no money for six weeks (Darren, Rownbrough)
36
Additionally, sanctions were found to be a frequent trigger in emergency food referrals.
Their increased prevalence is illustrated by Ian (Benefits Manager, Rownbrough)
observing ‘sanctions has kind of kicked off big time last autumn’, and echoed by Jim,
Benefits Manager in Ellingham:
sanctions was quite topical and we did react to those ... because there’s some
horrendous stories
Reasons for sanctioning often appeared coercive and poorly communicated. Poppy was
sanctioned for missing an appointment due to an emergency hospital admission whilst
David was sanctioned due to missing an appointment letter as it had been sent to his old
hostel address. On both occasions, the explanation only followed the stopping of
payment. Even users not sanctioned told of the thresholds and difficulties in complying
with tighter jobseeking requirements:
The Jobcentre became a lot more stricter, a lot more, regulations became in place,
whereas before it was apply for 3 jobs per week and then it went up to 5 jobs per
week and then it went up to 10 jobs per week and obviously with the economy,
there wasn’t 10 jobs out there (Kyle, Ellingham)
if you don’t get 10 jobs in yer book, they sanction you for four week (Mary,
Ellingham)
37
Interestingly, the data provided convincing evidence that the adequacy of benefits is an
important determinant in emergency food use. The combination of low benefit levels
and an increasing cost of living created a precarious form of existence in which people
articulated their susceptibility to crisis. Jane, Advice Manager in Ellingham, highlights
how this is intensified for young people living independently who receive ‘£14.75 a
week less than that for somebody who is over 25, well ... your gas bill is the same, your
electricity, your food bills are the same’. The lived experiences corroborated those
difficulties:
It’s impossible ... to me personally, you can’t live off that a week, not with yer gas
and electric and all the other debts and food and toiletries and stuff like that, you
can’t live off that forty three pound a week. It’s not impossible, it’s obviously not
impossible, but it’s hard, it’s very hard (Nikki, 22).
Clearly at one level, young people have no choice and indeed data revealed different
coping strategies – for instance, asking families and friends for help – but the fragility of
life is also affirmed by Kyle:
And that’s not a chance you can live on fifty six pound per week, there’s no way you
can do that, it amazes me that so many young people do manage to do it ... it’s not a
standard of living, it’s just getting by
38
Unintended consequences
Data revealed a number of exclusionary impacts although that was counterbalanced by
positive narratives of human relationships, which contrasted starkly to interactions
with the state. The patchiness of provision – in terms of location, accessibility and
opening hours – was remarked on by users, managers and local authority
representatives as problematic.
Sally, Head of Public Affairs for an international charity, used an anecdote to illustrate
how the Trussell Trust franchise model does not necessarily match provision with need:
There are three seaside towns in a row, a posh one, a not so posh one and a grim
one ... so the [Trussell Trust] foodbank is in a warehouse church in the posh town
which is where that kind of church has sprung up and [we] are in the grotty one so
[our] officer said to me [people] can’t afford the bus fare to get to the foodbank
The data also questions the Trussell Trust model’s assumption they provide crisis
support whilst the referring agency resolves the ‘underlying issue’. Some users did
speak of overcoming temporary issues but for others, the issue was more
fundamental as Michael explains:
well for me, there’s not enough for me to live on what I get and I found myself just
slipping ever so slightly every fortnight a little bit further into debt.
39
The inability to solve what are structural issues is revealed by Jane:
for the first time in my work as an advice worker which runs well over 20 years
now, I am feeling on occasions that there is nothing we can do for people and I
know that people are literally destitute, that they don’t have food provision and
what’s particularly concerning to us is this effective self-disconnection that’s
happening with people’s utilities (Advice Manager, Ellingham)
Some respondents reinforced this point by explaining that even when provided with
food, they had no cooking facilities. Sometimes this was due to not having a cooker
whilst on others it related to insufficient money for prepayment meters.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, users spoke about theft as a potential coping strategy. Darren,
49, who had spent two thirds of his life in prison, spoke of how ‘it’s been difficult not to
return to criminality to survive’. Becky, as a sixteen year old, ‘used to steal food
sometimes from the shops ... just little things ... like a pasty or a tin of beans or
something’.
The data uncovered contrasting emotions when participants were asked to reflect on
the experience of emergency food. At one level, there was an almost uniform expression
of gratitude that simultaneously clashed with the unease of being gifted food:
40
I am grateful they give me it but each time it is still ‘oooh’ they’re handing me this
type like, how can I describe it, almost like a desperation type thing and I still do
feel a bit of that each time they give me that but obviously I am grateful for
whatever they give me. (Aisling, 18).
Whilst users were generally glowing in their praise of the emergency food
providers, stigma was expressed through a range of words synonymous with the
concept. So words like ‘embarrassing’, ‘desperate’, ‘weird’, ‘scary’, ‘ashamed’,
‘trepidation’, ‘nervous’ and ‘negative’ were used to convey the emotions associated
with the process. Mary demonstrates its exclusionary nature:
I didn’t even want to go in library, I felt so small. Having to ask somebody for food,
ringing, I were looking round in library to make sure nobody could hear me
because I were embarrassed.
A closer look at the data indicates how this feeling of stigma is linked to the restriction
of autonomy. Being independent was very important for participants, especially the
young people in Ellingham. Needing to use emergency food or borrow money from
friends and family was regarded by many users as being reliant, and restricting their
ability to define their own biographies. Whilst some expressed anger at what they
perceived a sense of unfairness, most users articulated a sense of resigned acceptance.
When asked about the quantity and quality of food, users often turned the question
round suggesting choice was of low priority:
41
Beggars can’t be choosers, you know what I mean ... food’s food isn’t it? (Mark)
Food’s food, you can’t be picky in this life. Do you know what I mean? In this
world ... Like I say, you can’t be picky. You can’t choose. If you are hungry, you are
hungry. You will eat what you need to eat. You know. To not be hungry. (Poppy)
I get what I’ve got given if that makes sense. (Aisling)
Despite the stigma experienced by users, the data introduced a new aspect that has
hitherto received little attention within food bank literature. The emphasis on
human relationship and a friendly, non-judgmental space was clear from interviews
with managers, volunteers and users in both cities. Nathan, the manager at
Rownbrough, described their approach:
I’ve always kind of clung to this kind of theory [that] transformation comes through
relationship really so ... people’s lives don’t get turned around by sitting opposite
somebody at a Jobcentre, because there’s no relationship there ... some people will
come and sit down for forty five minutes and they will tell you their whole life
story.
Although Nathan warns this approach is far from uniform, suggesting a more
impersonal approach in larger cities – ‘you just turn up, get your food and go’ –
users in Rownbrough certainly appreciated the warmth and friendliness of the
welcome:
42
the best thing is having a cup of tea and some biscuits and a nice chat while you
were waiting (Mark)
I’m overwhelmed, emotionally, I’m overwhelmed, and with the offer of a prayer,
that meant a lot you know. I’ve never really opened my eyes up to people being
there for everybody, you know. (Darren)
This was mirrored by an informal discussion with a volunteer who said users often
drop by for a cup of tea and a chat after exhausting the ‘three vouchers in six
months’ rule. This positive experience was contrasted to relationships with state
organisations that were seen as uncaring and bureaucratic. Jake (19) explains the
difference:
well if I went to Jobcentre, I’d tell em what I’ve been doing on Universal Jobmatch
and when I’m here, I don’t. I just tell them everything. Like my family, my friends,
how many brothers and sisters I’ve got ... I feel perfect. Cos I can express my
feelings.
The sustainability of the emergency food model
Sustainability can be evaluated both from a user perspective as well as the long-
term viability of the food bank models. Whilst all users expressed gratitude, the
difference between the Trussell Trust and Fareshare experience was marked. Whilst
a Trussell Trust food parcel is expected to last three days, many users suggested it
43
would last them longer, with estimates between five days and up to two weeks
although some people felt non-food items were overlooked. As Michael says, ‘it
might sound cheeky but a toilet roll wouldn’t go amiss’.
In contrast, staff in Ellingham were more critical of the deterioration in quantity and
quality of the weekly Fareshare delivery which they attributed to increased demand
on Fareshare services, therefore restricting supply. Ellingham users generally
regarded the scheme as a supplement. Its erratic and stop-gap nature is recalled
here by Becky:
It wasn’t a lot … like you’d get jars of things but nothing to use them with so like
pasta sauce without any pasta, and biscuits and things that aren’t really enough for
a whole meal … I remember like having food and just eating it all cos you’re really
hungry and then you just go without, for a few days sometimes.
The best reviews were reserved for the Ellingham Local Welfare Assistance scheme,
which supplied successful applicants with a basket of goods from a national
supermarket chain. Jim (Benefits Manager) explained Ellingham’s objective was to
make a ‘sizeable award … which actually safeguarded the week for [applicants]’.
Staff and users were similarly positive:
I have very few complaints about the Local Welfare Support scheme … I think it’s
about an effective scheme as could have been produced. (Jane, Advice Manager)
44
It lasted me nearly two week … yeah, it were ace. The food, it wasn’t [Keymarket’s]
own brand, it were the other one up, so they didn’t even me bring me [the basic
range], they brought me proper mince, chicken, everything, it were mad. (Mary)
Nonetheless, such provision is by no means universal and indeed in Rownbrough,
the Local Welfare Assistance scheme is constructed very differently with no food
basket awards, a significantly lower successful award ratio and almost no
knowledge of the scheme within the city.
In evaluating emergency food from a social justice perspective, interviews
considered how health needs were met. Whilst health was an issue, users’ priorities
invariably surrounded alleviating acute hunger:
It was just cheap stuff. I remember getting hot dogs, two tins of hot dogs. I ate them
all at once. Bit disgusting. But yeah, it was things like that. Nothing that was really
healthy or good for you, you know, no fruits or vegetables. Just tins and things. And
biscuits. (Becky, Fareshare user)
Whilst Nathan (foodbank manager, Rownbrough) spoke of how the non-perishable
set list compiled by Trussell Trust was ‘nutritionally balanced’ (see Appendix E), the
storage of fruit and vegetables was considered too problematic. It is also
questionable whether either model provides for the specific dietary requirements
(eg vitamins, calorie intake) of some health conditions described by users.
45
The articulated acuteness of the need for food supported the view food banks
address absolute rather than relative poverty. Whilst the temporality of experience
varied, at the point of crisis users’ needs were consistently severe. Whilst managers
acknowledged the importance of upstream work to challenge policy, the lack of
capacity to do so suggested a subliminal prioritization of downstream work. The
lack of campaigning work opens up a discursive space for users to be tagged
‘deserving’ or otherwise as Jane (Advice Manager) argues:
The issue with food banks that I find quite disturbing ... there’s a feel of the
deserving poor that I feel creeps into the debate ... and [for] other people ... it’s
about poor choices that people make. Well, choices often relate to opportunities.
Whilst partly sympathetic to the circumstances of applicants, there was
nevertheless evidence in Rownbrough of how ‘policy as discourse’ can become
enmeshed with pejorative portrayals:
it’s not as easy to winkle the money out of us as it was the DWP ...we have to eyeball
them, we eyeball them ... it is less easy for them to hoodwink us (Ian, Benefits
Manager)
Linkage between the state and emergency food providers
Whilst data demonstrated linkages in both cities, the difference in approach was
marked. In Rownbrough, the local authority clearly identified the food bank as a
46
legitimate resource for referring applicants for emergency support as shown by Ian
(Benefits Manager):
Because this fund is cash limited ... where we can preserve that fund and redirect
for people elsewhere, that would be our preference and that’s where the foodbank
kinda comes in ... and the foodbank at that time was beginning to expand and it
seemed a kind of neat fit.
This deflection was reinforced by data in Rownbrough that demonstrated evidence
of gatekeeping, poor awareness (see Appendix D) and restrictive eligibility criteria.
Whilst Ian said ‘the [eligibility] criteria is wider than under the [previous] DWP
scheme’, on inspection the reverse was true. Whilst officers acknowledged that
excluding sanctioned people from the scheme required reconsideration as a ‘food
voucher doesn’t really cut the mustard’ (Andy, Customer Services Manager), their
policy remains unchanged despite only spending approximately 50% of the central
government grant in 2013/14.
The Ellingham approach was very different. Rather than looking to ‘preserve’ the
fund, officers aimed for a rapid 24 hour turn-around to applications, operated out of
hours including bank holidays, launched the scheme to 350 advice workers and
were in the process of publicising it within GP surgeries. The eligibility criterion
only excluded non-residents or people ineligible to receive public funds. Any
underspend was channelled into initiative advice funding. Ellingham showed no
47
appetite for any referral process between local authority and foodbanks although
some initial foodbank funding had been provided.
Different policy mechanisms illuminate how local authorities can widen or narrow
take-up. The ‘Interactive Voice Response message’ was used to make the Ellingham
application process more welcoming, resulting in a 20% increase in applications.
Different marketing clearly impacted on take-up. Whilst only 2 of 7 Rownbrough
users knew of the Local Welfare Assistance Scheme, only 2 of 7 didn’t know in
Ellingham (see Appendix D). This implies agencies either choose to refer clients to
the foodbank or alternatively don’t know of the Local Welfare Assistance Scheme.
Nathan (Foodbank manager, Rownbrough) expressed some regret at providing a
referral arrangement to the local authority but also a sense of irritation :
The thing that annoys me is that the Financial Assistance Scheme is not very well
advertised so I suspect that a lot of people coming to us would qualify for that but
just don’t know about it ... I now give a little plugs for the Financial Assistance
Scheme ... and what’s fascinating is that ... even local authority teams ... they don’t
know it exists.
The process of administrative gatekeeping extended to the availability of short term
benefit advances by the DWP, a payment that can be made when waiting for a claim
to be processed. Both local authorities revealed how awareness and confusion on
48
eligibility meant people being inappropriately referred to their local schemes by the
DWP. Mark explains how both the national and local state retreated from providing
him with assistance:
I went to the Jobcentre to enquire about my claim and when it was going to be
ready. They said go to the council and ask for whatever they call, what they call
what used to be a crisis loan now. Then they’ll give you some sort of financial help.
So I went there, went and enquired in the council office and they said yes, but even
we are slow at sorting things out, but the CAB ... they can help you out with the food
bank ... so I spoke to a lady in Citizens Advice ... she gave me a voucher for the
foodbank.
Instances such as these demonstrate state retrenchment and a growing reliance by
the state on emergency food providers.
49
CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
At the outset the controversy over any causal linkage between emergency food use and
welfare reform was highlighted. Empirical data presented in this research, supported by
Lambie-Mumford (2014) and Scottish Government (2013), suggests the adequacy of
social security provision, its conditional nature and the efficacy of the processes through
which it is delivered, all contribute to demand. Despite that, attributing the increase in
emergency food use to a specific factor (see Trussell Trust voucher, Appendix E) seems
reductionist. Rather than perceiving these as ‘reasons’ or ‘causes’, they are arguably
better regarded as the catalyst that pushes people through the state safety net. The
commonality between emergency food users therefore is an experience of deep poverty,
which makes users susceptible to crisis (eg the catalyst). Whilst in the past people could
call on the Social Fund, the spatial unevenness of local emergency provision means
assistance is unpredictable and is likely to further deteriorate when central government
grants are removed in 2015.
Participants in Rownbrough were largely made up of working age adults without
dependent children, corresponding with MacInnes et al’s (2013) analysis that this group
are increasingly susceptible to poverty, with a poverty rate that is the highest in thirty
years. The research also showed the lived hardships, and sometimes destitution,
experienced by young people in Ellingham who when out of work were expected to live
independently for 25% less money than those aged over 25. Young people’s
disproportionate susceptibility to sanctions (YMCA 2014) combined with Cameron’s
50
proposals to further cut their entitlement (Grice 2013) suggests both young people as
well as working-age adults without dependent children warrant specific policy
attention in future research. The high susceptibility to financial crisis can be observed if
one compares the current rate for Jobseekers Allowance for under 25s (£56.75) with
the minimum amount a member of the public believes is required for food for a single
person, £50.11. (Hirsch 2013).
The consequences of eroding the welfare safety net together with the emergence of
emergency food provision can be broken down into three areas: firstly, the coping
strategies to deep poverty, secondly the psycho-social impacts and lastly how the
depoliticisation of hunger has facilitated state retrenchment.
Whilst Lister (2004: 130) proposes a fluid taxonomy to explain the forms of agency
used when faced with poverty, arguably the deeper nature of poverty experienced by
respondents in this research suggests ‘getting by’ was the predominant reaction.
Coping strategies included borrowing from friends and family, small-scale theft and
desperation for any work despite poor conditions, low pay and churning. Emergency
food is an emergent strategy that can bridge a very temporary gap. Whilst anger was
observed, this usually manifested itself as a distrust of the ‘system’ and similar to Dean’s
(2002) study, users regarded decently paid work as the best solution rather than more
radical forms of resistance.
51
Narratives suggested Lister’s (2004) taxonomy is partly outdated: experiences of not
eating for days, even weeks, reflected destitution rather than relative poverty. It is
implausible to suggest three days of emergency food provision, or in the case of
Fareshare a small supplement, is adequate to address sustained hunger. The
incremental nature of welfare sanctions further calls into question how someone might
survive on hardship payments for up to three years. Research by Dwyer and Brown
(2005) into the coping strategies of destitute forced migrants – in which informal
welfare agencies such as churches increasingly took on more responsibility from the
state - suggests a similar pattern emerging on a mainstream scale.
Whilst literature suggests consumer participation is the primary determinant in
avoiding stigma (Ridge 2002), the research supports the argument that food is a social
marker (Dobson et al 2001). The words used in narratives, which Retzinger (1995:
1107) refers as ‘colloquialisms of shame’, support the argument that shame is at the
‘irreducible, absolutist core’ of poverty (Sen 1983: 159). Scheff (2000), whilst
acknowledging the emotion of shame, suggests an absence of critique within the social
matrix. The emergency food provider provides a locale in which shame can be both
internalised and projected.
In this research, the internal trigger of shame was often borne out of a failure to meet
aspirations to live independent lives. Being independent is often seen as pivotal to being
a worthy citizen and therefore the absence of a locus of control was not only injurious in
reducing self-esteem but was observed in social withdrawal (see Chase and Walker
52
2013), evidenced by users who were ‘in and out’ of the foodbank as quickly as possible.
There was also a period in Rownbrough where fifty percent of foodbank vouchers
issued by the local authority were not used. Whilst this was attributed to recipients not
‘needing’ food, an alternative explanation is they were deterred by the prospect of
attending a foodbank.
External triggers of shame may be seen through the prevalence of underclass rhetoric,
now seen in ‘poverty porn’ TV programmes such as ‘Benefit Street’ or ‘We all pay your
benefits’ in which taxpayers are pitched against benefit recipients. The construction of
normative values in which success and participation are only measured through paid
work was echoed frequently in interviews – for instance, Mary mentioned her desire
and need to get a job on eight separate occasions without any prompt. Emergency food
providers may accentuate the deserving and undeserving dichotomy, especially as the
Trussell Trust model is also conditional on assessed need through the voucher referral
system. The impacts of shame are multiple. As well as a loss of self-respect (Rawls
1973), increased vulnerability and a deterioration of physical and mental health may
result in a worsening of self and therefore an increased risk of poverty, suggesting the
temporary benefit of emergency food may be outweighed by its risks.
This silent rolling-back of state obligations – as seen by Riches (1997, 2011) and
Poppendieck (1998) in Canada and the US respectively – can now be witnessed through
the emerging linkage between UK welfare institutions and food providers. Evidence of a
discretionary residualisation of emergency aid is borne out by the research and is likely
53
to worsen when central government ceases funding in 2015. Retrenchment is
paradoxically accompanied by an interventionist and punitive state, evidenced
particularly in the growth of sanctions. The evidence of administrative and
diversionary gatekeeping, the poor awareness of local welfare assistance schemes
(evidenced in Rownbrough), and the cutting of all local welfare assistance funding in
2015 suggest a neoliberal drift focussed on ‘small government’, which the likes of
Ellingham may find difficult to resist.
If so, Riches (1997) was prescient in arguing the institutionalisation of food banks helps
depoliticise the issue by persuading the public – through media and food drives – that
the issue of hunger needs to be dealt with by the charitable sector. Failing to frame the
issue as acute hunger and a public health risk - and therefore an urgent public policy
issue - moreover undermines the argument that there needs to be a ‘right to food’.
Whilst still persuaded that Lambie-Mumford (2014) and Dobson et al (2001) are
correct to argue for the enforcement of such rights, one can conclude the ‘vague,
discretionary’ nature of [food] rights fails to lend ‘themselves to enforcement’ (Evju
2009: 83) and are therefore unlikely to materialise in the near future.
Two proposals are therefore advanced as a means to re-politicise the issue. Whilst
measuring poverty has always been contentious, the 2013 Monitoring Poverty and
Social Exclusion report acknowledges recent decreases in overall poverty rates, due to
lower median income, obscures the squeeze on those with lowest incomes (MacInnes et
al 2013). Introducing a Food Energy Intake measure may address this by highlighting
54
the extent of food deprivation. The measure relates to the income level required at
which a person’s food energy intake is sufficient to meet a basic nutritional requirement
(for instance 2350 calories in Pakistan). In reflecting income levels and the cost of food,
it is a more sophisticated measure of poverty that draws attention to how many people
are failing to receive basic food needs (Burki et al 2012). By adopting this frame in
mainstream discourse (see Lakoff 2004), there is the possibility of shifting the Overton
window (the range of ideas that are palatable to the public) and thereby opening up
new policy alternatives including a ‘right to food’.
Participant interviews illustrated the contrast between coercive interactions with state
institutions and the open, friendly welcome by emergency food providers. Arguably,
whilst a symbolic space for shaming, the emergency food provider can also act as a ‘safe’
and ‘trusting’ space. If that space can be utilised to not only provide emergency help but
also affirm dignity and integrity through collective self-empowerment and political
action, there is the possibility they can provide a platform for what bell hooks (1994)
refers as a politics of representation and recognition. Whilst requiring a radical shift in
ethos by food providers, the concept of self-reliance and highlighting social injustice
were stated objectives by emergency providers in the research. Clearly, the nature of
the empowerment and the overt politicisation may create unease within some
organisations, especially as it threatens the alluring Wenceslas syndrome (Poppendieck
1998). I argue however that any solutions are likely, as Riches (2011: 768) phrases it, to
fall ‘outside the charitable food box’. Whilst I don’t argue self-empowerment per se – for
instance an organisation like The Stop in Toronto - can necessarily resolve the scale of
hunger, the reformulation of the food bank model to provide a space to exercise political
55
agency and self-empowerment has potential. Against conventional wisdom, Lawless and
Fox (2001: 362) found ‘severe economic hardship ... served as significant experiences
that bolstered the willingness to participate in the political system’. Self-help may
therefore be regarded as a process towards a ‘progressive’ realisation of human rights
(Davy et al 2013).
This small-scale qualitative research has drawn tentative conclusions, which should be
best treated as themes for further exploration. We explored how catalysts for food bank
demand – for instance benefits delays, changes, sanctions – should not be confused with
the reasons, which are argued primarily to relate to low income, exacerbated by the
residualisation of social security and the spatial unevenness of emergency assistance.
The empirical research revealed how the emergency food provider can be seen as an
exclusionary and symbolic space for castigation but once breached, can provide a
welcoming and safe sanctuary. Whilst shame was internalised by users, research also
indicated how shame was projected through interpersonal and structural interactions
in which the edicts of a neoliberal state were enacted. This neoliberal shift was
observed in the paring-back of state obligations whereby users were not only overtly
referred to emergency food providers but through other policy mechanisms such as
administrative gatekeeping. The process of depoliticisation – and the postcode lottery of
emergency assistance - questions the feasibility of realising a ‘right to food’. If such a
right is to be achieved, I argue a re-politicisation is required in which the trust and
public legitimacy garnered in the emergency food network, by both users and the
public, is utilised to not only realise a sense of collective self-help but also political
agency. This process may be helped through the introduction of a Food Energy Intake
56
measure, and thereby heightened public awareness of the extent and acuteness of
hunger in the UK.
57
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arksey, H. and Knight, P. (1999). Interviewing for social scientists : an introductory
resource with examples. London: SAGE.
BBC News. (2013). Numbers relying on food banks triple in a year. [Online]. [Accessed 17
October 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24536817>.
Beatty, C. and Fothergill, S. (2013). Hitting the poorest places hardest. The local and
regional impact of welfare reform. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.
Berger, L. (2013). People don't visit food banks because 'they're unable to manage their
finances', Mr Gove. [Online]. [Accessed 15 September 2013]. Available from
World Wide Web: <http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/people-
dont-visit-food-banks-because-theyre-unable-to-manage-their-finances-mr-
gove-8810005.html>.
Betterway Demo. (2014). About demo. [Online]. [Accessed 1 March 2014]. Available
from World Wide Web: <http://abetterwaydemo.org/about/>.
Bingham, J. (2014). New Cardinal Vincent Nichols: welfare cuts ‘frankly a disgrace’.
[Online]. [Accessed 15 February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10639015/New-Cardinal-Vincent-
Nichols-welfare-cuts-frankly-a-disgrace.html>.
Blaikie, N.W.H. (2010). Designing social research : the logic of anticipation. 2nd ed.
Cambridge: Polity Press Ltd.
Blond, P. (2012). David Cameron has lost his chance to redefine the Tories. [Online].
[Accessed 18 October 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
58
<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/cameron-one-
nation-u-turn-tory-tragedy>.
Briant, E.,Watson, N. and Philo, G. (2011). 'Bad news for disabled people: how the
newspapers are reporting disability'. [Online]. [Accessed 15 December 2013].
Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_214917_en.pdf>.
British Educational Research Association. (2011). Ethical Guidelines for Educational
Research. [Online]. [Accessed 10 October 2013]. Available from World Wide
Web: <http://www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/BERA-Ethical-
Guidelines-2011.pdf>.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
BSA (British Sociological Association). (2002). Statement of Ethical Practice for the
British Sociological Association (March 2002). [Online]. [Accessed 10 October
2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.britsoc.co.uk/about/equality/statement-of-ethical-practice.aspx>.
Buckingham, H. (2012). 'Capturing Diversity: A Typology of Third Sector Organisations'
Responses to Contracting Based on Empirical Evidence from Homelessness
Services'. Journal of Social Policy. 41, 569-589.
Burke, E. (1910). Reflections on the French revolution & other essays. London New York:
J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd ; E.P. Dutton & Co.
Burki, A.A.,Khan, M.A. and Malik, S. (2012). From Chronic Disease to Food Poverty:
Empirical Evidence from the Panel Data of Pakistan. [Online]. [Accessed 15
February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://lums.edu.pk/docs/dprc/Burki-Khan-Malik-Paper-Chronic-disease-and-
poverty.pdf>.
59
Butler, P. (2013a). Oxfam chief: charity begins at home. [Online]. [Accessed 16 October
2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/oct/16/oxfam-charity-food-
banks-uk>.
Butler, P. (2013b). Welfare minister urges local councils to invest in food banks. [Online].
[Accessed 13 December 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/13/welfare-minister-local-
councils-food-banks>.
Butler, P. (2014a). Scottish government report links welfare reform to food bank growth.
[Online]. [Accessed 16 January 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/society/patrick-butler-cuts-
blog/2014/jan/16/scottish-govt-links-welfare-cuts-to-rise-in-food-banks>.
Butler, P. (2014b). Government to stop funding for low-income families facing
emergencies. [Online]. [Accessed 3 January 2014]. Available from World Wide
Web: <http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/03/government-stops-
emergency-funds-low-income-families>.
Butler, P., Arnett, G., Marsh, S. and Jeraj, S. (2014). Councils sit on £67m in emergency help
for poor. [Online]. [Accessed 20 April 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/20/emergency-welfare-
scheme-local-councils>.
Cameron, D. (2014). David Cameron: Why the Archbishop of Westminster is wrong about
welfare. [Online]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/10646421/David-
Cameron-Why-the-Archbishop-of-Westminster-is-wrong-about-welfare.html>.
Campbell, C.C. and Desjardins, E. (1989). 'A model and research approach for studying
60
the management of limited food resources by low income families'. Journal of
Nutrition Education. 21 (4), 162-171.
Castles, F.G. and Obinger, H. (2008). 'Worlds, families, regimes: Country clusters in
European and OECD area public policy'. West European Politics. 31 (1-2), 321-
344.
CESCR (Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights). (1999). General comment
12: the right to adequate food. UN Doc. E/C/12/1999/5. [Online]. [Accessed 18
October 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?sym
bolno=E%2fC.12%2f1999%2f5&Lang=en>.
CESCR (Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights). (2000). General Comment
14: The right to the highest attainable standard of health. UN Doc. E/C.12.2000/4.
[Online]. [Accessed 23 October 2013.]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?sym
bolno=E%2fC.12%2f2000%2f4&Lang=en>.
CFC Canada. (2012). The Stop: How the fight for good food transformed a community and
inspired a movement. [Online]. [Accessed 16 December 2013]. Available from
World Wide Web: <http://cfccanada.ca/book>.
Charmaz, K. (1983). ‘The Grounded Theory Method: An Explication and Interpretation’.
In: R. M. Emerson (ed). Contemporary Field Research: A Collection of Readings.
Boston: Little Brown.
Chase, E. and Walker, R. (2013). 'The co-construction of shame in the context of poverty:
beyond a threat to the social bond'. Sociology. 47 (4), 739-754.
Coffey, A. and Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data : complementary
61
research strategies. Thousand Oaks ; London: Sage Publications.
Cooper, N. and Dumpleton, S. (2013). Walking the breadline: the scandal of food poverty
in 21st century britain. [Online]. [Accessed 15 October 2013]. Available from
World Wide Web: <http://www.church-
poverty.org.uk/walkingthebreadline/info/report/walkingthebreadlinefile>.
Davy, B., Davy, U. and Leisering, L. (2013). 'The global, the social and rights. New
perspectives on social citizenship'. International Journal of Social Welfare. 22
(S1), S1-S14.
Dean, H. (2002). Welfare rights and social policy. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Dean, H. (2010). Understanding Human Need. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Dobson, B., Dowler, E. and Turner, S. (2001). Poverty bites Food, health and poor families.
London (United Kingdom): Child Poverty Action Group.
Dowler, E.A. and O'Connor, D. (2012). 'Rights-based approaches to addressing food
poverty and food insecurity in Ireland and UK'. Social Science & Medicine. 74 (1),
44-51.
Drakeford, M. and Davidson, K. (2013). 'Going from bad to worse? Social policy and the
demise of the Social Fund'. Critical Social Policy. 33 (3), 365-383.
Driver, S. and Martell, L. (1997). 'New Labour's communitarianisms'. Critical Social
Policy. 17 (52), 27-46.
Dwyer, P. (2004). ‘Agency, ‘dependency’ and welfare: beyond issues of claim and
contribution?’ In: H. Dean (ed). The Ethics of Welfare Human Rights, Dependency
and Responsibility. Bristol: Polity Press. 135-153.
Dwyer, P. and Brown, D. (2005). 'Meeting basic needs? Forced migrants and welfare'.
Social Policy and Society. 4 (4), p369.
62
Everton Football Club. (2014). Blues Urged to Aid Food Bank Appeal. [Online]. [Accessed
26 February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.evertonfc.com/news/archive/2014/02/25/blues-urged-to-aid-
food-bank-appeal>.
Evju, S. (2009). 'Should Norway ratify the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR?–that is the
question'. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Menneskerettigheter. 27 (1), 82-90.
Fareshare. (2013). Tesco to provide 7 million meals. [Online]. [Accessed 16 December
2013]. Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.fareshare.org.uk/tesco-
to-provide-7-million-meals/>.
Fawcett Society. (2012). The Impact of Austerity on Women. Report dated March 2012.
Ferrera, M. (1996). 'The'Southern model'of welfare in social Europe'. Journal of
European social policy. 6 (1), 17-37.
Foodbank Australia. (2013). End Hunger in Australia. Report dated 2013.
Fyfe, N.R. and Milligan, C. (2003). 'Space, citizenship, and voluntarism: critical
reflections on the voluntary welfare sector in Glasgow'. Environment and
Planning A. 35 (11), 2069-2086.
Galeano, E. (2003). Interview with Eduardo Galeano: 'The Progressive'. [Online].
[Accessed 18 November 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/ugandanet@kym.net/msg05039.html>.
Galtung, J. (1969). 'Violence, peace, and peace research'. Journal of peace research. 6 (3),
167-191.
Greenhalgh, J. (2012). Accessing research sites and managing your identity as a
researcher in very different research contexts. Current research in Sociology and
Social Policy: the staff/student seminar series. University of Leeds. 15 October
2012.
63
Grice, A. (2013.). David Cameron: Young People under 25 would not be able to claim
employment or housing benefits under Tory government. [Online]. [Accessed 5
January 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-young-
people-under-25-would-not-be-able-to-claim-employment-or-housing-benefits-
under-tory-government-8853560.html>.
Grover, C. (2012). 'Localism and poverty in the United Kingdom: the case of Local
Welfare Assistance'. Policy Studies. 33 (4), 349-365.
Hansard (Lords). (2013). 2 July 2013. Column 1072.
Harris, R. and Seldon, A. (1987). Welfare without the state : a quarter-century of
suppressed public choice. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
Hirsch, D. (2013.). A minimum income standard for the UK in 2013. [Online]. [Accessed
15 October 2013.]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/income-living-standards-full.pdf>.
Hodgetts, D., Chamberlain, K., Groot, S. and Tankel, Y. (2013). 'Urban Poverty, Structural
Violence and Welfare Provision for 100 Families in Auckland'. Urban Studies. 1-
16.
hooks, b. (1994). Outlaw culture : resisting representations. London: Routledge.
House of Commons Library. (2013). Food Banks and Food Poverty: HC SN06657.
[Online]. [Accessed 15 December 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/briefing-
papers/SN06657/food-banks-and-food-poverty>.
Institute for Fiscal Studies. (2014). IFS Green Budget. Report dated January 2014.
Johnston, L. (2013). Food Bank Britain: Thousands need charity handouts because of
64
welfare system failings. [Online]. [Accessed 17 November 2013]. Available from
World Wide Web: <http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/443511/Food-bank-
Britain-Thousands-need-charity-handouts-because-of-welfare-system-failings>.
Joseph Rowntree Foundation. (2014). Minimum Income Standard. [Online]. [Accessed 15
February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.jrf.org.uk/topic/mis>.
Judge, L. (2014). How the poor have been hit hardest by inflation. [Online]. [Accessed 6
February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/how-poor-have-been-hit-
hardest-inflation>.
Killeen, D. (2008). Is Poverty in the UK a Denial of People's Human Rights? Joseph
Rowntree Foundation York.
King, D.S. (1989). ‘Voluntary and state provision of welfare as part of the public-private
continuum: modelling the shifting involvements in Britain and the US’. In: A.
Ware, (ed). Charities and government. Manchester University Press: Manchester.
29-55.
Lakoff, G. (2004). Don't think of an elephant! : know your values and frame the debate :
the essential guide for progressives. White River Junction, Vt.: Chelsea Green Pub.
Co.
Lambie, H. (2011). The Trussell Trust Foodbank Network: Exploring the Growth of
Foodbanks Across the UK. Coventry: Coventry University.
Lambie-Mumford, H. (2013). ''Every Town Should Have One': Emergency Food Banking
in the UK'. Journal of Social Policy. 42 (1), 73-89.
Lambie-Mumford, H. (2014). Food Bank Provision and welfare reform in the UK: SPERI
65
British Political Economy Brief No. 4. [Online]. [Accessed 15 April 2014]. Available
from World Wide Web: <http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2014/01/SPERI-British-Political-Economy-Brief-No4-Food-
bank-provision-welfare-reform-in-the-UK.pdf>.
Lambie-Mumford, H., Crossley, D., Jensen, E., Verbeke, M. and Dowler, E. (2014).
Household Food Security in the UK: A Review of Food Aid. Report dated February
2014.
Lang, T. (1997). 'Dividing up the cake: food as social exclusion'. Poverty Publication –
Child Poverty Action Group. 213-230.
Lang, T. (1999). 'The need for a food policy'. Benefits. 24 (Jan/Feb), 1-2.
Laurie, N. and Bondi, L. (2005). Working the spaces of neoliberalism. London: Blackwell.
Lawless, J.L. and Fox, R.L. (2001). 'Political participation of the urban poor'. Social
Problems. 48 (3), 362-385.
Lister, R. (2004). Poverty. Oxford: Polity.
Lister, R. (2010). Understanding theories and concepts in social policy. Bristol: The Policy
Press.
Macinnes, T., Aldridge, H., Bushe, S., Kenway, P. and Tinson, A. (2013). Monitoring
Poverty and Social Exclusion 2013. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Marcuse, H. (1964). One dimensional man : studies in the ideology of advanced industrial
society. London: Routledge & K. Paul.
Marshall, T.H. (1992). ‘Citizenship and social class’ In: T.H. Marshall
And T. Bottomore (eds). Citizenship and Social Class. London: Pluto Press. 3-39.
Maslow, A.H. (1943). 'A theory of human motivation'. Psychological review. 50 (4), 370.
Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
McGlone, P., Dobson, B., Dowler, E. and Nelson, M. (1999). Food projects and how they
66
work. York: York Publishing Services Limited for the Joseph Rowntree
Foundation.
Metcalf, K.,Minnear, J.,Kleinert, T. and Tedder, V. (2012). 'Community food growing and
the role of women in the alternative economy in Tower Hamlets'. Local Economy.
27 (8), 877-882.
Meyer, S.B. and Lunnay, B. (2013). 'The Application of Abductive and Retroductive
Inference for the Design and Analysis of Theory-Driven Sociological Research'.
Sociological Research Online. 18 (1), 12.
Mohan, J. and Gorsky, M. (2001). Don’t Look Back? Voluntary and charitable finance of
hospitals in Britain, past and present. London: Office of Health Economics.
Morse, F. (2013). Tory MP Paul Maynard suggests food banks could become a "habit" for
people in poverty. [Online]. [Accessed 6 January 2014]. Available from World
Wide Web: <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/tory-mp-paul-maynard-
suggests-food-banks-could-become-a-habit-for-people-in-poverty-
8855762.html>.
Nagel, T. (1977). 'Poverty and food: Why charity is not enough'. In: P.G. Brown and H.
Shue (eds). Food Policy: The Responsibility of the United States in the Life and
Death Choices. 54-62.
Nat Cen Social Research. (2014). From Food Waste to Fighting Hunger. Report dated
January 2014.
O'Neill, O. (2002). Answer to question Reith Lectures: Lecture 2: Trust and Terror.
[Online]. [Accessed 13 January 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2002/lecture2.shtml>.
Padley, M. and Hirsch, D. (2014). 'Households below a minimum income standard,
2008/9 to 2011/12'.
67
Park, A., Clery, E., Curtice, J., Phillips, M. and Utting, D. (2012). British Social Attitudes: the
29th Report. Report dated 2012.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. 3rd ed. London: Sage.
Peck, J. and Tickell, A. (2002). 'Neoliberalizing space'. Antipode. 34 (3), 380-404.
Penner, L.A. (2004). 'Volunteerism and social problems: Making things better or
worse?'. Journal of Social Issues. 60 (3), 645-666.
Perry, K. (2014). Bishops condemn Government welfare reforms. [Online]. [Accessed 20
February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10650480/Bishops-condemn-
Government-welfare-reforms.html>.
Poppendieck, J. (1999). Sweet charity?: Emergency food and the end of entitlement.
London: Penguin Books.
Rawls, J. (1973). A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rayner, J. (2013). Food bank Britain: life below the line. [Online]. [Accessed 18 August
2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/aug/16/food-bank-britain-jay-
rayner>.
Reed, M. (2013.). Loss of the local safety net is pushing families into poverty. [Online].
[Accessed 14 November 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/local-government-network/2013/nov/13/local-
authorities-families-poverty-finance>.
Retzinger, S.M. (1995). 'Identifying shame and anger in discourse'. American Behavioral
Scientist. 38 (8), 1104-1113.
Riches, G. (1997). 'Hunger, food security and welfare policies: Issues and debates in
First World societies'. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 56 (1A), 63-74.
68
Riches, G. (2002). 'Food banks and food security: Welfare reform, human rights and
social policy. Lessons from Canada?'. Social Policy & Administration. 36 (6), 648-
663.
Riches, G. (2011). 'Thinking and acting outside the charitable food box: hunger and the
right to food in rich societies'. Development in Practice. 21 (4-5), 768-775.
Ridge, T. (2002). Childhood poverty and social exclusion : from a child's perspective.
Bristol: Policy Press.
Rowntree, B.S. (1901). Poverty : a study of town life. London: Macmillan.
Royston, S. and Rodrigues, L. (2013.). Nowhere to turn? Changes to emergency support.
[Online]. [Accessed 15 October 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/sites/default/files/tcs/nowhere-to-turn-
final.pdf>.
Saul, N. and Curtis, A. (2013). The Stop: How the Fight for Good Food Transformed a
Community and Inspired a Movement. Toronto: Random House Digital, Inc.
Scheff, T.J. (2000). 'Shame and the social bond: A sociological theory'. Sociological
Theory. 18 (1), 84-99.
Scottish Government. (2013). Overview of Food Aid Provision in Scotland. Report dated
December 2013.
Skeggs, B., Thumim, N. and Wood, H. (2008). ''Oh goodness, I am watching reality
TV'How methods make class in audience research'. European journal of cultural
studies. 11 (1), 5-24.
Smith, S.R. (1999). 'Volunteering and community service'. Law and Contemp. Probs. 62,
169.
Standing, G. (2011). 'Behavioural conditionality: why the nudges must be stopped an
opinion piece'. Journal of Poverty and Social Justice. 19 (1), 27-38.
69
Stuart, T. (2009). Waste : uncovering the global food scandal. London: Penguin.
Tarasuk, V. (2001). 'A critical examination of community-based responses to household
food insecurity in Canada'. Health Education & Behavior. 28 (4), 487-499.
Taylor-Gooby, P. (2013). 'Why Do People Stigmatise the Poor at a Time of Rapidly
Increasing Inequality, and What Can Be Done About It?'. Political Quarterly. 84
(1), 31-42.
Taylor-Robinson, D.,Rougeaux, E.,Harrison, D.,Whitehead, M.,Barr, B. and Pearce, A.
(2013). 'Malnutrition and Economic Crisis: The rise of food poverty in the UK'.
British Medical Journal. 347.
Thériault, L. and Yadlowski, L. (2000). 'Revisiting the food bank issues in Canada'.
Canadian Social Work Review/Revue canadienne de service social. 17 (2), 205-
223.
Thomas, G. (2013). How to do your research project : a guide for students in education
and applied social sciences. Second edition. ed. Los Angeles, Calif.: SAGE.
Toynbee, P. (2013). If Britain's charities are gagged, who will stop this lobbying bill?
[Online]. [Accessed 18 October 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/18/if-charities-
gagged-who-will-stop-lobbying-bill>.
Travers, K.D. (1996). 'The social organization of nutritional inequities'. Social Science &
Medicine. 43 (4), 543-553.
Trussell Trust. (2013). Start a foodbank. [Online]. [Accessed 18 October 2013]. Available
from World Wide Web: <http://www.trusselltrust.org/start-a-foodbank>.
Trussell Trust. (2014). Latest foodbank figures top 900,000: Life has got worse, not better
for poorest in 2013/14, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. [Online]. [Accessed 17
April 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
70
<http://www.trusselltrust.org/foodbank-figures-top-900000>.
United Nations. (2014). United Nations Treaty Series Online Collection. [Online].
[Accessed 18 February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<https://treaties.un.org/Pages/UNTSOnline.aspx?id=1>.
University of Leeds. (2013). University of Leeds Research Ethics Policy [Online].
[Accessed 10 October 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://researchsupportarchive.leeds.ac.uk/images/uploads/docs/Research_Et
hics_Policy.pdf>.
Unwin, J. (2013.). What future for a devolved approach to opposing poverty? Some
reflections from research and from experience [Online]. [Accessed 15 January
2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/julia-unwin-glamorgan-opposing-
poverty.pdf>.
Wakefield, S.,Fleming, J.,Klassen, C. and Skinner, A. (2013). 'Sweet Charity, revisited:
Organizational responses to food insecurity in Hamilton and Toronto, Canada'.
Critical Social Policy. 33 (3), 427-450.
Williams, F. (1992). 'Somewhere over the rainbow: universality and diversity in social
policy'. Social policy review. 4, 200-19.
Williams, R. (2013). Red Cross to launch winter food aid plan for Britain's needy. [Online].
[Accessed 11 October 2013]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10371511/Red-Cross-to-launch-
winter-food-aid-plan-for-Britains-needy.html>.
Wilson, B. and Tsoa, E. (2001). Hunger count 2001: food bank lines in insecure times.
Toronto: Canadian Association of Food Banks.
Wintour, P. (2014). Record number of sanctions made against benefits claimants in 2013.
71
[Online]. [Accessed 19 February 2014]. Available from World Wide Web:
<http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/19/record-number-
sanctions-benefits-claimants>.
Wright, S. (2003). ‘The street level implementation of unemployment policy’. In: J. Millar
(ed). Understanding Social Security. The Policy Press: Bristol.
YMCA. (2014). Processed and Punished: An insight into vulnerable young people’s
perspectives on the current welfare system and Jobcentre Plus. Report dated March
2014.
72
APPENDIX A Ethics approval and correspondence
Ethics Committee application form
E-mail correspondence between Research Ethics and Applicant
Further clarification from Applicant
Ethical approval letter dated 8 January 2014
E-mails confirming formal permission from recruiting charities
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
APPENDIX B – Participant Information Sheet
95
96
APPENDIX C – Consent form
97
98
APPENDIX D – Summary user table
Summary user table
NB. All names and places anonymised
Name
Place
Age
Catalyst/reason
for
emergency
food
No of
times
used
Aware of
local
welfare
assistance
scheme
Ever
received
benefits
sanction?
Kyle
Ellingham
25
Migration from
ESA
Multiple
Yes
Yes
Nikki
Ellingham
22
Insufficient
income
Multiple
Yes
Yes
Aisling
Ellingham
18
Insufficient
income
Multiple
Yes
No
Becky
Ellingham
24
Insufficient
income
Multiple
No
No
Mary
Ellingham
25
Benefit efficacy
Multiple
Yes
No
Lyndsey
Ellingham
22
Benefit efficacy
Multiple
Yes
No
Lauren
Ellingham
20
Domestic
abuse
Multiple
No
No
Poppy
Rownbrough
18
Benefit efficacy
3
Yes
Yes
David
Rownbrough
35
Benefit
sanction
1
No
Yes
Mark
Rownbrough
33
Benefit efficacy
2
Yes (not
used)
No
Peter
Rownbrough
37
Waiting for
first payday
4
No
No
Michael
Rownbrough
44
Insufficient
income
1
No
No
Darren
Rownbrough
49
Benefit efficacy
1
No
No
Jake
Rownbrough
19
Benefit
sanction
5
No
Yes
99
APPENDIX E – Sample shopping list and Voucher
100
APPENDIX F – Sample interview
Sample interview (with foodbank manager)
Q So if you can start by telling me your position and role within the organisation
A So I am the foodbank manager, current, although we have just recruited someone else
to take on my role from the end of September. I will then switch to being the Chair of the
Trustees of York Foodbank the charity. I was involved right from the start of York
Foodbank kind of coordinating the project getting the project off the ground, um, and I
have been doing that ever since
Q Ok and could you describe to me what you see the role of foodbank as
A yes, so the foodbank is very much about helping people out who hit a crisis where
they cannot afford to buy food for themselves or their family. If they have a family it is
very much a short term, only 3 days of food, we kind of where it fits in terms of other
agencies I like to view the Foodbank as a bit of a safety net that sits underneath kinda
the welfare state and various other organisations that are working with people who are
going through some kind of crisis often we can pick people up who fall through that net
for whatever reasons really
Q Ok and what would you say the foodbank’s main aims and objectives are – you’ve
maybe covered that a bit already but
A yes, I guess for us in York we want to be able to provide food for anyone in our city
who hits some kind of crisis where they cannot afford food so we don’t want to see
people aced with that choice of you know do I put food on my table for my kids or do I
money on the gas or electric. We want to enable people to to eat regardless of their
circumstances really
Q Ok and does the Trussell Trust, because I know there is a franchise model, if thats the
right word, the right way of putting it, does it allow for flexibility in your opinion in
doing your own thing I suppose in moving beyond a traditional giver / recipient sort of
model if that makes sense
A I think there is room [00:02:45] for some flexibility within the Trussell Trust so we
are a franchise of them so how that works from our perspective is that we have right at
the beginning, we paid a fee to the Trussell Trust in return for that we get a website, an
online system we get a whole manual on how to run a foodbank in the kind of Trussell
Trust model and a certain amount of ongoing support from a regional development
officer. They are they don’t really I think they come and do an annual audit although we
haven’t had one yet. we’ve been open for just over a year but there isn’t a huge amount
of accountability or checking up on us in terms of our systems and processes they will
come and see how we are doing and whether we need any support. So if we wanted to
stray from their model I feel like we probably could to be completely honest, I am not
sure how they would react to that if they caught wind of it but from our point of view,
actually their system is fairly tried and tested and seems to work pretty well. There are
one or two niggles that we think we would change but
101
Q ok, so you mean there’s other aspects of some foodbanks, say community food
initiatives and I know that perhaps you can just maybe speak first before we move on to
that just a little bit about where you see within the franchise model the position of
advocacy
A uh huh um its a good question. You mean advocacy on behalf of the people coming
into the foodbank ?
Q yeah
A yeah. um i think what we’ve been what we’ve tried to be clear on from the outset with
the foodbank here in York is we are very much a bunch of volunteers who are giving
food to people. We when it comes to offering specialist advice or um advocacy or you
know kind of someone needing more intensive support then that’s where we have to
rely on other agencies [00:05:08] um so we I kind of sometimes I think we should be
upskilling our volunteers a little bit just to provide them with a bit more skills to offer in
terms of that support but the reality is we they are volunteers from a wide range of
backgrounds with a wide range of motivations for getting involved in it and they are not
professional advisers. One of the I think one of the advantages of the Trussell Trust
model is that because vouchers are held by professionals and not by us it means that
someone coming to us always comes via a professional or some kind of agency and
estimate I don’t actually have an actual statistic for it but I would estimate that at least 9
out of 10 people coming to us are already having their underlying issue crisis whatever,
it is looked at supported, resolved by somebody else by the agency that sends them and
they are just coming to us for food to kind of see them through that crisis. There are a
small percentage of people they have either come from an agency who can’t offer that
support to them and they’ve just given them the voucher and that’s where we would
tend to try and signpost people to other agencies but like I said that’s where we rely on
other agencies for that kind of thing
Q ok um that perhaps there is a question further down the line I shall perhaps just use
because it follows on actually um in discussing things with other people. One critique of
the voucher model is that there are some agencies and I think it is fair to say that they
are hopefully small amount that use the voucher model to shall we say, I don’t want to
say it quite so bluntly as this, get rid of some say problem clients and move them out of
their environment. Is that something that you’ve experienced at all
A yeh we um the model is certainly open to that kind of abuse. We have to rely on the
agencies who have vouchers giving them out in good faith and so we try to minimise
that by say in several different ways. So one would be whoever is giving out the
vouchers I would personally try to where possible get along to a team meeting so I can
explain fully the foodbank way that kind of thing. It doesn’t always necessarily manage
to do that and sometimes we just train a couple of staff members who then will train
others so that’s one of the ways we kind of combat that one some of the other ways we
tend to we monitor our system to see who’s giving out how many vouchers .We can tell
how many vouchers have been redeemed so they if someone orders more vouchers
from us and our system is says actually. There’s one agency we were working with
where it turned out that they ordered over a period of time so many vouchers I cant
remember how many but only 50% of those had actually been brought in to be
102
exchanged for food. So we sat down we went and approached this agency they were
quite shocked by this but we basically we gave them a final warning. To us this
translates as you’re giving them to people who don’t need food, that’s our assumption
because what other reason once someone had been given this its worth quite a lot of
money in terms of food value why would they not, I mean every agency has a certain
percentage who don’t come for whatever reasons but this was a really high percentage
so we kind of said you need to review your policy of giving out these vouchers. If you
don’t we are just going to stop you having vouchers so it is open to that kind of abuse we
try and minimise it and monitor it yeah
Q Ok just speaking on advocacy in a sort of in a broader sense in terms of actually, I
don’t whether you would call it social policy or political with a small p what sort of work
do you do on that and how important do you see that role as part of the franchise
A uh huh I for me I thinks that vital. I think we have to feed people but we have to speak
up on behalf of these people who whatever the issues are that they are facing so for us
that works in several ways I guess. One is that we obviously collect statistics on the
reasons on why people come to the food bank. I mean currently the last time I checked
it was something like 52, 53% of people were coming because of a benefits related issue
so either a benefit delay, a benefit change um so one of one of the advantages of being
part of the Trussell Trust is that nationally they collect those statistics and try and do
kind of advocacy on a national level with ... which I think I think is great although at the
moment there appears to be some kind of the DWP seem to have kind of shut down
Trussell Trust a little bit and just aren’t really working with them which is a shame
really. But on a local level to be honest this is one of the priorities we have kind of set for
our new food bank manager who is going to taking on the role. I’ve not had a huge
amount of capacity to do this kind of thing so we are asking our new manager to make
that a focus really on a local level how do we kind of advocate on behalf of some of our
recipients? I think um some of the things we have done its fairly basic things but we’ve
tried to keep our local MP involved and up to date with statistics and the reasons why, I
approached JRF a while back to ask if they wanted to do a piece of work with us to look
at the reasons why and kind of highlighting the benefits thing and they didn’t seem that
keen on it, probably they’ve got their own things going on. Um, and I think going
forward that actually making more of a public kind of being a public voice really even if
it is only in the local media that kind of thing I guess we’ve been part of the CAB-led
Advice York partnership we're involved in that and trying to collect information from
across the city to try and do similar advocacy so I guess that’s how its worked but
definitely its an area that is important to us and is becoming a priority I think for us
Q Ok, um just a small question. In terms of outreach work, do you do any outreach work
to organisations where users might not be able to access your venues?
A [00:12:31] Yes, as part of the training with everywhere we go to kind of train people
up to have vouchers, one of things we say is that if somebody, if you are working with
somebody who cannot get to us, there are a couple of different options so the first one is
that you as their key worker can come and collect the food and take it to them um and
secondly we can if there are genuine reasons they can’t get to us we will organise for
someone to deliver food um in reality we have only had to do that a handful of times in
103
the year or so we’ve done it. Its, I would say, a good probably 10% of food vouchers are
professionals coming in and collecting it and taking it
Q right
A so that tends to be the main way that we would you know make sure food gets to
people who cant get to us
Q yeah sure, um, and how secure are the donations and funding for the foodbank - I
know you’d mentioned about employing a full time manager which obviously costs and
so forth and so on so
A [00:13:37] yeah, we found that I think maybe because the food banks are in the public
eye at the moment that they are very much mainstream news nationally and I think
because we are new to York that people have really responded really generously so in
terms of food, um, I believe we are now more than 40 tonnes of food donated in the last,
just over a year. We’ve never run out of food in that time and its all donated by members
of the public. We currently have got about 12 tonnes of food in stock so in a really
healthy position there. I find it really helpful to be able to access supermarkets and
that’s something that Trussell Trust have actually negotiated at a national level with
supermarkets this process of being able to partner with them and hold a collection at
supermarkets. In terms of finances, again we are pretty healthy really, we’ve got enough
money or money pledged to employ somebody its a 12 month fixed term contract
initially but they will also be given responsibility for kind of ongoing fundraising really
um so we are going to get more creative with that in terms of utilising some of our
supporters and the general public in terms of funding through kind of monthly giving
but up to this point our funding has tended to come from so we’ve had two round of
funding from the Community York which is effectively local authority money but
distributed by kind of not for profit organisation called York Consortium. Weve had two
round of that for the food bank and we will apply for a third one um whether we get it
or not, who knows but that’s been the first time round that was £15000 to run the food
bank and another project it was £10 for the foodbank. The second time around we got
£15k again for the foodbank. We have had several one off donations from other kind of
other funding bodies um anywhere between probably £500 and £5000 um and
Churches actually have been really generous churches have a kind of giving as part of
their budget they will set aside a certain amount to give to other charities so we’ve some
churches regularly give say £1000 a year so yeah we’ve found it quite easy to secure
funding up to this point. We don’t know in the future but the other thing is people we
just get individuals who come and drop money off you know people come with £500 in
cash and just give it and all sorts really. I think its we kind of feel like foodbanks have
captured peoples imagination really and I think sometimes when you are giving money
to a national charity I think people worry that a lot of it will get spent on overheads and
things like that yeah especially I think that’s cos why we’ve seen a lot of food donated is
because people know food has to be given away you can spend food on your other costs
so but yeah we’ve found a real generosity really so far
Q and have you turning that hopefully into not too much of a negative, do you ever have
a situation where you have to throw food away or waste it what do you do if you get to a
situation where food is getting close to sell by dates
104
A [00:17:23] So the only food that we have thrown out and its been a substantial
amount I'd say it's now in the region of a tonne of food we have had to throw out that’s
only ever been food that um that has been given to us when its already out of date so we
get a lot of that around Harvest festivals um people go to the back of their cupboard and
what can I find to send with my child to school that kind of thing or often we get a
reasonable amount of food from people whose elderly relatives die and people clear out
their cupboards bring it in and often [a lot] of that food is out of date but we are pretty
efficient so we have a warehouse facility where all the food is sorted and if it short shelf
life it will go out immediately and if its longer shelf life it will stay in the warehouse
longer. We’ve there are some items where pure volume mean it could become an issue
but we’ve tended to actually offload that to other charities so this week were giving a
whole load of baked beans to Carecent
Q so in a situation where you get to a surplus, you tend to address by
A Yes, donating it elsewhere
Q but really the only wastage is that food isn’t ok to use
A and even some of that if its been in a tin for seven years and its a month gone past its
sell by date we technically can’t give that to people who come with a voucher but what
we do is we make that available in our sessions and we will say to people we can’t give
you this cos its out of date, you can take it if you want but it is at your own risk and we
would only do that with things that we are confident are safe it wouldn’t be a bottle of
milk two weeks gone but so yeah, very little waste in the system we had a tin of soup
from 2002, i think that was the best we’ve had so far.
Q in terms of, um, the appropriateness of food, I think that’s something that comes up
quite often, how do you feel or how nutritionally adequate or perhaps a better way of
putting is um what is the nutritional value of the food you give
A [00:19:51] yeah, so the food we give out is a set list that the Trussell Trust have
determined and I am led to believe that this was devised working with nutritionists so
um, we say the food we give out is nutritionally balanced so there is no fresh produce,
we are quite open about that fact, its all non-perishable its um but it is fairly balanced so
you get good solid kind of carbs calories in terms of pasta, rice, that kind of thing but
you also get tinned fruit, tinned vegetables um so its a fairly mixed kind of you know
diet really we some food banks do use fresh produce um up to this point we felt just
logistically we are just not ready to do that kind of thing um because there is huge
potential for wastage and if you’re dealing with fresh stuff. So we experimented this
autumn with apples and potatoes that um people had a surplus of and we just we didn’t
put them in the standard bag we just made them available to people and actually they
went down really well um so we are in conversation with some of the local kind of
growing groups about kind of moving that forward really and the agreement we have
come to and we’ve not seen anything come of it yet what we’ve said to them is that um,
if they have a surplus of food produce, if they can bring it at the beginning of a session to
us, we can make it available, offer it to people and if there is some left over at the end,
we don’t want to be throwing that out so they will need to come and take that away and
try and redistribute it elsewhere and um so that’s the agreement we’ve come to but we
105
haven’t seen any of that happen yet but its something we will continue to explore you
know. We get offered fresh things a lot to be honest and unfortunately we have had to
turn them down just from a logistical point of view often it can be frozen things or
refrigerated things which would be a considerable cost to us to try and make sure that
at each place there was refrigeration and a freezer but its one for the longer term I think
we will probably keep looking at it
Q and what about culturally appropriate food, how do you deal with that?
A [00:22:40] so we kind of deal with that on a case by case basis so when somebody
comes in, we will ask them the question. we usually get the food first and bring it over
and there’s a list of what’s in the bag that we give to everybody and we will ask them
can you look down that list and is there anything that you cant eat um and whether that
it is a dietary requirement or a cultural thing we will then kind of go and swop whatever
we can. We can’t promise to deal with cater for every single eventuality but we’ve I
think we’ve been able to cos the kind of range of food given is quite diverse anyway
there’s often things given that is not on our list so we are able to then utilise some of
those things. Interesting, I think of the interesting cultural observations i have had is
that we get very few vegetarians actually. Somebody needs to do some research into
that and whether that’s a socio-economic kind of - whether there’s a section of society
that kinds of makes moral choices like that I don’t know but we rarely get that. We do
get health-related diabetes that kind of thing and occasionally we would get somebody
from a different cultural kind of ethnicity who has requirements
Q I mean York isnt that diverse
A No its not a huge issue but we’ve had a fair few and we would try and swop them
Q Ok, and someone from Salvation Army said to me one of the problems I would be
interested to know if you’ve had the same issue some of the users are not used to
cooking that generally speaking they have bought food from Iceland that’s it pre-
packaged and if you give somebody some pasta to make up a lasagne they are stumped
really. is that something that
A [00:24:59] it does occasionally we get a few different things like that sometimes you
get someone who just doesn’t have cooking facilities um so with that we would tend to
swop everything that needs cooking for things that don’t need to be cooked and can be
eaten cold if necessary. That’s a very rare occasion when that happens, there’s a few
people who sleep rough in York and do it on an ongoing basis because that’s what they
prefer and they occasionally we’ve had one or two of those guys come in and we can
swop things. Yes, the issue of people not knowing what to do with the food, most of the
food we give out is fairly basic or basic things can be made with it um I’ve known a
handful of occasions when people have looked through the food bag and what on earth
is that how do I use that and on most occasions we will say we can swop that for
something if you want and we’ve. There was one girl I remember who you know said I
just eat ready meals I don’t know what to do with this stuff can I I can't use I can't use
that and we just took all of that stuff and brought back some stuff that she could just
heat up or heat in her microwave or whatever and I think she was happy with that so it
does happen, not all the time, but that certainly can happen yeah
106
Q alright, um, do you, yeah, I was going to say, I know that recently you’ve done some
statistics and I saw those and I noticed that it was predominantly single people who Is
that something that is in line with a national picture or is there a different demographic
A [00:26:49] No I think I couldn’t tell you for certain because I don’t get access to the
national stats unless they Trussell release them publicly but my understanding is that
um that predominantly single people access the food bank. The reason we’ve come to
that and other food banks have come to is that basically the benefit system is tightest
and harshest to single people so therefore there is more of them living right on the
breadline therefore whenever a crisis hits, immediately they haven’t got enough money
to buy food. Yeah, we think that’s a common thing across foodbanks.
Q That would be quite an interesting area to actually
A Yes it would, it would
Q Yeah, in terms of repeat clients, I know when I’ve worked in here sometimes you do
get repeat clients and I know that you have a process where you are supposed to limit it
to 3 in 6 months I think it is, is that right
A yeah that’s right
Q do you ever feel that it does create, there’s an element of dependency within the
process
A Yeah, I think there is the potential for that. Um, we, the statistic I have looked through
all our stats and did some maths around it and what we discovered is that the average
person or average person in the family or whatever or the average person coming in
that person will come on average 1.5 times to the food bank so from our perspective for
the vast majority of people it’s working in terms of, its a very short term thing, um
seeing somebody through a short term crisis they only need to come once or twice, um,
there are then a number of people who will come up to the limit of three um, and then
there are a few people who we have gone through that limit and how we work that is
that if somebody just comes to us with a voucher, we check every voucher on the way in,
and we look up their kind of details, and if they have been three times, we will turn
them away unless they unless whoever has given them the voucher has got permission
to give out a fourth one first so we have occasionally someone will ring up and say I am
working with this family they have had 3 already um but the money isn’t going to come
through till next Tuesday so they are going to need a fourth one is that ok? We will say
yes so long as there is an end in sight to the crisis, its been resolved, and that kind of
thing. I think, I would say, I think the system we have is designed to make it really
difficult to either abuse the system or become dependent um I think we didn’t have
those checks then probably we would find people who were becoming dependent on
the food bank. There are - I have to - we have to - kind of openly say if there is
somebody who is absolutely determined to cheat the food bank or whatever, there is
not a huge amount you know if they go to the extent of giving fake names and all of that
then potentially somebody could but I guess that’s where our human intelligence comes
in because same people running the sessions, you remember people as well
107
Q so just as a matter of interest, how do you deal with self-referrals, I suppose a tension
between a responsibility to the people who are giving food but also somebody who is
hungry so how would you ordinarily deal with somebody that turns up
A[00:31:05] just turns up, um, we the way we operate it that we sort out our food bank
distribution points do not have vouchers themselves. the Gateway is a bit messier than
that because there are several agencies here and several teams within that who do have
vouchers but so in general what happens is if someone comes without a voucher they
will be referred to somebody who does have a voucher so we tend to ask the question
are you working with any agencies. If they name one who have got a who hold vouchers
we will say well go an talk to your key worker there and they we can’t promise they will
give you one but ask them because we prefer people to be referred by somebody who is
working with them on an ongoing basis obviously. In terms of if somebody isn't working
with any agencies and occasionally somebody will drop an email to the foodbank email
address whatever saying these are my circumstances I’ve got no food what can I do and
we will always say we can’t give you food unless you have a voucher, you will need to
get a voucher from and well if they are not working with an agency we will name the
agencies who operate on a drop in basis who they can get to. So we tend to do that. How
we work here at gateway is slightly differently in that um if somebody comes to us
without a voucher we have teams of people who can if they are around can sit down
with somebody and they will go through a process with them, establishing whether they
are genuinely in need, if there are any additional support they need, it tends to be CAP
who do money advice stuff anyway so that tends to be how it works. We wouldn’t ever
we don’t ever give out food to people who just turn up without a voucher, that’s the
kinda bottom line really.
Q Ok, nearly there at the end, how do you deal with referrals from what I call the State.
So you’ve got 2 levels of the state you’ve got the DWP, JC+, and then you’ve got the local
authority and their welfare assistance scheme.
A. [00:33:25] Yeah, yeah, yeah. um, that’s a really good question. Thats something that
we wrestle with to be honest. um, and er, I am assuming, I don’t know how candid I can
be really,
Q you can be as candid as, this is totally anonymous, totally confidential,
A`[00:33:44] yeah, so we, um, from the right from the off, we said we were not going to
give vouchers from the DWP um and the Jobcentre. Because we basically, we felt like
um, for people that were making that decision of I'm going to sanction you, I'm going to
stop your money, I'm going to give you your money, for them to have vouchers in the
background, we felt that could influence their decisions. And you know, we didn't want
to make it easy for them to be able to go 'Well I will sanction that person, I'll just give
them a voucher'. So they um approached us and wanted vouchers and we said no. Um,
we, we with hindsight, I would have done the same thing with the Financial Assistance
Scheme. However, I at the time we trained them, it was with a couple of other council
teams, and they kind of snook in under the radar, and had already got vouchers before I
had fully understood what their service was. Once I realised that, I did have a sit down
with them and chatted to the manager there and we came to an agreement where they
would, one of the other things is that they were doing in summer was that they were
108
giving people £35 on a card plus a voucher um and we said you cant do that, that’s not
what the food bank is for, you’ve got your own pot of money you use that for people
who come to you the only we agreed that only refer people to us if they didn’t qualify for
their assistance basically and we’ve since we had that conversation with them, their
referrals have gone done hugely actually so they have stopped, they were actually the
people who 50% were not
Q Oh I see I see
A that team, so we’ve seen that kind of reduce and I’ve I’m reasonably comfortable with
that. Its one of the things we are monitoring and having this discussion and it is one of
the things that the trustees of the food bank really need to decide on really. Where do
we fit in terms of the welfare state and you know, on a local and national level and er, I
am fairly comfortable with where we sit currently with that. I think that the thing that
annoys me is that the FAS is not very well advertised so I suspect that a lot of people
coming to us would qualify for that but just don’t know about it so
Q what about a partner, for instance, do you talk about that with partner agencies to say
that actually do you think actually maybe the Assistance scheme may be your first port
of call rather than
A so its really interesting whenever I go and train up a team to give out vouchers, I now
give a little plugs for the Financial Assistance Scheme and what’s fascinating is that a lot
even local authority teams in Children’s Centres, health visitors and all of the rest of it,
they don’t know it exists. Some of them do. I was at one meeting where there was maybe
five different Children’s Centres represented and I said, before I finish I just want to, Are
you aware of the Financial Assistance Scheme and I think there was like one of them
said, 'Yeah, I use that actually. I send people. And the others are all like 'What on earth is
that? I’ve never heard of it'. So I was saying, 'Well this is how it works and really they
should be pre-food bank. I think there are a few challenges with it. One is that I feel like
its, I feel like its very easy to refer somebody to the food bank which is a good thing,
which means that somebody can get food quickly, but what it also means is that it is
really the easier option, um, to sending somebody down to say YFAS or whatever, um,
so I suspect that probably does happen, um, I don’t know what the solution is to that. I
know they have got a big underspend and money may get cut because they are not using
it so I am trying to advertise it wherever I go um but yeah, that is one of the challenges
really, its part of the bigger question, where we do we fit in terms of the Welfare State
cos in some ways 'is there anything wrong with you know the food bank taking on some
of the responsibility that the Welfare State has traditionally had, you know, for the past
few decades, because before that, it was the charity sector who did all of the, they were
the Welfare State, so you know, where, and I kind of you know in the big bigger picture I
feel like it probably the pendulum swung from the kind of the charity sector,
predominantly the church really were the Welfare State, and it swung all the way over
to the state does everything, absolutely everything, has a legal responsibility for people
and you know, if you are in a crisis, they are there to help. And I feel like maybe that
pendulum is starting to swing a little bit further and you know whether that’s because
of a political ideology or a pure practical 'we haven’t got enough money to do that', I
don’t know, um, but I, you know, I kind of feel, you know, if we are saving tax payers
money on a local people by doing some of the work that YFAS might have been doing,
109
then maybe we are doing everybody a favour cos people are giving willingly to the
foodbank um but on the other hand, how would people feel like if they knew people
were using the foodbank when the state could have been providing for them, I think,
that’s probably a concern people would have. So its an ongoing wrestle for us really, of
where we fit, and I think to be honest cos food banks are only recently been big news,
those questions are probably to starting to get asked and over time we will work out
where we really fit. I think it will take a while
Q cos I was going to say actually, and this probably my final question, um, if you look at
other countries, I think you would see that some food banks in Canada and States
particularly um sort of don’t, there has been an element of donor fatigue, and also
associated with increased dependency so for instance in Canada recently there’s a sort
of move to monthly paying the benefits and so food banks have a peak every month
where people you know are running out of money. Is there any patterns that you’ve
noticed over the last year um and if so what do you attribute to and what do you see
food bank if anything developing into in the future
A [00:41:30] er, great questions. I think in terms of patterns, its very difficult for us to
see, did the benefits change impact on us, its really difficult for us to say definitively if
that did or not for us because we only started in November last year and we started
small intentionally we only trained up a few agencies to give out vouchers so naturally
we have a growth from the start, our numbers definitely carried on growing in April, um
we heat a peak in August interestingly um, August was our busiest month to date, we
did 180 vouchers in the month of August. Since then, we have seen it drop off, in
September I think we were down to 140/150, and then November, December, we
were at 115/120 so we don’t know the factors behind that were. One of the theories
behind that is that in Summer you have a whole load of families trying to feed their kids
who would normally get free school meals that’s one theory. I am not sure its that
simple, I think part of it is that YFAS were giving out a shed loads of vouchers and it was
the end of summer that we spoke to them and they stopped, I mean it maybe something
that simple. I mean, so we it difficult I don’t think we see a trend in terms of within a
month, within weeks we get busier days but I think just the nature of when and were we
are open so Fridays tend to be our busier day so we have two centres open and yeah, so
its difficult to know, to identify any trends as such. We in terms of the future food banks,
I part of me, maybe its far too simplistic, but the fact that 50% of the people coming us
are related to a benefits related issue, if the benefits system sorted itself out, or those in
charge of it sorted it out, we would be feeding half as many people as we currently are,
that’s the reality. If they stopped sanctioning people, if they stopped all the delays in the
system, and stopped trying to move people from one benefit to another, you know all of
that, if they sorted all that out, then in theory we would be feeding half as many people. I
think, we keep on saying, the dream for us as a food bank, is that in five years time, we
don’t exist, um and I think our hope is that we do everything we can to make that
happen, I suspect there are so many factors beyond our control that I suspect we
probably will still exist, um, I think for me I its a really tricky one, we are a crisis, we’re
for people who hit a crisis, we are a kind of one-off thing and then the vast majority of
people come once and we never see them again. That tends to be how it works so that’s
every little long term impact we can have on people like that. I think I’ve always kind of
clung to this kind of theory transformation comes through relationship really um so
people aren’t peoples lives don’t get turned around by sitting opposite somebody at a JC,
110
because there’s no relationship there, to be honest that’s one of my criticisms of the
whole model of the Welfare State doing everything. Its there’s no relationship whereas
through our work here at CAP, through the foodbank to an extent although were fairly
kind of early into that, like we run a cafe down here where we get people on work
placements so people have to, to get their benefits, they have to come and volunteer a
certain amount of hours a week, what we find is that they it’s incredible really the vast
majority of them finish their work placement and carry on volunteering here because
they enjoy, kind of enjoy, they enjoy being productive but they enjoy working alongside
people and it connects them in and at the end of the day it they are building
relationships with people that’s what kind of starts. There was one guy who came
whose first day here was like 'Oh I am David Cameron's working boy, I’m only here
because I have to, and now he is still coming even though he doesn’t have to and he’s
helping and he’s loving it and I kind of feel like that’s what the Welfare State misses
really. People who have actually come alongside people [00:46:43] and get to know
them and support them. And I guess our aim with all the stuff we do here at gateway is
it’s not just kind of we are not just handing help out to people we are coming alongside
them trying to support them we are looking at another project to start up called Jobclub
which is just trying to help some of the people who are coming to our cafe and helping
find kind of employment and support them into that. Um, but we and I kind of feel like
with the food banks that’s what we need to be thinking about really is how we how do
we come alongside people and make it more than just a sit down give people some food
and never see them again um I mean for some people it is already more than that some
people will come and sit down for 45 minutes and they will tell you their whole life
story and the volunteers will just and listen and offer them a listening ear and a bit of
basic encouragement um and I think that’s helpful. I kind of feel like we as a foodbank
need to be doing more of that and less kind of come and get your food and go not that,
we kind of intentionally from the outset said that our foodbank we didn’t want it to be
like that in other cities it is apparently in Liverpool you just turn up get your food and go
i think in an inner city you’ve probably got more challenges a big big city cos you’ve got
so many people whereas In York weve got a lot of volunteers we can offer them our
time so yeah, I feel like probably in the future that’s where we there are other projects
we I had read about this Canadian foodbank where they pretty much run a farm where
people come I think its on the Guardian website where people they’re offered food but
also they are offered to come back volunteer and will get more fresh food because of
that Id love to do that if anyone has got a farm to - laughter - we don’t necessarily have
the space for that kind of thing, we probably need to get creative in terms and working
alongside other agencies who will help people who are kind of long term out of work
who are relying on the benefits system not that they are always the people who come to
the food bank at all but that is a section of people who are probably the ones who are
going to be tempted to come back again and again. And if we can do something about
coming alongside them, supporting them, then I think that would be yeah, success
111
APPENDIX G - Dissemination
Having written two articles for a local magazine and a national faith-based publication, I
have also been approached by my local MP (see letter) to provide information on
emergency food. I intend to make a submission to the inquired conducted by the All
Party Parliamentary Group on Hunger and Poverty (see email).
The organisations in which the research was conducted – and the local authorities –
have similarly requested I provide them with a report on the findings.
I have been asked to provide findings to Emma Stone, Director of Policy and Research at
Joseph Rowntree Foundation and intend to do the same to Child Poverty Action Group,
Salvation Army, Trussell Trust, Fareshare, Real Aid as well as regional media.
112
113