Will More Gov’t Spending Reduce Richmond Food Insecurity?

Food deserts in Richmond. Click to view larger image.
Food deserts in Richmond. Click to view larger image.

by James A. Bacon

After two years of deliberations, a Richmond Food Policy Task Force has issued recommendations for tackling so-called “food deserts” in low-income city neighborhoods racked by obesity and food insecurity. I was anticipating a touchy-feely report full of good intentions divorced from real-world considerations. My worst fears were not confirmed. Although they were fiscally improvident, the proposals issued by the task force were restrained in their ambitions.

The task force does call for more spending, of course. How could it not? When government sees a problem, it invariably defines the solution as more government. Thus, the task force would spend $600,000 over two years to create a food hub/community kitchen, hire a food policy coordinator costing $100,000 yearly, hire two animal control inspectors to inspect urban chicken coops at a cost of $84,000 yearly, and expand healthier-school work groups at a cost of $100,000 a year.

On the positive side, there was a recognition that government also needs to get out of the way. The city should revise zoning laws that hinder urban agriculture and the raising of fowl, while also encouraging the conversion of vacant lots into community gardens.

We can all agree that the problem is real. Residents of inner-city Richmond, like other communities across the country, have deplorable diets that are heavy in starch, salt, sugar and fat. Access to healthy food is difficult in many neighborhoods, especially for people who do not own cars. Obesity leads to poor health and higher medical bills, which society at large pays for.

The question is whether government can do much about the problem. The task force, which is comprised of community food advocates, city planners and public health officials, are inclined to believe that change is possible…. at least on the margins. Their solution: Grow and eat more fresh food.

That’s a wonderful idea. I’m not sure it justifies the expenditure of an additional $1 million a  year in city funds, but it’s a wonderful idea. Indeed, it’s such a wonderful idea that the not-for-profit enterprises like Tricycle Gardens are already pursuing it. Whether the city can materially add to what Tricycle Gardens is already doing is anyone’s guess.

The problem in getting inner-city residents (or poor Americans anywhere) to embrace the production and consumption of healthy food is two-fold. First, people have lost the taste for fresh food and the knowledge of how to cook it. Second — and here I am swimming in the treacherous waters of political correctness, but it must be said — many poor people simply aren’t willing to expend the effort.

Over the past 100 years, the food industry has transformed how people eat. Americans of all ethnicities and income groups are totally disconnected from the process of growing and preparing food. Following market demand, the food industry has labored mightily to make food cheaper, tastier and easier to prepare. And it has succeeded. The big drawback is that food companies have made processed foods unhealthier. Along the way, Americans lost the taste for fresh food and the knowledge of how to cook it. If it doesn’t heat in a microwave, it’s too much trouble. You can give some people fresh food for free and they will not eat it. The problem isn’t one of supply or access, it’s that they don’t like the taste of fresh food or don’t want to make the effort to prepare it.

A revolt against processed foods has arisen over the past decade or so, but it is confined mainly to higher-income and better-educated classes who can afford to pay higher prices for food. Many of the urban farmers in Richmond are college-educated idealists. With the laudable exception of the 31st Street Baptist Church, which raises vegetables for its food pantry, the poor residents of Richmond’s East End have been slow to embrace either fresh food or gardening.

One would think that poor people would flock to the idea of urban gardening. It is their health, after all. And food consumes a disproportionate share of their incomes. Why wouldn’t they volunteer to help tend community gardens? Why wouldn’t they invest time and effort in cultivating key-hole gardens in back-yard planters? “Relief gardens” proliferated in cities across the country during the Great Depression as the poor, sometimes with philanthropic or government assistance, raised their own food.

But America is not the same country it was in the 1930s. Multiple generations of welfare have shorn many poor Americans of the habits, attitudes and ambition to organize and exert themselves on their own behalf. We can amp up nutritional education and put more fresh food in schools. We can organize school kids to get involved with gardening in the hope that they want to eat what they grow. Maybe we can erode the cultural preference for junk food. But we can’t force people to eat healthier, much less grow their own vegetables.

As Richmond Mayor Dwight Jones said, “This didn’t happen tonight, and it’s not going to change overnight.” He’s right about that. Whether city government can make a difference without tackling ingrained cultural attitudes remains to be seen.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

11 responses to “Will More Gov’t Spending Reduce Richmond Food Insecurity?”

  1. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    What have other cities done about this? What worked and what didn’t work? One thing I recall is an article from Peter stating that the City of Richmond has one of the worst municipal bus systems in the US. If I recall that correctly – why wouldn’t improving the bus system be a factor to consider here?

  2. freeelectron Avatar
    freeelectron

    Wouldn’t the increased density you keep on espousing cause there to be enough of a market for grocery stores to come into the area? Isn’t that the way to decrease food deserts?

    Or is it that these people do not have enough income to actually spend enough at the grocery for it to be profitable?

    Wouldn’t better public transportation to food oases also solve the problem? And I bet that where there is an oasis, there may also be jobs (maybe even better jobs) for those that are poor?

    1. If there was sufficient demand for fresh food in Richmond’s inner city, a for-profit company would provide it. The problem is that demand doesn’t exist. Through education programs and demonstration projects, Tricycle Gardens is trying to jump-start that demand. I hope they are successful, although I am not confident they will be. As LarryG points out, idealistic white people from outside the inner city don’t have a lout of clout when it comes to influencing black culture. We’ll see signs of change only if black leaders make healthy eating a priority.

      1. larryg Avatar

        I don’t like to characterize it as white and black as there ARE disadvantaged white urban dwellers also… and “black” do-gooders no doubt.

        but the whole idea that folks who live outside the urban core presuming that people inside the core are ignorant about “good” food and obesity.. is pretty condescending….when the problem is clearly nationwide respecting no race or locality boundary.

        additionally, the idea that people should be eating “fresh” food vs canned or frozen to relieve their food insecurity and to help their obesity is equally suspect. Jesus H. Keeerist – the advent of canned and frozen food has been heralded as a landmark achievement of civilization, of the OECD countries over 3rd world countries.

        Growing chickens in backyards to slaughter for sunday dinner? Jesus… I’d like to know if any of the do-gooders have actually
        killed a chicken, defeathered it and prepared it for a meal? I have and can say without question that it’s not something the average person is going to do if they can buy a regular chicken at the market.

        Is Richmond supposed to work like Thailand when it comes to food?

        the Fredericksburg food bank gets a ton of out-of-date meat including chicken from all the major local stores. frozen solid, It is then moved to the various field pantries where people pick them up and take them home to thaw and cook. excess produce is also available.

        It’s a win-win for the food markets and the needy in many places like Fredericksburg.. not sure what the problem is in Richmond but turning it into Thailand is not a reasonable solution in the US of A where we have one of the most advanced logistics networks on the planet and canned and frozen food is available in the most remote places… no problem.

        The people of Richmond need to come together to operate food pantries that offer canned and frozen as well as fresh and boxed foods as the means to do that is already available if the do-gooders can help obtain a storefront location to operate.

        That’s what the do-gooders should be doing IMHO. Better they should be working with the people in the community and the Va Food Bank to set up more coops and food taxi-service if need be but don’t be adding yet another duplicative service with it’s own administrative overhead – competing for the same scarce resources that could be much-better used in setting up additional food pantries as part of the existing network and Gawd Forbid not trying to get govt to tax folks even more to pay for it.

        “deserts” and “insecurity” ???? come on…. let’s kill the goofy rhetoric.. guys.it sounds just like a bunch of effite liberals… ginning up more tea party opposition folks to rebut them.

        Let’s UNITE the political factions to work together to solve these issues not create even more wedges…

  3. Breckinridge Avatar
    Breckinridge

    What have other cities done? Well, the District of Columbia first recruited and then drove off a number of new Wal-Mart locations, which would have included grocery stores. The Dee Cee City Council insisted that the stores pay a super-minimum wage even higher than that imposed on other retailers, and Wal-Mart either has or is about to say no thanks.

    I don’t see anything in the PowerPoint about how to encourage additional supermarket locations or coordinate existing public transit to coordinate routes to serve existing supermarkets. I would hope the group spoke with the business community to find out why those areas don’t have more or better stores, and it isn’t just because the people in those areas have too little money to patronize them. There are other reasons you don’t see Kroger or a Food Line in those shaded zones on the map. And that leaves people either dependent on unreliable transportation or visiting high-cost convenience stores with limited fresh selections.

    Could grocery stores enjoy some of the enterprise zone tax reduction benefits available to employers? Could the city subsidize security or underwrite losses from vandalism? Could the zoning rules be bent? How do you get a supermarket with its fresh produce and dairy into the project areas?

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Gotta agree with Breckenridge on this one. The DC City Council decision to demand a super minimum wage was bone-headed.

      There is also more to this food desert deal than meets the eye. Are these areas “bar deserts”? Are they “fast food deserts”? If people in a certain area won’t patronize a particular type of business then I wonder what the government can do about it. If people in a particular area will patronize a particular type of business I wonder why there aren’t any of that type of business in the area.

      You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him eat broccoli.

  4. larryg Avatar

    The more that Jim writes on this – the more I am convinced that the concept is nutty.

    it’s like canned and frozen food – are not solutions because they are not “fresh” or worse that “fresh” food has less calories, or something.

    the problem with the poor and obesity is the same exact problem with the affluent and obesity…

    the people, regardless of their demographic status who are not obese almost surely eat canned and frozen food… like most do.

    if you visit any modern supermarket – maybe 1/12 of the store is fresh produce and the rest of it is canned and frozen.

    When you wait at the check-outs, watch what others have in their carts.

    they invariably have a mixture of fresh, canned and frozen….

    I’m just do not understand the “fresh means less obesity” message here.

    we don’t see that message delivered to folks who are not disadvantaged.

    when is the last time you say a commercial advising people that if they stop eating canned and frozen and eat fresh that they can shed their obesity?

    but here’s the part that is most distressing to me.

    people who are disadvantaged or live in disadvantaged neighborhoods do have legitimate needs that could benefit from volunteers and assistance but the whole idea of getting taxpayers to pay to reduce food “deserts” and grow backyard chickens is ludicrous.

    we had the backyard chicken argument down our way and it was finally agreed that the county would allow them, with restrictions, that included paying an inspector to make sure the rules were followed and to respond to neighbors complaints – but what was really amusing was near the end of the process when someone asked ” are people allowed to kill/butcher the chickens in their backyard”..

    well… no…. you can’t do that. and I bet you can’t do that in Richmond either.

    would you want your next door neighbor out in his backyard killing his chickens, taking the feathers off, gutting them and putting the entrails in the garbage to be collected?

  5. accurate Avatar
    accurate

    “The problem in getting inner-city residents (or poor Americans anywhere) to embrace the production and consumption of healthy food is two-fold. First, people have lost the taste for fresh food and the knowledge of how to cook it. Second — and here I am swimming in the treacherous waters of political correctness, but it must be said — many poor people simply aren’t willing to expend the effort.”

    BINGO – give that man a kupi doll. Look you can throw as much money as you want/can think of at the problem, there are people who just plain won’t take help when it’s offered; in thier minds they ARE living healthy and fine and the food tastes better, and etc. Yes, there will be a percentage that actually will benefit, but I’m willing to bet that percentage is below 30% if even that high. Again, to me, it’s another example of seeing a problem and deciding (the government deciding) that the solution will involve money, money and more money.

  6. larryg Avatar

    I’m gonna sound like Accurate here Gawd Forbid.

    This is the kind of thing that gives liberalism a bad name – and it treads dangerously close to effitism , something in that ballpark because it promotes the idea that “disadvantaged” people are somehow “different” than “regular” folks when it comes to food – to knowing what good food is … to needing “help” in not eating “bad” food…

    you want something constructive?

    set up food co-opts and the disadvantaged run them. Let them find sources for produce and chickens in the surrounding country-side and bring it to the cooperative and if there are people with mobility needs – then set up a food taxi service….

    the whole idea that we would presume to show the poor how to eat properly is odious.

    I’m quite sure those ‘po’ folks are laughing their fat butts off about this idea.

    It’s bad enough that there do-gooders who think this, worse that they are willing to put their own time and effort towards dealing with it – and outrageous that they want the govt to uses taxes on it – when we already spend gobs of govt (taxpayer) money on that entire conundrum.

    this is the kind of thing that causes the right to become even more anti-govt

  7. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    I’m glad Jim is tackling the topic of inner-city poverty and eating habits. But try not to be condescending. The savvy white folks and plenty of upscale immigrants from places such as Asia descend regularly on Whole Foods or Trader Joe’s where you can get bargains but pay through the nose for out of season fresh produce.
    I can’t judge inner city African-American culture (and neither can an equally White Boy like Jim Bacon) but I do remember back when I was a reporter on a small North Carolina newspaper many years ago that rural Blacks absolutely knew how to raise vegetables and fruit themselves that would put Whole Foods to shame.
    I would assume that there are many issues in a city like Richmond or one larger, such as placing fresh food outlets or stores that are accessible via public transport. It’s hard to shop for a lot of stuff when you have to lug it on a crowded bus. Live chicken seems to be a fad but one wonders what happens to all the chicken doo doo that ends up in the city gutters.
    Still I think urban farming is an interesting idea that has legs (or feet) going beyond the Birkenstock crowd.

  8. larryg Avatar

    It’s harder to lug food on a bus than it is to grow enough of it to eat?

    Ok..say I asked how many have grown – and killed chickens for food.

    Now I’ll ask how many have had real gardens that grew enough food
    make a serious dent in your food needs – …

    and as any rural person with a real garden knows also- you need tools to maintain the garden and then the “food” does not appear every day, year round. each vegetable “peaks”.. and you harvest it and then how do you make it last? In the good old days, you had a few weeks of “fresh” food and you “canned” the rest. Mason jars, pressure kettles, the whole shebang….some counties used to have “canneries” that you could take your harvested food to…

    It’s not impossible to do even in a city – but now days even the poor in rural areas (with no transit) find it easier to use their food stamps to buy frozen and canned food to supplement fresh produce in season from farmers markets and home gardens and round out those times when there is no fresh produce readily available.

    In our area, we have these for folks who need mobilty services:
    http://www.raaa16.org/

    but how do folks think we get produce year around now days anyhow?

    it comes in a continuous stream of 18-wheelers from down south where crops can be grown year round. If that produce can travel thousands of miles to get to the environs of Richmond – we have no option for getting it the last few miles to urban residents and they should have gardens instead?

    this is one of those ideas that at first blush sounds good but when you spend just a few minutes thinking about it- you realize that it’s totally impractical for most folks but worse – it really does not solve the problem because ‘fresh’ produce from home gardens, unless you can, is a 2-3 month deal – tops – in places like Richmond.

Leave a Reply