12

According to Wikipedia, a food desert is a low income area where people there cannot access high quality or nutritional food, due to either a lack of transportation or a lack of real grocery stores.

My question is, are food deserts statistically proven to exist due to a significant inability to obtain quality food by low income communities within the United States? Or are they an exaggeration of data?

TheEnigmaMachine
  • 2,775
  • 1
  • 23
  • 29
  • I used to work in Camden, NJ. The closest "real" supermarket that carried any reasonable selection of healthy foods was either [4 miles away](http://bit.ly/ilS4pX) or *[in a different state](http://bit.ly/jqlGBR)*. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 19:11
  • Okay, to be fair I guess there is [one that is a bit closer](http://www.cousinssupermarket.com/), but it is still ~2 miles away. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 19:16
  • 4
    @ESultanik 2-4 miles is not very far. Is that really outside the range people consider reasonable to purchase food? I understand that this range is reduced by not having access to an automobile, but that's still hardly a long walk. Or is this a matter of the implied privilege of the modern day? – John Rhoades Jun 28 '11 at 19:35
  • 2
    @John: You are right, it's not very far. The problem is that, at least in urban environments, there are usually much more convenient and much less healthy options that are closer. Why would I walk 4+ miles to buy some veggies, fruit, and raw ingredients if I could walk to the end of my block and get an already prepared fast food hamburger or fried chicken for likely the same price? And if one is already obese, that 4 mile walk is even harder. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 19:40
  • 1
    Walk 2-4 miles every few days with groceries? Possible if you are young, fit and have no children, but certainly a problem as soon as any of those is not true. – DJClayworth Jun 28 '11 at 20:17
  • 2
    You know, there's such thing as busses, bicycles (4 miles on a bicycle is nothing), and other wheeled things even for people without a car. Or people pooling to take a trip with a neighbour who HAS a car and paying that neighbour for gas. As usual, this is merely about excuses for people being mostly lazy. – user5341 Jun 28 '11 at 20:29
  • 2
    @ESultanik - are you implying that those aren't the same people who can easily find a way to go somewhere to, say, go clubbing or pick up chicks etc..? Camden has public transportation. – user5341 Jun 28 '11 at 20:30
  • No, I'm saying that one needs a lot of motivation to go grocery shopping, especially if there are alternative (albeit less healthy) options close by. Also, public transit costs money. In Camden, it's about $3 round trip. For [someone who makes less than $12k a year](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden,_New_Jersey), $3 is a lot of money. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 21:25
  • Could you provide a definition for "high quality or nutritional food"? – Christian Jun 28 '11 at 21:49
  • 1
    I'd like a clarification for what it means to have "access" to high quality foods. Everyone has "access", it's just a matter of the time, money, and effort required to get the "high quality food". Can we make the question a bit less subjective? See the edit to my answer, below, for more clarification. – ESultanik Jun 29 '11 at 12:21
  • @ES: last time I've check passports were nor required to go to different state within US, has that changed? If not, how is "in different state" relevant? – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 12:33
  • 1
    @vartec: Not to speak for him, but I think his point was that a) Camden, NJ is considered a pretty bad US city in terms of poverty (~40%) and crime (#1 in crime 3 times between 2000-2010) and that b) "quality" (define however you'd like) supermarkets are unlikely to rise up in areas like that. By "different state" he meant that he had to cross the river to go into Philadelphia, PA, a trip which can be a pain in its own right if you've ever done it. It's an isolated example but I don't think it's atypical. – erekalper Jun 29 '11 at 13:07
  • @ere: I still fail to understand how crossing state line is relevant. – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 13:12
  • 1
    @vartec: It's implied that it's not an easy journey (his point all along) to take because of the necessary route, which I mentioned. Geography and context are needed in this case, whereas they might be less important if crossing from, say, Nebraska to South Dakota. – erekalper Jun 29 '11 at 13:15
  • 1
    @ere: my point is, 4 miles is 4 miles, doesn't matter if you have to cross 0, 1 or 2 state lines, any number of county lines etc. – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 13:40
  • 1
    @vartec: @erekalper did a pretty good job of summarizing my point. The bridge connecting Camden to Philly does have a pedestrian walkway, but it is a pretty steep climb and it isn't open 24/7. Public transit is available, but it's either a $10 round-trip ferry ride or ~$6 for a bus and a train. My argument is mostly about economics. Someone below the poverty line is going to have a hard time justifying that kind of monetary and time expense just to get some healthy groceries when there are much more convenient (but less healthy) options close by. – ESultanik Jun 29 '11 at 13:48
  • @ES: fair enough. btw. it's one of the last things they advertise, but it does say `vegetables` here: http://goo.gl/YIV3P. And still, I wouldn't call eating KFC "struggling with hunger". – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 13:56
  • @vartec: 4 miles is 4 miles, right. That's easily 1 and a half hours on foot (with groceries). And that may be *one* way. So, 2-4 miles *is* quite far (it isn't if you only think about it hypothetically, which the "they're just lazy" faction here pretty much seems to do) – Jürgen A. Erhard Jun 29 '11 at 14:05
  • @vartec: I actually went there once because I needed an ATM! (I worked just a couple blocks away.) I recall only seeing some bananas, maybe some apples too. It's in [a low-income housing development](http://bit.ly/2m092z). It was a bit scary there; I'd see an ambulance and police stopping at the building at least once a week. – ESultanik Jun 29 '11 at 14:13
  • @jae: so? the don't work, so they have plenty of time. Also this way they get their exercise, even more healthy :-P – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 14:30
  • 2
    I think everyone is forgetting about the Delaware river here... You can't walk it and I don't see any side walks on the commodore barry or the betsy ross bridges... plus those bridges are ALWAYS jam packed so in this case 4 miles is not just 4 miles, you have to actually get into philly which can take an hour or more during the day just to get accrossed the bridge... and god forbid there is an accident (anywhere near philly!) because then traffic will start being routed through the open routes and exponentially increase your travel time. Yeah philly sucks I drive through it every day... – Supercereal Jun 29 '11 at 14:45
  • @ESultanik If someone "needs motivation" to find a way to traverse the extra miles to eat healthy or buy decent food, then they're content with their laziness and cheap unhealthy food and whatever problems arise from that are entirely their own fault. I'm not sure this whole "Food Desert" thing ISN'T a real problem or anything, but making "motivation" either the problem or solution doesn't win much sympathy. – John Rhoades Jun 29 '11 at 15:30
  • @Kyle that "an hour or more" is by car, do I understand that correctly? Well, of course on foot you don't have traffic jams... ;-) – Jürgen A. Erhard Jun 29 '11 at 15:56
  • @jae yeah it's by car but other than train I don't see any other way to get to philly... good luck walking across the delaware river... I mentioned not seeing sidewalks on the bridges either... – Supercereal Jun 29 '11 at 17:17
  • 1
    @Kyle: As I mentioned elsewhere, there is a pedestrian walkway on the Ben Franklin Bridge, but it isn't open 24/7 and in fact has unpredictable hours (they regularly close it without warning due to "inclement weather", even when it is sunny out). Also, it is relatively steep and is a good workout even for people that are fit. It's [about 1.5 miles long to cross](http://bit.ly/lp2Oae), and for a slightly overweight man the round trip over the bridge alone would be [equivalent to over 45 minutes of high impact aerobics](http://bit.ly/mtQxLD). – ESultanik Jun 30 '11 at 12:27
  • @Esultanik interesting... I don't normally take the Ben Franklin so I wouldn't have noticed it... still, not an easy solution. – Supercereal Jun 30 '11 at 12:30
  • 1
    It seems a bit ironic to speak of a "food desert" defined as healthy food being a mile or 2 from one's home and that is much too far to travel, when there are so many people who live in REAL deserts who travel several miles every day on foot just for water – BlueWhale Jul 27 '11 at 12:10

2 Answers2

7

Nearly 13% of all households in Washington D.C. were struggling with hunger in 2007–2009. The district is divided into wards, much like townships. According to D.C. Hunger Solutions,

Wards 7 and 8, which have the District's highest poverty rates, also have the city's highest obesity rates and are home to large "food deserts." Of the city's 43 full-service grocery stores*, only two are located in Ward 4, four in Ward 7, and three in Ward 8. By contrast, Ward 3 - the highest-income Ward - has eleven full-service stores.

* see the second comment, below, for my interpretation of "full-service grocery store".

Ward 8's poverty rate in 2009 was 35%. I couldn't find an exact statistic for the area of Ward 8, but it appears to be at least 1/8th the area of the entire district, which is 100 square miles (260km2). Assuming each of the ward's three grocery stores services an equal 100/8/3 ≈ 4 square mile area, I think it is plausible that a good number of the ward's residents live at least one mile from a supermarket.

Edit: The original question is just asking if food deserts exist. The problem is that the definition of a "food desert",

a low income area where people there cannot access high quality or nutritional food

is a bit subjective: One can always have access to high quality or nutritional food if one is willing to spend enough time to travel to it. If a person lives a couple miles away from a grocery store but has "access" via expensive (to them) public transport, does that constitute "access"? Technically, of course, yes. But what I think AgentKC is really asking—and the question I have been trying to answer—is: "Is there any statistical correlation between proximity to full-service grocery stores, obesity, and poverty?" I think the answer to that is "yes". Answering why is a much more difficult (and perhaps open) question.

Here are some more points that came up in the discussion:

  • As John Rhoads pointed out, a mile walk to a grocery store isn't really very far. The problem is that, at least in urban environments, there are usually much more convenient and much less healthy options that are closer. Why would I walk 2+ miles to buy some veggies, fruit, and raw ingredients if I could walk to the end of my block and get an already prepared fast food hamburger or fried chicken for likely the same price? (When I lived in a not-so-savory part of Philadelphia, I could buy a whole fried chicken at the end of my block for the same price as a raw chicken from the 1-mile-away grocery store). And if one is already obese, that walk to the store is even harder.
  • As DVK pointed out, many of these urban centers have extensive public transport systems that would allow carless residents to commute back-and-forth to a supermarket. Here are some counter-arguments:
    • For people that live below the poverty line (the average per capita income in Camden, NJ, for example, is less than $12k), a public transit ride for as little as $3 is a significant expense. And as Erik Harris noted, it is likely more expensive in DC.
    • How many shopping bags can one person reasonably carry home without a car? Enough for a week's worth of food for a family of four? I know that at least extrapolating from the way I shop, I'd have to make multiple trips per week to feed a family of 4, which is a further expense.
    • As DVK rightly noted, many of these factors are likely social/cultural in nature, however, that only speaks to the underlying cause; it does not change the fact that there is a correlation between availability of produce, obesity, and poverty.
  • Townsend, et al., did a study on the correlation between food insecurity and obesity. Here is a summary from Oregon State University:

    [Obesity] may also result from periodic episodes of food insecurity. For many people, food stamps and money for food run out before the end of the month. Among respondents to the 2004 Oregon Hunger Factors Assessment, 95 percent ran out of food stamps at least 1 week before the end of the month. When money and food stamps become available again, some may overeat low-cost, high-calorie foods that have limited nutrient density. This could result in gradual weight gain over time, especially for mothers with dependents in the household.

Community
  • 1
ESultanik
  • 8,038
  • 3
  • 38
  • 49
  • 3
    I'm not familiar with the term "full-service grocery store", and it is not defined in the link. Is it a US-term? Does it refer to one of those giant hyper-enormous supermarkets? If so, I think >98% of Australians lives more than one mile from such a store, and yet they seem to be able to provide nutrition for themselves. Am I jumping to conclusions? – Oddthinking Jun 28 '11 at 20:12
  • There are lots of stores—especially in big US cities—that call themselves "grocery stores" that are really [bodegas](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convenience_store) or convenience stores; they don't sell much in the way of groceries, and usually don't sell anything in the way of fresh produce or raw meats. I consider a "full-service grocery store" to be any store that sells fresh produce, raw meats, and perhaps fish. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 20:18
  • 1
    -1. Washington DC has one of the best public transportation systems in the country. If someone is not lazy, they can easily get to a grocery store and buy food, even if it's not very close. And it costs LESS to buy fresh food than to buy from Mickey Ds. Let's call it for what it is - there are areas where culture is such that making an extra effort to better your own life is NOT part of culture. Add up the narcotics budget spent by population of any of those poor Wards, and you likely end up with enough to feed every "underpriviledged" kid in the country, never mind in DC. – user5341 Jun 28 '11 at 20:34
  • ... plus, as far as costs, I have seen what people spend food stamps on in NYC. And it wasn't the case of "we really honestly can't afford good food" - it was "lets' by bubble gum, cigarettes, junk crap, etc...". – user5341 Jun 28 '11 at 20:40
  • @DVK: Metro stops are quite far apart in DC. In many places (including Ward 8) it can be a good 20 minute walk to the metro. Also, for a place with an average per-capita income below the poverty line, a $5 public transit ride can be prohibitive. You do have a point about culture, though. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 21:34
  • @ESultanic - DC has no bus routes either? – user5341 Jun 28 '11 at 21:37
  • @DVK: As for the cost of fast food *vs.* buying fresh, when I lived in a not-so-savory part of Philadelphia, I could walk down to the end of my block and buy a whole fried chicken with fries and a large sugary drink for $7.99. My local supermarket (a 20 minute walk away) sold raw chickens for $7.99 each. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 21:37
  • @DVK We should continue this in chat, but my point isn't so much about accessibility as it is about cost. Bus + Metro requires a transfer, which is even more $$$. – ESultanik Jun 28 '11 at 21:39
  • 3
    DC also has one of the most expensive public transportation systems in the country. It's stuck between three separate jurisdictions (DC, MD, VA) that all essentially say "you pay for it!" (when I worked in DC, my daily public transportation commuting cost was just under $12.) The result is a system that's expensive and a bit dilapidated (hardly "one of the best in the country," at least if you're doing apples-to-apples comparisons of metro regions with subway systems). – Erik Harris Jun 29 '11 at 00:55
  • "struggling with hunger" and "highest obesity rates" sounds self contradicting. – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 09:14
  • @vartec: http://extension.oregonstate.edu/catalog/pdf/em/em8828-e.pdf – ESultanik Jun 29 '11 at 11:39
  • @ES: they define "struggling with hunger" as fat dude being hungry, which I find misleading. A person actually struggling with hunger will not be obese. – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 11:56
  • @vartec I think the "hunger" to which you refer is what they are calling "malnutrition" or perhaps "emaciation". Their definition of "struggling with hunger" seems to be more like, "the state of often being hungry and without food". – ESultanik Jun 29 '11 at 12:08
  • @ES: by this definition, from 11:30 I'm "struggling with hunger", until I eat my lunch at 12. – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 12:19
  • @vartec: Heh, true, but from their description of Townsend's work I think they are referring to the state in which one has adequate food for two or three weeks and then little or no food for one week. – ESultanik Jun 29 '11 at 14:03
  • 1
    ESultanik is correct though. The only thing that can really be measured scientifically is a statistically correlation. The cause is a more subjective (and controversial) answer that is likely beyond the scope of this site. – TheEnigmaMachine Jun 29 '11 at 14:34
  • @ESultanik, "2 or 3 weeks and then little or no food for 1 week" (not even close, http://jn.nutrition.org/content/131/6/1738/F1.expansion.html), here is how they determined the level of Food Security (http://jn.nutrition.org/content/131/6/1738/T1.expansion.html). Under that definition, I am surprised that nearly 100% of us aren't food insecure (I never get enough lobster and sushi) – user1873 Sep 08 '12 at 10:48
  • DC is only 68 square miles (not 100), of which only 61 are land. Prior to 1871 DC was 100 square miles, but Virginia took back its part. Ward 8 has a land area of 8.5 square miles. http://www.usboundary.com/Areas/200020 About 1.5 square miles of this is Joint Base Anacostia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Base_Anacostia%E2%80%93Bolling The furthest anyone is from a major grocery store is about a mile, because in addition to the Safeway at 2845 Alabama Ave. and Giant at 1535 Alabama Ave., there is a Giant on Audrey Ln a few hundred feet into Maryland. – DavePhD Aug 01 '16 at 18:30
3

Wikipedia has a number of links to reports by reliable organizations.

Here is a good one:

Of all households in the United States, 2.3 million, or 2.2 percent, live more than a mile from a supermarket and do not have access to a vehicle. An additional 3.4 million households, or 3.2 percent of all households, live between one-half to 1 mile and do not have access to a vehicle.

But also:

The current state of research is insufficient to conclusively determine whether some areas with limited access have inadequate access.

DJClayworth
  • 57,419
  • 26
  • 209
  • 195
  • 1
    @DJC - they don't have access to public transportation? – user5341 Jun 28 '11 at 20:35
  • 1
    I'm not completely convinced by all their arguments myself. – DJClayworth Jun 28 '11 at 20:48
  • This is exactly why I posted the question. ;) – TheEnigmaMachine Jun 28 '11 at 20:51
  • In other words they eat junk, because they are too lazy to walk 10 minutes to a store? – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 09:19
  • @vartec You walk a mile in 10 minutes? – Jürgen A. Erhard Jun 29 '11 at 14:01
  • 2
    If you're young, fit and single then walking a mile (which would take even you fifteen minutes carrying groceries - and another fifteen back, let's not forget) is easy. If you're old, have health issues or young kids, then two miles is a challenge. – DJClayworth Jun 29 '11 at 14:24
  • @jae: "between one-half to 1 mile", yes, that's 10 minutes on average. But I'm not a bum trying to find excuse for being lazy. In fact I had to walk 2 miles to work today, because frikin' tram company went on strike. – vartec Jun 29 '11 at 14:36
  • 2
    @vartec, @DJ, @jae: Just to note, a 10 minute walking mile is nearly superhuman. That's 6 mph, which if you set a treadmill at, is really more of a slow trot than anything else. At best it's a power walk, which can be exerting in its own right. A pretty darn fast *walk* would be 12 minute miles (5 mph), and for most people even a 15 minute mile is a decent pace (4 mph). When backpacking, if you're hitting 15 minute miles, you're doing a good job. I think a 20 minute mile is pretty accurate for how most people actually move. Just go on Google Maps and look at the time: http://goo.gl/hYtFO – erekalper Jul 01 '11 at 14:34
  • I can tell that none of you have actually tried to walk a mile to the nearest grocery store and then carry said groceries home. According to Google, my home is 650 m (slightly more than 1/3 of a mile) from our nearest grocery store (about 4 blocks), and it takes *me* (fit and skinny) around 8 minutes to walk each way. I'm not especially keen about carrying groceries this far, and generally speaking, I'm not able to carry much more than a day's (*maybe* two) worth. I would like to re-iterate the need to walk a mile in someone's shoes before judging them to be "lazy". – Ernie Jul 29 '11 at 23:44
  • 3
    It's very easy to judge a mile to be "easy" and "not a problem" when you usually only take a couple of minutes to do that in a car. It's something else entirely when you're walking. And another thing entirely when it's something you *need* to do at the end of a long day and the weather is crap. But again, these are not even things anyone here has considered in anything but an abstract concept. – Ernie Jul 29 '11 at 23:50
  • I live in a rural area, and the nearest grocery store is 8 mines from my house. And there is ZERO public transportation where I live. Now, thankfully I have a car, but I am aware of people who depend on neighbors (well, that guy down the road, 2 miles away) for rides to the grocery store. I find it puzzling that people can doubt people living far away from a grocery store, and not having access to public transport... – JasonR Jan 21 '16 at 17:01