I first visited a food bank in 2017 at the invitation of the Trussell Trust, the admirable charity which runs the UK’s largest network of emergency centres providing food to people in crisis. Since then the use of their food banks has continued to grow rapidly. Even the government has now acknowledged that this is partly due to the botched rollout of Universal Credit. I’m therefore happy to back the Trust’s #5WeeksTooLong campaign. But there are still plenty of misconceptions about the activities of food banks, and how to interpret the statistics in the context of wider debates about poverty. Indeed, almost every report I’ve read today includes some pretty basic mistakes.
Let’s begin with the raw data. The Trussell Trust now supports food banks operating from more than 1,200 locations around the UK. Between April 2018 and March 2019, they distributed 1.6 million food parcels (including nearly 600,000 to children), an increase of around 19% on the previous year. What’s more, as the chart below shows, use of the Trussell Trust network has surged by 73% in the last five years.
But this is where many commentators start to get it wrong. Note first that these figures are only a guide to the number of individuals or families who rely on food banks. In part this is because the same person may visit a food bank several times a year and therefore receive more than one parcel. In particular, someone using the Trussell Trust network takess, on average, two parcels over a twelve-month period. This means that the number of people using Trussell Trust food banks is lower than the number of parcels that this particular network hands out.
However, the Trussell Trust is not the only organisation running food banks in the UK. Sabine Goodwin, on behalf of the Independent Food Aid Network, has estimated that there are over 800 food banks operating independently, on top of the Trussell Trust’s 1200.
Taken together, these points suggest that the total number of people using a UK food bank in any one year is well over a million, but we simply don’t know for sure.
It’s also worth putting both the level and growth rates of food bank use in the UK in some sort of context. I’ll start with the level. Some commentators, such as Labour’s shadow disabilities minister Marsha de Cordova, have expressed outrage that even in one of the wealthiest countries in the world, many people rely on food banks. I do understand where this outrage is coming from. But the current levels of food bank use in the UK would actually be considered normal and unremarkable in many other countries.
For example, a 2014 review found that there were around 800 food banks in Canada, serving 850,000 people every month; 1,000 food banks in Germany, helping at least 1.5 million people; and 2,000 in France, helping 3.5 million people.
In 2017, members of the European Food Bank Federation (FEBA) network provided food to more than 8 million people across Europe. And according to the Global FoodBanking Network’s 2018 report, the leading food bank network in Australia helps 652,000 people every month, including 176,000 children. In other words, the UK is not an outlier.
This is consistent with other evidence that poverty levels in the UK are unexceptional. Here, it is common to see headlines such as ‘14 million people in the UK live in poverty’. However, these figures actually refer to (relative) measures of income inequality, such as the percentage of people living with less than 55% of the median income, adjusting for factors such as housing costs and debt.
To be precise, the Social Metrics Commission estimated last year that 14.2 million people in the UK are in poverty on this definition (8.4 million working-age adults, 4.5 million children, and 1.4 million pension age adults). For example, the poverty threshold for the resources available to a childless couple is £252 a week (roughly £13,100 a year). For a couple with two children, one of whom is aged under 14, it is £408 a week (roughly £21,200). These are clearly very tight budgets, but not what most people would think of as ‘poverty’, or at least not ‘extreme poverty’.
What’s more, even on the basis of this very broad measure, levels of poverty in the UK are unexceptional. The OECD publishes data on ‘poverty rates’, which it defines as the ratio of the number of people (in a given age group) whose income falls below the poverty line, taken as half the median household income of the total population. As the chart below show, the UK sits roughly in the middle of pack and actually performs better on ‘child poverty’ (the diamonds) than any other major (i.e. G7) economy, bar France.
What’s more, there has not been a huge change in the UK over time. The chart below is from the 2018 Social Metrics Commission report. There are more timely data and I will return to them in another blog, but the big picture is that relative poverty has been broadly stable.
I’d go one step further and suggest that the recent growth in use of food banks in the UK is partly a process of catch-up with other countries where food banks have long been a common means of providing benefits-in-kind. In the words of the Global FoodBanking Network (page 80 of their 2018 report), ‘the food bank model has been an effective hunger relief intervention for 50 years in industrialised, high-income countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, and most of Europe’.
While the need for food banks isn’t obviously something to be proud of, their greater use in the UK shouldn’t be a source of national shame either. Indeed, many advocates of Universal Basic Services (a scheme which would provide a range of essential goods and services, at no cost, to anyone who wants them) have even suggested this could be extended to include some free meals.
There are some important caveats about the Trussell Trust data too, especially when making comparisons over long periods. Some of the increase in the number of people helped by the Trussell Trust will be due to the replacement of existing food banks or similar local initiatives, rather than an indication of a jump in overall demand. For example, in 2009 the Trust operated in only 29 UK local authority areas. By 2013 this figure had jumped to 251. These new areas had presumably experienced food poverty before. It would clearly be wrong to conclude that nationwide poverty had increased by anywhere near the same amount.
The awareness of food banks is now greater too. This factor could have increased both demand and supply. For example, shoppers at leading supermarket chains are now able to donate food and other essentials for food banks to pass on to those in need, and many food banks have partnered with local companies.
In short, it would be a huge leap to conclude that the numbers of people in poverty have surged by 73% over the last five years on the basis of the Trussell Trust data alone.
Equally, though, it would be misleading to claim that increased use of food banks in the UK is simply due to their increased availability. It’s a myth that people can just turn up at a food bank and walk away with free food. In the case of the Trussell Trust, professionals in the local community (such as doctors, health visitors or social workers) identify people in need and issue them with a voucher for three days’ food.
What’s more, there is still plenty of stigma attached to visiting a food bank (albeit perhaps less so than in the past). Indeed, some vouchers are never actually redeemed. And there is some evidence of unmet demand: four in five users of a Trussell Trust food bank reportedly go hungry multiple times per year.
What we can say with confidence is that food banks are acting as a stop-gap where government has failed. As I first found two years ago, it is impossible not to be impressed by the Trussell Trust and the dedication of its staff and volunteers. Indeed, the Trust appears to be delivering a much better service than many government agencies, with some truly joined-up thinking. For example, the ‘More Than Food’ initiative provides access to many other forms of help, notably support for people with mental health problems.
Nonetheless, I’m sure too that the Trussell Trust would be the first to baulk at the idea that we should just pat them on the back and walk away. There is no doubt that the increased use of food banks has provided an early warning of serious problems in the timing of benefit payments. There are also widespread examples of maladministration, especially in the sanctions regime, which are contributing to poverty and hunger. It would surely be better to fix those problems at source, rather than rely on charities to pick up the pieces.