Food Deserts in US Cities

Donley, Amy M.; Gualtieri, Marie C.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.64059-x

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(51 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Davitt et al, 2021 [95] Food insecurity: diminished variety, quality, and desirability of diet as well as decreased access to food Donley and Gualtieri, 2015 [96] Food insecurity: lacking enough money to buy the amount and variety of food one needs or wants.…”

Section: Desirabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring Food Insecurity: The Problem with Semantics

Sumsion

June

Cope

2023

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rising rates of hunger and food insecurity have sparked a major re-evaluation of all aspects of food systems. Because of the multifaceted nature of food insecurity, however, determining what actions should be taken is challenging, especially since reevaluation efforts are led by experts from several disciplines and there is no consensus about which indicators should be used and how they should be measured. Confusion surrounding the meaning of the terms ‘food security’ and ‘food insecurity’ has contributed to this lack of consensus. As indicators inform action, such confusion has slowed those committed to alleviating hunger in identifying the most pressing targets. This review highlights (1) the importance of clearly defining food security and food insecurity and (2) how such definitions affect measures of food insecurity in the United States. While some might say that definitions are an issue of the past or a trivial matter of semantics, we believe that the world’s present rates of hunger and malnutrition are attributable, at least in part, to the lack of consensus on these definitions and their accompanying measurements and indicators. Although the present review can be helpful to academics and policy makers, the primary purpose is to be a resource to those involved in the day-to-day production of food, such as ranchers and farmers by providing an overview of definitions, indicators, and measurements used when discussing food security.

show abstract

Section: Desirabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Donley and Gualtieri, 2015 [96] Food insecurity: lacking enough money to buy the amount and variety of food one needs or wants.…”

Section: Monetary Meansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Food Insecurity: The Problem with Semantics

Sumsion

June

Cope

2023

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…T he food-energy-water (FEW) nexus is a focal point in research due to its dynamic impacts on ecosystem services that sustain human life (Wichelns, 2017;Dai et al, 2018;Zhang et al, 2018). That is, food systems utilize vital natural resources through socioecological interactions (Storm et al, 2015;Vallejo-Rojas et al, 2016); climate change drives more frequent and intense agroclimatic events which affect food availability and quality (Zucali et al, 2017;Rötter et al, 2018); and human health outcomes are affected by access to healthy food options and clean water (Donley and Gualtieri, 2015;Ahola et al, 2016;Dieter and Tuttle, 2017;Karabulut et al, 2018). It is also understood that food consumption is integral to the FEW nexus (USGCRP, 2018), and food-consumption patterns in the United States tend to vary based on factors such as race and income level (Kirkpatrick et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinguishing Environmental Impacts of Household Food-Spending Patterns Among U.S. Demographic Groups

Bozeman

Ashton

Theis

2019

Environmental Engineering Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The food-energy-water (FEW) nexus is a focal point in research due to its impacts on ecosystem services that sustain human life. Despite this, FEW studies have not produced enough policy-relevant insights, particularly addressing differences across demographic groups with sufficient data and analysis. We addressed this research gap by integrating socioeconomic status (SES) with pertinent life cycle assessment findings to explore foodconsumption impacts across three of the largest demographic groups (Black, Latinx, White) in the United States. Looking at five food groups-vegetables, fruits, protein, dairy, and grains-food-consumption impacts per dollar spent (FCI$) were calculated. Results show that Latinx and Black household food purchasing and consumption behavior has greater impact on cradle-to-farm-gate environmental resources (land, greenhouse gas [GHG], water) for every dollar spent compared with White households. Higher FCI$ rates for Latinx and Black households are attributable to relatively low average household incomes (i.e., lower SES), which is associated with the purchase of more cheaper, energy-dense foods. Addressing food access issues for demographic groups of lower SES could facilitate the purchase of less environmentally-intense foods, thereby conserving environmental resources and mitigating GHG emissions. Specifically, different messaging relevant to particular demographic groups may be necessary to encourage healthier and lower-impact dietary choices. This study's results provide practitioners, policy makers, and researchers policy-relevant data for issues involving the environment, with interesting discussion on implications for racial equity and human health.

show abstract