Cargando…

Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox

Struggling for food in a time of crisis: responsibility and paradox. Responsibility is a useful lens through which to examine the current state of food poverty in the UK in the context of the Covid‐19 crisis, noting that this concept contains several paradoxes. Currently, responsibility involves the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: CAPLAN, PAT
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7301012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32572296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12573
_version_ 1783547610044301312
author CAPLAN, PAT
author_facet CAPLAN, PAT
author_sort CAPLAN, PAT
collection PubMed
description Struggling for food in a time of crisis: responsibility and paradox. Responsibility is a useful lens through which to examine the current state of food poverty in the UK in the context of the Covid‐19 crisis, noting that this concept contains several paradoxes. Currently, responsibility involves the voluntary sector, the food industry and the state, a situation which the author has been exploring for the last five years in an ethnographic study of food poverty and food aid in the UK. Food aid organizations, especially food banks, have mushroomed during the period of austerity. This reveals the first paradox: namely, that the existence of food banks conveys the message that ‘something is being done’, but in actuality this is very far from being sufficient to meet the needs of either the ‘old’ or ‘new’ food insecure. The second paradox is that at the onset of the crisis, a government which had been responsible for inflicting austerity on the country for 10 years, dramatically reversed some of its policies. However, predictably, this did not change the situation vis‐à‐vis food insecurity. The third paradox is that the frequent rhetoric invoking the two world wars has not resulted in lessons being learned – notably, the creation of a ministry to deal with food and rationing, as in the Second World War. The final paradox relates to Brexit and its likely deleterious effects on food security, particularly if no ‘deal’ is achieved with the European Union, as seems likely. The voluntary food aid sector, try as it may, cannot possibly assume responsibility for the long‐standing and now hugely increased problems of food insecurity. That belongs to the state.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7301012
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73010122020-06-18 Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox CAPLAN, PAT Anthropol Today Original Articles Struggling for food in a time of crisis: responsibility and paradox. Responsibility is a useful lens through which to examine the current state of food poverty in the UK in the context of the Covid‐19 crisis, noting that this concept contains several paradoxes. Currently, responsibility involves the voluntary sector, the food industry and the state, a situation which the author has been exploring for the last five years in an ethnographic study of food poverty and food aid in the UK. Food aid organizations, especially food banks, have mushroomed during the period of austerity. This reveals the first paradox: namely, that the existence of food banks conveys the message that ‘something is being done’, but in actuality this is very far from being sufficient to meet the needs of either the ‘old’ or ‘new’ food insecure. The second paradox is that at the onset of the crisis, a government which had been responsible for inflicting austerity on the country for 10 years, dramatically reversed some of its policies. However, predictably, this did not change the situation vis‐à‐vis food insecurity. The third paradox is that the frequent rhetoric invoking the two world wars has not resulted in lessons being learned – notably, the creation of a ministry to deal with food and rationing, as in the Second World War. The final paradox relates to Brexit and its likely deleterious effects on food security, particularly if no ‘deal’ is achieved with the European Union, as seems likely. The voluntary food aid sector, try as it may, cannot possibly assume responsibility for the long‐standing and now hugely increased problems of food insecurity. That belongs to the state. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-06-04 2020-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7301012/ /pubmed/32572296 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12573 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Anthropology Today published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Royal Anthropological Institute This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
CAPLAN, PAT
Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox
title Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox
title_full Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox
title_fullStr Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox
title_full_unstemmed Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox
title_short Struggling for food in a time of crisis: Responsibility and paradox
title_sort struggling for food in a time of crisis: responsibility and paradox
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7301012/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32572296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12573
work_keys_str_mv AT caplanpat strugglingforfoodinatimeofcrisisresponsibilityandparadox