During previous blogs, I have discussed the importance of
empowering low-income neighborhoods and the importance of understanding the
reasons behind their lack of access to secure
foods. Whether it falls under one or more categories of the community food security
(CFS) criteria, assessing the characteristics of the food system and its
constituents is complex and it entails a variety of issues. In this week’s
readings, both Clifton and Raja et al. conclude that transportation was a
paramount component in the daily decisions that people make, both in schedule
and the places they decide to go.
Transportation in communities may be the key to solve major
issues in food accessibility and affordability. For access, Raja et al. show
that citizens with automobile access have a much higher rate of available food
destinations in comparison to walking, which hinders the capacity of
pedestrians or people who do not own cars to access certain food hubs such as
supermarkets and grocery stores. Even when car owners have transportation
advantages, low-income drivers face great shortages of funds for other
essential needs. Clifton’s case study reports that some families face hardships
when balancing car maintenance costs and sustaining their families.
Furthermore, it can result in a reliable source of transportation if not given
the appropriate maintenance, requiring greater inputs of money; a double-edged
sword.
The source of this issue can be attributed to the
association of automobile use with independence, since most transportation
systems (especially in low-income areas) are unreliable, and further caused
cities to sprawl and make car use almost necessary. Consequentially, market
chains moved away from the cities and started serving a bigger radius of
customers that dominantly reach the location via automobile.
To understand this issue is to also question it. If the lack
of accessible, affordable, nutritionally adequate, culturally acceptable, and
good quality foods is due to an insensitive transportation system, why has it
not been addressed across the country? CFAs can also take an important role in
addressing this issue, by determining the areas where transportation is limited
and how investing in smaller food locations can be efficient as they spread where
demand is promising and necessary for the community’s health.
In the ASCP article where it looked at food stores in the Bay Area, it showed that many large supermarkets were located at the periphery (around 2-3 miles) away from people's homes. Obviously, that's far to get food when you're walking but at the heart of many neighborhoods lied a bunch of smaller and cultural market places. These are easily accessible, even by walking, to pick up a few essentials at any given time. These smaller markets can partner up with CFA's and community gardens to provide even more fresh produce to the community at a low rate.
ReplyDeleteBobby, you certainly make a valid argument there. But how many of the convenience stores in most cities are culturally appropriate? It is accessible, but not always the best option. Additionally, the study only focuses in Oakland and San Francisco(short et. al), which may limit whether or not this occurs beyond the area. It does propose a great model for small grocery shops, and if it is adapted more commonly it can yield great results to communities' health and access. Lastly, the partnership idea is great, it also provides better opportunity for small businesses and can become a local food hub. The Healthy Food Financing Funds do something similar to a local food partnership, and it is a good example for improvement in low income communities.
Delete