Going Without in a Time of Plenty A Study of Food Insecurity in NSW & the ACT
Sue KinG, John Bellamy, Byron KemP and JeaneTTe mollenhauer
Prepared on behalf of ANGLICARE Sydney, the Samaritans Foundation
and Anglicare NSW South, NSW West & ACT | May 2013
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
ANGLICARE SYDNEY� 1
EXECUTIVE�SUMMARY� 2
1.� INTRODUCTION� 6
1.1 POVERTY, DEPRIVATION AND CHOICE 6
1.2 ANGLICARE’S RESEARCH 7
2.�� STUDY�METHODOLOGY� 8
3.�� WHO�ARE�THE�PEOPLE�FACED��
WITH�HARD�CHOICES? 10
3.1 LOW INCOME AND
GOVERNMENT BENEFITS 10
3.2 HOUSING TENURE AND RENTAL STRESS 11
3.2.1 Tenure 11
3.2.2 Rental Stress 11
3.3 UNEMPLOYMENT 12
3.4 HOUSEHOLD TYPE AND SINGLE
PARENT HOUSEHOLDS 13
3.5 BEING INDIGENOUS 13
3.6 AGE AND GENDER 15
3.7 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS� 15
4.�� SEVERITY�AND�RECURRENCE��
OF�FOOD�INSECURITY� 16
4.1 LEVELS OF ADULT FOOD INSECURITY 16
4.2 FREQUENCY OF ADULT
FOOD INSECURITY 18
4.3 SEVERITY OF CHILD FOOD INSECURITY 19
4.4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 20
5.� �HARD�CHOICES�AND�FOOD� 22
5.1. WHAT CONSTRAINS CHOICE? 22
5.1.1 Income Inadequacy 23
5.1.2 Transport Issues 23
5.1.3 Cooking and Food Storage Access 24
5.2. WHAT CHOICES ARE BEING
MADE ABOUT FOOD? 25
5.2.1 Choosing Poorer Quality Food 25
5.2.2 Going Hungry to Protect Children 27
5.2.3 Shopping Choices 28
5.2.4 Seeking Assistance 29
5.2.5 Desperate Choices 29
5.2.6 Choosing between Food
and other Essentials 31
5.3. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS� 31
6.�� THE�IMPACT�OF�HARD�CHOICES��
OVER�FOOD� 32
6.1 STRESS, ANGER AND ANXIETY 32
6.2 DEPRESSION AND SELF ESTEEM 33
6.3 SHAME AND EMBARRASSMENT 33
6.4 COMPROMISED HEALTH 34
6.5 IMPACTS ON CHILDREN 34
6.5 DISCONNECTION AND ISOLATION 35
6.6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 35
7.�� POLICIES�THAT�COULD��
MAKE�A�DIFFERENCE� 36
7.1 FOOD SPECIFIC POLICIES 36
7.2 MONITORING FOOD INSECURITY
AT A STATE AND TERRITORY LEVEL 37
7.3 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE 37
7.4 EMERGENCY RELIEF 38
7.5 CASE MANAGEMENT 39
7.6 INADEQUACY OF NEWSTART 40
7.6 HOUSING 41
8.�� CONCLUSION� 44
ENDNOTES� 46�
BIBLIOGRAPHY� 49
© ANGLICARE Diocese of Sydney, 2013
ISBN 978-0-9805757-8-1
For�further�information�contact:�
Sue King
ANGLICARE Diocese of Sydney
Social Policy & Research Unit
PO Box 427
Parramatta NSW 2124
T +61 2 9895 8017
This research formed part of wider national research into food insecurity undertaken by the Anglicare
Australia network research in 2012. We extend our appreciation to Anglicare Australia for making this
research possible and, in particular, to Anglicare researchers across the network who understood
and worked so hard to implement the vision of a national food insecurity research project.
We wish to thank Anglicare’s Emergency Relief (ER) staff for their willingness to be part of this
research project and for their work in arranging and carrying out interviews among ER clients.
We extend our thanks to all those clients who gave so generously of their time and experience
to help the wider community gain a better understanding of what food insecurity means to those
who experience it.
This report was prepared by ANGLICARE Sydney’s Social Policy & Research Unit. We acknowledge
the valuable contributions of previous Social Policy & Research Unit staff: Sally Carter for the
development of the survey instrument, survey logistics and contribution to the national report, and
Alison Moffitt for data analysis and contribution to the national report.
We also wish to thank ANGLICARE staff who were involved in the production of this report: Janine
Jones (Public Affairs Manager) and Kim Wares (Marketing Services Coordinator).
Sue King
John Bellamy
Byron Kemp
Jeanette mollenhauer
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
2 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 3
What limits the choices for food insecure
households?
The biggest constraint on choice for food
insecure households is the inadequacy of
income. Often the only discretionary item in
the budget is food. An unexpected event or
expense can put a family into crisis. Some 95%
of the NSW/ACT sample indicated that in the
past three months they had run out of food
because of events such as an unexpectedly
large bill, medical bills, a family funeral, a vet bill,
removalist costs, car repairs or car registration.
One in four people ran out of food every week
because they couldn’t afford to buy more.
Transport was also an issue with one fifth of
respondents considering that public transport
to get to the shops to buy food was inadequate
and unreliable, and 41% said that transport was
too expensive.
Others were limited in their choice of food
because they did not have a fridge (9%), a
working stove, oven or microwave (11%) or the
power connected (7%). For almost one in four
(23%) health and mobility reduced the capacity
to cook for themselves.
What choices are being made about food?
With a limited household budget and
competing demands being made on that
budget respondents indicated a number of
enforced choices:
1. Choosing poorer quality food and food
of less variety: Respondents spoke of
the difficulty in accessing fresh food,
meat and vegetables (43%) because of
the expense and of substituting cheap
carbohydrates to bulk up meals. Others
spoke of having the same meals three or four
times a week – often using cereal, potatoes,
bread and noodles.
2. Going hungry to protect children: The data
clearly indicates strong protective mechanisms
at work, with adults endeavouring to protect
their children from the worst effects of food
insecurity. In many cases this required them to
go hungry themselves to ensure their children
get fed.
3. Planning and budgeting: Many respondents
indicated rational choices to their difficult
situation including budgeting and careful menu
and shopping planning. Several mentioned
growing their own vegetables in order to be
self sustaining. Some however were forced
to buy cheaper food which was close to its
expiry date and line up at supermarkets at
closing time in order to get specials.
4. Seeking assistance: One of the most common
choices (92%) was to seek assistance from
an Emergency Relief (ER) centre or at places
where food was given out free (29%).
5. Desperate choices: In the open ended questions
in the survey, a number of respondents showed
desperation in their choices including cutting
their meal portions and the size of their meals,
skipping meals altogether, raiding garbage
bins, shoplifting or stealing.
6. Choosing between food and other essentials:
Frequently cited as choices in the juggling
or balancing act of a limited budget were
actions such as extending the due date of
a bill, putting off paying a bill, pawning or
selling personal possessions (49%) and
buying food on credit (17%).
What are the impacts of making hard choices?
Never being sure of where to source the next meal
or not being sure if the family will be fed adequately
for the rest of the week clearly generates stress,
anger and anxiety, which is well documented
in both the literature and the responses in the
open ended section of the survey.
Lived poverty is the embodiment of hard
choices. Households living on the margins
experience significant levels of deprivation as
they choose between having sufficient food to
feed their families, securing stable and affordable
accommodation and paying utility and medical
bills. The experience can be one of isolation and
social disconnection from family and friends, and
a significant struggle to protect their children
from the worst effects of such poverty.
In 2012 the network of Anglicare agencies across
Australia undertook a national study which
examined the experiences of food insecure
households. This current report describes
the outcomes of this study for people living
in NSW and the ACT and explores in some
detail the nature of the choices confronted by
such households. It is a study which highlights
the resilience and creativity of those whose
low income constrains choice, particularly in
relation to food. It is also a study of the extreme
lengths that some people are forced to go in
order to survive on a daily basis.
Who are the people faced with these hard
choices?
The study was carried out among people who
access Anglicare’s Emergency Relief (ER)
centres across Australia. In the NSW/ACT sample,
a number of people groups were found to be at
risk of facing hard choices around food, including:
• People who have a low income: More than
61% of respondents were endeavouring to
survive on less than $1000 a fortnight
• People with a disability: 44% of households
had someone in receipt of a Disability
Support Pension
• Unemployed people: Only 20% of households
had anyone receiving wages or a salary and
31% had someone in receipt of the Newstart
Allowance
• People renting: Four out of five people in
the NSW/ACT sample were renters, divided
evenly between public and private rental
• People experiencing rental stress: Three out
of four households experienced some form
of rental stress and for 42% this was severe
– ie they were paying more than 45% of their
household income on rent
• Single parents: One in three households had
a single parent
• Indigenous people: 14% of households had
someone present who was indigenous,
compared with a national indigenous
population of only 2.2%.
how bad is food insecurity for low income
households in nSW and the aCT?
Using scales developed from an adapted
USDA Household Food Security Survey
Module (HFSSM) survey tool, some 98.8% of
the sample of 171 respondents was found to
be food insecure and 82.2% of respondents
were severely food insecure. These levels were
somewhat higher than the rest of the sample
in other parts of Australia. Households also
reported worrying about running out of food
(87%), actually running out of food (78%),
cutting the size of meals (82%) or skipping
meals entirely (68%) on a recurrent basis. In
most cases adults were hungry but did not eat
because there was not sufficient food (68%)
and 40% regularly did not eat for a whole day.
For children the findings were very concerning.
Three out of four children in the sample lived in
a food insecure household. In 14% of households
children were forced to skip meals and in a
quarter of cases children were forced to go
hungry on a regular basis. In the worst case
scenario, in 7% households, children did not eat
for a whole day on a recurrent basis. EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
4 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 5
Respondents indicated a range of emotions
including anger and frustration, depression and
low self esteem and shame and embarrassment
over their circumstances. There was clear
evidence of compromised health, lethargy
and a sense of hopelessness. The perceived
impacts on children were concerning as they
included reduced capacity to learn at school,
going to school hungry, being embarrassed
and angry in front of peers and being unwilling
to invite friends home after school. For some,
such factors led to a sense of disconnection
from both family and friends with a sense of
isolation and exclusion.
What can be done?
There are a number of possible responses
which could be made by both the NSW and
ACT Governments in relation to these issues:
1. Food specific policies: These include
the development of state-wide nutrition
strategies, support for local food initiatives
and regular food basket monitoring.
Consideration should also be given to
monitoring the prevalence of food insecurity
in the community.
2. Emergency Relief: ER is one of the most
utilised crisis management responses by
low income households. It requires more
funding to meet the current levels of need
and to widen the capacity of such services
to include wrap-around support services,
case management and capacity building.
3. Newstart Allowance: Both the NSW and
ACT Governments need to lobby the
Federal Government over the inadequacy
of Newstart which is forcing low income
and unemployed households well below the
poverty line.
4. Housing: One of the key factors which
mitigates food insecurity is stable, affordable
and sustainable accommodation. The NSW
Government needs to increase the supply
of such housing in order to reduce the
significant levels of housing insecurity and
rental stress which are currently occurring.
Conclusion
Lived poverty for the most marginalised and
socially excluded people in the community is
a daily struggle, attempting to meet the most
basic of needs of food, heating and housing
on a limited budget. This report highlights the
nature of the difficult choices faced by such
households and how they attempt to balance
competing needs. It is a struggle focused
on daily survival and not on longer term
sustainability or future well being.
eXeCuTiVe Summary
If�your�kids�have�got�food�you’re�OK.
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
6 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 7
Australia is one of the most prosperous
countries in the world and is a more prosperous
place than it was even 10 years ago. In its
rankings of the progress of nations, the United
Nations listed Australia second in the world
behind Norway on its Human Development
Index1. According to the 2012 Legatum
Prosperity Index, Australia was ranked as the
fourth most prosperous nation in the world
after Norway, Denmark and Sweden2.
Yet despite this ongoing prosperity there
is endemic social exclusion and material
deprivation for a proportion of the Australian
population, reflecting inequality of income.
The Australian Council of Social Services
(ACOSS) reported that in 2010 one in eight
adult Australians and one in six Australian
children lived below the poverty line3.
This trend has barely shifted between 2003
and 2010.
Poverty for those people living on the margins
is a struggle between having a roof over one’s
head and putting food on the table. This
struggle has become ever more apparent
to community agencies which operate
Emergency Relief (ER) and crisis intervention
services. Of particular concern are those
households with children, where cutting or
skipping meals, hunger and food insecurity are
not being adequately addressed. Workers in
the field have long maintained that low income
households struggle to access nutritionally
adequate food. In such households, where
budgets are stretched, food often comes to
be seen as a discretionary item thus forcing
people to make difficult choices. This report
focuses on the difficult choices that food
insecure households are compelled to make in
order to survive.
1.1 POvERTY, DEPRIvATION AND CHOICE
Being poor generally means having insufficient
resources, which leads to difficult life choices.
Saunders et al (2007) make a distinction
between poverty and deprivation. Poverty
is seen as inadequate income leading to an
unacceptably low standard of living. Deprivation
on the other hand is considered to be the
enforced lack of socially perceived essentials4.
In the Saunders et al study this included such
things as having access to sufficient food,
adequate housing, heating in winter and access
to medical and health services.
The current study considers the hard choices
that individuals living with deprivation have to
make; however an ‘enforced lack’ means that
people in such circumstances often have no
real choices when it comes to the essentials for
living, usually a reflection of inadequate income.
The Saunders et al research indicates that there
are high levels of deprivation among people
accessing community services. Indeed people
were going without access to doctors, dental,
disability and child care services because they
could not afford them. One in four people did
not have heating in winter, more than half could
not afford new school books and uniforms for
their children and 70% chose to forego home
insurance5.
Further evidence from the Australian Bureau of
Statistics shows that low income households
spend proportionally more on housing, energy
and tobacco than middle income households,
have similar patterns of expenditure in relation
to food, clothing and household furnishings
and spend proportionately less on alcohol,
medical care, transport and recreation6.
It has been argued in the literature that the
nature of decision making is very different when
comparing low income and higher income
households. Pennings and Garcia (2005)
contend that when people live day to day,
survival, nor wealth maximisation, is the main
goal7. This reflects the shorter time horizons
when making decisions, which in turn leads to
a reduced capacity to be innovative or seize
new opportunities when making fundamental
choices. Community workers recognise the
limited horizons of those individuals who are
trying to work out if, when and how they will
have enough food on the table to feed the
family that night or the next week. In other
words, the needs of the current self outweigh
the needs of the future self; the decisions and
choices made reflect that context.
Choices made by low income households can
either reflect:
• An emotional (and sometimes irrational)
response to their situation in an attempt
to reduce stress or
• A problem solving (rational) approach
aimed at trying to optimise the choices
available8.
The latter approach includes adopting budgeting
and shopping strategies, deferment or juggling
of bills, and seeking assistance from welfare
agencies. Sanderson et al (2012) noted that:
The primary strategy of low income households...
was to reduce spending on essentials such as
food and fuel....spending on food was usually
reduced by cutting the range and quality of
food purchased, spending on energy was
usually reduced by cutting consumption9.
Emotional responses on the other hand might
include splurging on a lottery ticket in the
hope of a big win, buying high priced designer
shoes or brand name clothing for a child to
help them fit in with their peer group and avoid
stigmatisation, or spending on costly items
such as tobacco, which individuals feel helps
them ‘escape’ from their current situation10.
1.2 ANGLICARE’S RESEARCH
The difficult choices faced by households living
on the margins were highlighted in a national
study of food insecurity carried out by a network
of Anglicare agencies across Australia in 2012.
The Anglicare network is a significant provider
of Emergency Relief. In 2012 across NSW and
the ACT more than 26,000 people accessed
these services at a total cost of $4.85m, 40% of
which was funded through the donations and
support provided by local communities.
This current report examines data gathered
from this national study for NSW and the ACT,
highlighting the severity and chronic nature
of food insecurity for households accessing
ER services. The report identifies the difficult
choices such households were making in
meeting basic household needs in the context
of the financial constraints imposed by low
income. It also posits some possible policy
solutions.
1
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
8 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 9
the participant without any assistance from the
interviewer before being sealed in an envelope.
The first stage of analysis included the
generation of food insecurity scores using the
HFSSM. Frequencies and cross-tabulations
were run for all close ended questions in the
survey. The second stage involved an analysis
of all open ended survey questions and other
comments volunteered by respondents
recorded by interviewers during the survey.
Throughout this report the terms ‘food
security’ and ‘food insecurity’ are frequently
used. The term ‘food security’ refers to access
by all people at all times to enough food for an
active, healthy life. At a minimum, food security
includes:
(1) The ready availability of nutritionally
adequate and safe foods, and
(2) An assured ability to acquire acceptable
foods in socially acceptable ways (eg,
without resorting to emergency food
supplies, scavenging, stealing, or other
coping strategies).12
Conversely, food insecurity refers to the
‘limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally
adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain
ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially
acceptable ways.’ 13
In Anglicare Australia’s national study, a total
of 590 people accessing Emergency Relief
(ER) services were interviewed over a six
week period at 63 sites in all states. This was
a purposive and targeted sample of people
accessing ER or other forms of food support.
Some 167 respondents were interviewed at ER
centres in NSW and the ACT. This sub-sample
forms the basis of the current report.
The survey period ran from late February to late
March 2012, with an extension for the Northern
Territory, where surveys were conducted a
month later due to logistical issues. As a result,
most participants were describing their food
situation from mid December 2011 through to
mid March 2012.
The central measure of food insecurity used
in this study was adapted from the USDA
Household Food Security Survey Module
(HFSSM). The HFSSM is a series of questions
on whether households have enough money
for sufficient quantity and quality of food or
meals, and whether the respondents worried
about not having enough food. Specifically, the
questions identify:
• Anxiety or perception that the household
food budget or food supply is inadequate
• Perceptions that the food eaten by adults
or children is inadequate in quality
• Reported instances of reduced food
intake, or consequences of reduced intake,
for adults
• Reported instances of reduced food intake
or its consequences for children11.
The version of the HFSSM used in the study
included questions about the three months
prior to the survey period. Respondents
answered for their household. Children’s and
adults’ experiences were measured in separate
scales, with 9 questions pertaining to adults’
experience and 7 for that of children in the
household. Due to the sensitive nature of
children going hungry, these questions were
confidentially completed by the participant
separate to the interview.
The HFSSM tool was supplemented by the
inclusion of a single food sufficiency question,
used previously in the Australian Bureau of
Statistics’ National Health Survey.
Broader issues of food insecurity were also
addressed through supplementary questions
which included:
• Reasons why participants struggled to
obtain food;
• Coping strategies used by food insecure
participants;
• The impact of food insecurity on
individuals and families;
• The experience of using emergency food
relief services;
• Demographic information, including
information on household/family, housing,
income, employment, age, Indigenous
status, postcode, country of birth, year of
arrival and language spoken at home.
• Transport;
• Regular household expenditurea;
• Strategies for managing the household
food situationb; and
• Migration stream and visa status for
participants who were born overseas.-
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee
of the Brotherhood of St Laurence. All participants
received an information sheet on the survey and
gave written consent to be interviewed. Questions
on child food insecurity were completed by
2
People�look�down�on�you...
a. Adapted from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Self Completion Survey.
b. An open ended question to complement the question on coping strategies, which was multiple choice and focussed on reactive actions such as going without food, using food relief services, avoiding bills or selling personal belongings. The open ended question provided space for participants to talk about other strategies, including proactive strategies, used to manage the household food situation.
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
10 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 11
• 19% (n=32) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in receipt of a Carers
Payment.
By comparison only 20% (n=33) of households
had at least one person aged 15+ years in
receipt of wages or a salary.
The high proportion of food insecure people on
a Disability Support Pension (44%) in NSW and
ACT is an issue for concern as is the number
of people in this study who are reliant on the
Newstart Allowance (31%). However, overall,
there was little variation regarding sources of
income between the NSW/ACT sample and
Anglicare’s national sample.
A reliance on government benefits is a
significant barrier to healthy food consumption,
particularly in regional and rural areas. A
food basket study of regional and rural
supermarkets in victoria found that in regional
and rural victoria, couple families in receipt
of unemployment benefits would have to put
aside 40% of their income for groceries to be
able to feed their families healthy food. Single
parents would have to put aside 37% of their
income to be able to feed their families healthy
food.36 Families in these situations where the
grocery budget is constrained are forced to
buy unhealthy food or to go without food.
3.2 HOUSING TENURE AND RENTAL STRESS
3.2.1 Tenure
Food insecurity has been found to be
positively associated with high rental costs and
housing instability37 and negatively associated
with home ownership.38 Within the NSW/
ACT sample the overwhelming majority of
households experiencing adult food insecurity
were living in rented accommodation (82.5%).
Of the remaining 17.5%, a small percentage
(6.6%) were living in households that were
either purchasing or owned their own home,
while just over one in ten households (11.9%)
were in insecure forms of accommodation or
living on the streets.
Among renters, just under half were living
in government housing (48%) and a slightly
smaller proportion (40%) was renting in the
private market. The remaining 12% were paying
rent to community or co-operative housing
(6%), or to other people (6%). This compares
very differently with the national profile where
the 2011 Census revealed that renters only
make up 26% of the population whereas home
buyers and people who own their own homes
constitute two thirds (66%) of all householdsc.
The proportion of people nationally who reside
in public housing is just 4%.
3.2.2 Rental Stress
Respondents in the study, who were renting,
staying with family or friends, living in a boarding
house or in emergency accommodation, were
asked to indicate the amount of money they
spent on housing. Households paying more
than 30% of their income in rent are considered
to be experiencing rental stress and households
paying more than 45% are considered to
Food insecure households face difficult choices
over food that can even compromise health. In
the literature, a number of key socio-economic
and group characteristics have been associated
with food insecurity and challenging life choices:
• Low income14
• Recipients of government benefits15
• Renting as opposed to home ownership16
• Homelessness17
• Unemployed households18
• Single parent households19 particularly single
mother households20
• Being Indigenous21
Other characteristics in the literature that have
been associated with food insecurity include:
geographical isolation,22 drug and alcohol
dependencies,23 frail age,24 special needs due
to disability or ill health,25 recent divorce or
separation,26 being in shared accommodation,
being in a single parent family or lone person
household,27 low education28 or school non-
completion,29 being in a family with three or
more children,30 households without elderly
people,31 households with non-citizen heads,32
a history of mental illness,33 and living in the
central city of a metropolitan area.34
This following section provides an overview of
characteristics commonly found among people
in the NSW/ACT sample of the national survey
who experienced food insecurity.
3.1 LOW INCOME AND GOvERNMENT BENEFITS
In the current study more than half of all
households (61%) were living on incomes of less
than $1,000 per fortnight compared with only
30% of households in the Household, Income
and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA)
national sample. More than one in five food
insecure households in NSW/ACT (22%) were
endeavouring to live on incomes of less than
$600 per fortnight.
A causal link has been identified in the
literature between food insecurity and low
income, particularly among people relying
on government benefits.35 Questions in the
current study regarding sources of household
income revealed a high level of dependency
on government benefits among food insecure
respondents in the NSW/ACT sample:
• 44% (n=74) of households had at least
one person aged 15+ years in receipt of a
Disability Support Pension
• 31% (n=51) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in receipt of the
Newstart Allowance
• 37% (n=62) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in receipt of the
Family Tax Benefit
• 4% (n=7) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in receipt of the
Aged Pension
• 33% (n=55) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in receipt of the
Parenting Payment single
• 8% (n=13) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in receipt of the
Youth Allowance
More than half of food insecure households
received less than $1,000 per fortnight
3
82.5% of food insecure households were renting
42% of food insecure experienced severe
rental stress
c. www.abs.gov.au
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
12 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 13
be experiencing severe rental stress. Rental
stress can lead to food insecurity as money
spent on food is more discretionary than that
spent on housing. The findings for NSW/ACT
are concerning. Almost 30% of food insecure
households in the study experienced rental
stress and a further 42% experienced severe
rental stress. If this is broken down between
public and private rental accommodation it is
clearly evident that the greatest rental stress
is experienced by those in the private rental
market (Figure 1). More than 95% of food
insecure households in the private rental market
were experiencing some form of rental stress.
FiGure 1: Public vs Private rental
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
3.3 UNEMPLOYMENT
Participants in the Anglicare Australia study
were also asked to indicate the employment
status of the members of their household. In
food insecure households in NSW/ACT:
• 9% (n=15) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in full time work
• 8% (n=14) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in part time work
• 10% (n=16) of households had at least one
person aged 15+ years in casual work
• 31% (n=52) had at least one person aged 15+
years looking for work
• 43% (n=71) had at least one person aged
15+ years unable to work
• 27% (n=44) had at least one person aged
15+ years doing home duties (looking after
children or housekeeping)
• 24% (n=39) had at least one person aged
15+ years studying
• 7% (n=11) had at least one person aged 15+
years who was retired.
The number of food insecure households who
have no member in any form of employment,
is not a surprising finding given that a number
of studies indicate a strong correlation
between food insecurity or food insufficiency
and employment status. Temple39 found that
employment was linked to food sufficiency
whilst Foley et al40 found that unemployment
appeared to increase the likelihood of
experiencing food insufficiency. However it
should be noted that this employment profile
is very different to what could be considered
a nationally representative sample, such as the
profile provided by the Household, Income and
Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey.
In more than 60% of the HILDA national sample
of households at least one person is employed
full time compared with only 9% of the NSW/
ACT sample in the Anglicare Australia study.
While one third of households nationally have
at least one person in the household involved in
part time work, the percentage in the NSW/ACT
sample is only 8%. While only 6% of members in
households nationally are seeking work, 31% of
the NSW/ACT sample in the Anglicare Australia
study is actively looking for employment.
3.4 HOUSEHOLD TYPE AND SINGLE PARENT HOUSEHOLDS
Single parents with children were the largest
household type in the study, constituting one
in three (33%) of all household types, followed
closely by sole person households at 30%
(Figure 2).
FiGure 2: household Type
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
Comparison with the HILDA data provides a
useful benchmark of various household types
nationally. It is evident that single parent
households in Anglicare’s study (33%) are
significantly over-represented when compared
with a national representative sample of 6.6%.
The literature indicates that being a single
parent41 - particularly a single mother42 - appears
to increase the likelihood of experiencing
food insecurity. Stevens (2010)43 found that
factors for single mothers that contributed
to their food insecurity included housing
instability, income, affordable food sources and
transportation. All the mothers in the Stevens
study had developed coping strategies that
were primarily aimed at making sure their
children were fed. Furthermore, all mothers
were aware of the need to eat healthy food,
but were constrained by their tight budgets.
Some women had even less money to feed
themselves and their children because they
were also expected to provide for other family
members or partners who were also poor.
3.5 BEING INDIGENOUSThere was a significant over representation
of Indigenous people among food insecure
households in the Anglicare Australia study –
with 14% identifying as Indigenous compared
with 2.2% nationally.44
The link between being Indigenous and being
food insecure is not surprising. In a national
study in 2004-5, five times more Indigenous
0
20
40
60
80
100
Severe rental stress - 45% or more of income on rent
Rental Stress - between 30%-45% of income on rent
No rental stress - Up to 30% income on rent
Private rentalPublic rental
Severe rental stress –45% or more
of income on rent
Rental Stress – between 30%-45%
of income on rent
No rental stress – Up to 30% of income
on rent
Key:
Other
Adults not married or defacto,
living together
Couple withchildren
Couple withoutchildren Single
Parent
Live Alone
33%
6%7%
8%
17%
30%
OtherAdults not married or defacto, living together
Couple with children Couple without childrenSingle Parent
Live Alone
33%
6%7%
8%
17%
30%
14% of food insecure households in the nsw/act saMple were indigenous
3. Who are The PeoPle FaCed WiTh hard ChoiCeS?
%
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
14 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 15
Australians reported they had run out of food
in the last 12 months compared with the general
population45 (24% of Indigenous Australians
compared with 5% of non-Indigenous
Australians), including 4 times as many who
went without food when they couldn’t afford
more. This food insufficiency was most prevalent
in the Northern Territory (with 45% running out
of food), followed by South Australia (29%)
and Western Australia (26%). Queensland and
victoria were 21%; Tasmania and ACT together
were 19% and NSW 18%. Remote areas had a
higher prevalence of food insufficiency (36%)
than non-remote areas (20%). Aboriginality
as a risk factor for food insecurity is echoed in
other studies.46
3.6 AGE AND GENDER
Sixty four percent of food insecure households
in the NSW/ACT sample were represented in
the survey by women. The age of respondents
was relatively young with 79% of food insecure
respondents being 49 years of age or younger
(Table 1).
TaBle 1: aGe GrouPinGS oF Food
inSeCure reSPondenTS
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
numBer PerCenTaGe
LESS THAN 20 YRS 2 1.2%
20-29 YRS 27 16.4%
30-39 YRS 38 23.0%
40-49 YRS 64 38.8%
50-59 YRS 24 14.5%
60-69 YRS 8 4.8%
70-79 YRS 0 .0%
80+ YRS 2 1.2%
TOTAL 165 100.0%
3.7 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The NSW/ACT sample in the Anglicare Australia
study indicates food insecure households have
demographic characteristics that are reflected
in other studies. A critical factor is having
a low income – and in this sample of food
insecure households more than two thirds of
respondents live in households with an income
of less than $1,000 per fortnight. This reflects
the welfare dependency of the sample and the
inadequacy of some Government payments
such as the Newstart Allowance. Most food
insecure households are renting and those in
the private rental market are very vulnerable
to rental stress. Other characteristics which are
more likely among food insecure households
include being homeless, being a sole parent or
being Indigenous.
With�kids�it’s�hard�to�explain�to�them:�we’ve�run�out.�It�makes�me�want�to�
burst�into�tears.�It’s�very�hard.
3. Who are The PeoPle FaCed WiTh hard ChoiCeS?
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
16 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 17
Community agencies have spent a number of
years observing the challenges faced by people
who are food insecure. This chapter outlines
the levels of food insecurity found among the
NSW/ACT sample for both adults and children.
Subsequent chapters then explore the choices
which people are forced to make when they
find themselves food insecure.
4.1 LEvELS OF ADULT FOOD INSECURITYIn order to measure the breadth and depth of
food insecurity experienced by the respondents
and their households, a number of scales were
developed using questions from the HFSSM.
Separate scales were developed for adults and
children to measure:
• The severity of food insecurity (based on
the number of different manifestations of
food insecurity that were experienced) and
• The frequency of food insecurity (based
on how often these experiences were
occurring).
Using the core HFSSM measure outlined in
the Methodology section of this report, the
severity of a household’s food insecurity can
be categorised as:
• Food secured
• Food insecure
• Severely food insecure.
The severity of food insecurity was ascertained
by counting the number of HFSSM questions
that received a positive response (Table 2).
Separate scales were derived for adults and
children in the participating households.
TaBle 2: deTermininG SeVeriTy
leVelS oF Food inSeCuriTy
SeVeriTy leVel
adulT meaSure
Child meaSure
FOOD SECURE
Positive responses to 0-1 adult questions
Positive responses to 0-1 child questions
FOOD INSECURE
Positive responses to 2-5 adult questions
Positive responses to 2-4 child questions
SEVERELY FOOD INSECURE
Positive responses to 6 or more adult questions
Positive responses to 5 or more child questions
Households falling into the more severe
categories of food insecurity not only answer
positively to more questions, they tend also
to give positive answers to the questions
regarding more intense or severe experiences
of food insecurity.47
The nine questions which make up the Adult
FSSM scale and the resulting frequencies
among respondents from NSW/ACT are
provided in Table 3.
TaBle 3: reSPonSeS To The adulT
hFSSm QueSTionS
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
in The PreViouS 3 monThS...
onCe or
more oFTen
neVer ToTal
1. We worried whether our food would run out before we got money to buy more
95% 5% 100%
2. The food we bought just didn't last and we didn't have money to buy more
95% 5% 100%
3. We couldn't afford to eat the variety of food we should have
94% 6% 100%
4 How often did you (or other adults) cut the size of your meals?
89% 11% 100%
5. How often did you (or other adults) skip meals?
82% 18% 100%
6. How often did you (or other adults) eat less than you felt you should?
89% 11% 100%
7. How often were you (or other adults) hungry but didn't eat?
77% 23% 100%
8. How often did you (or other adults) not eat for a whole day?
55% 45% 100%
9. Have you (or other adults) lost weight because you didn’t have enough money for food?
56%* 44%** 100%
* = ‘Yes’ ** = ‘No’
The food insecurity severity scale for adults
was calculated from the responses of the 169
respondents who completed the adult food
security questionse. In NSW/ACT 98.8% of
respondents were food insecure and 82.2%
were severely food insecure (See Figure 3).
FiGure 3: SeVeriTy oF Food inSeCuriTy
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
4
0
20
40
60
80
100
Severely Food Insecure
Food Insecure
Food Secure
Frequency - At Least Once
Severely Food Insecure
Food Insecure
Food Secure
Key:
98.8% of nsw/act respondents were
food insecure
We�buy�a�bag�of�potatoes�to�live�on�until�there’s�
money�for�food
d. The “food secure” category includes people who are “marginally food secure”, i.e. people who are generally food secure but have experienced one aspect of food insecurity in the previous 3 months. It should be noted that people who are marginally food secure often experience a poor quality of life which is similar to food insecure households. Cf Coleman –Jensen (2010). e. Two respondents did not complete a sufficient number of adult questions to receive a food insecurity severity score.
%
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
18 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 19
In particular, NSW/ACT respondents were
significantly more likely to have experienced
the following once or more often in the last
three months:
1. Cutting the size of meals (89% for NSW/ACT
compared with 80% for the rest of Australia
excluding NSW/ACT).
2. Skipping meals (82% for NSW/ACT
compared with 74% for the rest of Australia,
excluding NSW/ACT).
In addition, more food insecure people lost
weight in the last three months as a result of food
insecurity in NSW/ACT (56%) when compared
with the rest of Australia sample (46%).
4.2 FREQUENCY OF ADULT FOOD INSECURITY
Within the survey both the HFSSM tool and
the National Health Survey question measured
how frequently respondents experienced
the phenomenon. The positive responses to
the HFSSM discussed above can be further
analysed by identifying situations where the
phenomenon in question occurred:
• Only in one or two weeks during the 3
month period;
• Some weeks but not every week during the
3 month period; or
• Almost every week during the 3 month period.
By combining these responses with the severity
levels identified above, a second scale was
developed to show the frequency of food
insecurity among respondents.
Eight of the adult HFSSM questions include data
on frequencyf. For seven of these questions,
between a third and a half of NSW/ACT
respondents were experiencing these aspects
of food insecurity chronically i.e. almost every
week during the previous 3 months (Table 4).
Adding the first and second columns together in
Table 4 shows those respondents who suffered
recurrent food insecurity, at least some weeks
during the survey period. Recurrent food
insecurity is shown by:
• 87% of respondents who worried that food
would run out and there would not be
sufficient money to buy more
• More than three quarters of households
(78%) that ran out of food and were not
able to buy more
• Four out of five households (81%) that
experienced a lack of variety of food
• Adults in 82% of households who were
cutting the size of meals and adults in 68%
of households who were skipping meals
• 79% of respondents who indicated that
adults in their household were eating less
than they felt they should
• 68% of households where adults were
going hungry but didn’t eat
• More than one third of households (40%)
where adults regularly did not eat for a
whole day.
4.3 SEvERITY OF CHILD FOOD INSECURITY
Of the 171 respondents to the adult survey, 99
had children present in their household at least
part of the time. This represented 238 children,
195 of whom were living in the respondents’
homes permanently or most of the time and 43
of whom were living with respondents some of
the time (e.g. in shared custody).
The severity and frequency of food insecurity
among these children under 18 years of age
has been calculated using seven child specific
questions in the HFSSM. These questions were
not limited to parents or full time guardians;
they were available to all respondents who
lived in a household with children, including
respondents who only had children living in
their household for less than half the time.
Answers to these questions were recorded in
confidence by the respondent and were not
seen by the interviewer. There were a total of 82
households who responded to the child specific
FSSM questions, representing a response rate
of 83% of households with children.
Analysis of the child specific FSSM questions
revealed that more than three quarters of
the children in the sample (78%) were food
insecure and more than one third (35%) were
severely food insecure. In terms of the number
of children in the sample:
• 48 children (22%) were food secure
• 92 children (43%) were food insecure
• 74 children (35%) were severely food insecure.
Table 5 illustrates these findings.
TaBle 4: reSPonSeS To The adulT hFSSm QueSTionS
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
almoST eVery WeeK
Some WeeKS BuT noT
eVery WeeK
only 1 or 2 WeeKS
neVer ToTal
1. We worried whether our food would run out before we got money to buy more
49.4% 37.5% 8.3% 4.8% 100.0%
2. The food we bought just didn't last and we didn't have money to buy more
37.5% 40.5% 17.3% 4.8% 100.0%
3. We couldn't afford to eat the variety of food we should have
50.9% 30.2% 12.4% 6.5% 100.0%
4 How often did you (or other adults) cut the size of your meals?
52.4% 29.2% 7.1% 11.3% 100.0%
5. How often did you (or other adults) skip meals?
45.0% 23.1% 14.2% 17.8% 100.0%
6. How often did you (or other adults) eat less than you felt you should?
49.1% 30.2% 9.5% 11.2% 100.0%
7. How often were you (or other adults) hungry but didn't eat?
35.1% 33.3% 8.9% 22.6% 100.0%
8. How often did you (or other adults) not eat for a whole day?
21.4% 19.0% 14.9% 44.6% 100.0%
f. “Have you lost weight because you didn’t have enough money for food” was a dichotomous question. No frequency information was collected from this variable.
4. SeVeriTy and reCurrenCe oF Food inSeCuriTy
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
20 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 21
TaBle 5: adulT reSPonSeS To The Child hFSSm QueSTionS
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
almoST eVery WeeK
Some WeeKS BuT noT
eVery WeeK
only 1 or 2
WeeKSneVer ToTal
1. We relied on a few kinds of low cost food to feed the children because we were running out of money to buy food
35.6% 33.3% 14.4% 16.7% 100.0%
2. We couldn't afford to feed the children the variety of food they should have
22.2% 37.8% 18.9% 21.1% 100.0%
3. The children were not eating enough because we just couldn't afford enough food
11.1% 20.0% 12.2% 56.7% 100.0%
4. How often did you cut the size of the children's meals?
13.8% 16.1% 10.3% 59.8% 100.0%
5. How often were the children hungry but you couldn't afford more food?
12.6% 11.5% 10.3% 65.5% 100.0%
6. How often did the children skip a meal?
5.7% 8.0% 5.7% 80.5% 100.0%
7. Did your children not eat for a whole day? How often did this happen?
4.5% 2.3% 2.3% 90.9% 100.0%
Table 5 shows that some children experienced
aspects of food insecurity on a recurrent basis
(ie ‘weekly’ or ‘some weeks’ over a three month
period). Recurrent food insecurity among
children was shown by:
• 69% of households with children reported
feeding their children low cost food to make
their budget go further
• 60% of households with children reported
that their children did not have a sufficient
variety of food. Parents choose instead to
bulk up the family meals by supplementing
with cheaper carbohydrates such as pasta,
rice and potatoes rather than fresh meat,
fruit and vegetables
• Almost one third of households with children
(31%) reported their children not eating
enough and 30% experiencing reduced
meal portions because there wasn’t enough
food in the household
• Almost one in four households with children
(24%) have children who were often
going hungry.
• In the worst case scenario, children were
forced to skip meals in 14% of households
and in 7% of households children often
went whole days without food.
4.4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Using scales developed from the adapted
HFSSM survey tool for the 171 NSW/ACT
respondents, 98.8% of the sample was food
insecure and 82.2% of respondents were
severely food insecure. These levels were
significantly higher than for the rest of the
Anglicare Australia sample. Nor was this a one
off occurrence. At least some weeks during the
survey period households reported worrying
about running out of food (87%); actually
running out of food (78%); cutting the size of
meals (82%) or skipping meals entirely (68%).
In some cases (68%) adults were hungry but
did not eat because there was insufficient food
and 40% regularly did not eat for a whole day.
For children the findings were very concerning.
Three out of four children lived in a food
insecure household. In 14% of households
children were forced to skip meals and in more
than one quarter of cases (25%) children were
forced to go hungry on a recurrent basis. In
the worst case scenario, in 7% households,
children did not eat for a whole day at least
during some weeks.
I�just�go�without.�As�long�as�the�kids�have�got�theirs,�that’s�the�main�thing.
4. SeVeriTy and reCurrenCe oF Food inSeCuriTy
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
22 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 23
5.1. WHAT CONSTRAINS CHOICE?
Poverty studies have shown that food is often
the only discretionary item in the budget of
low-income households and therefore prone
to erosion by more pressing expenses.48 This
situation can occur despite careful planning.
Lived poverty is a precarious existence where
one small event can place a household into
crisis. Emergency relief services are designed
to function as a short-term support in a time
of such crisis. Generally this is understood as
supporting people when they experience a
major or unforeseen change in circumstances,
such as a house fire, death in the family, or
unexpected job loss. But, as noted by ACOSS,
For many groups of recipients social security
payments are inadequate to meet basic living
costs. In this context, many individuals and
families are only just scraping by and there is no
slack for the unexpected. In these circumstances
any event which results in additional financial
stress is unlikely to be absorbed - for example,
the washing machine breaking down; new
school uniforms; health care costs or quarterly
bills such as heating.49
The Anglicare survey asked whether
respondents had run out of food due to an
unexpected expense or event in the previous
three months. Some 95% (n=158) of food
insecure adults in the NSW/ACT sample
indicated that this had happened to them. This
percentage was significantly higher than for
respondents from the rest of Australia (86%).
These unexpected expenses or events included
medical expenses, the beginning of the school
year, funerals, a car or fridge breaking down,
school excursions and school camps, an
unexpectedly high electricity bill or friends
coming to stay. Escalating bills was a common
theme among respondents. Relationship break
down, the cost of moving house, looking after a
sick parent, a blocked toilet and needing to buy
a birthday gift were all raised as issues which
were unexpected and which catapulted the
family into needing assistance. Some cited vet
and legal bills:
Took dog to the vet for yearly needles, vet
found bladder stones. Operation was going to
cost $800. Can’t let animal die! Rang animal
welfare... Vets won’t allow us to pay off bills.
Animal welfare did operation for $600 and
allowed [me] to pay it off. But this reduced
the money for food. Added massive pressure,
the dog is now on prescription only food,
now costing $105 per month...Have no choice
apart from killing the dog. It has made things
really tough.
Because of family law court, I ended up with
a huge legal bill, still trying to pay it off.
These events are significant because low
income households do not have resources to
draw upon. Savings are low or non-existent
and households tend to live from week to week
trying to make ends meet.
The Anglicare study and other literature
indicate there are a number of factors which
force people to make hard choices in relation to
food. Three of the most common are a lack of
income, the cost of transport and the cooking
and storage of food.
5.1.1 Income Inadequacy
As discussed previously, low income limits
choice and forces people into making difficult
choices. In the Anglicare Australia study,
clients from NSW/ACT experienced significant
levels of food insufficiency which were largely
due to economic circumstances and income
inadequacy. Indeed 95% of all food insecure
respondents indicated that they had run
out of food in the last 12 months because
they could not afford to buy more. This was
significantly more than the average across
the whole national sample (88%). For one in
four respondents (24.8%) this was a weekly
occurrence (Table 6).
TaBle 6: hoW oFTen did you run ouT oF
Food and Couldn’T aFFord To Buy more?
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
numBer PerCenT
ONCE A WEEk OR MORE
39 24.8%
ONCE EVERY TWO WEEkS
39 24.8%
ONCE A MONTH 41 26.1%
LESS THAN ONCE A MONTH
38 24.2%
TOTAL 157 100.0%
Respondents were also asked to consider the
adequacy of their income. More than half (61%)
of all food insecure respondents considered
that their household did not have enough to
get by on. Only 4% considered that there was
sufficient income to get by on and provide a
few extras.
In subsequent questions it was also evident
that a lack of income was a key element in
accessing food. In fact 90% of all food insecure
adults indicated that they did not have enough
money to buy the food they needed and for
just over half (55%) this was a problem because
there was no one in the household with whom
they could share costs
In the Anglicare survey respondents were asked
to consider the reason for their household’s
food insecurity. The issues of major concern
were the price of food and the lack of income.
This was compromised by costs for rent,
electricity and bills in general and the lack of
money to make ends meet.
5.1.2 Transport Issues
In order to ascertain if physical access to food
was an issue for them, respondents in the
Anglicare study were asked about the time it
takes them to get to the shops, their chief mode
of transport and other questions in relation to
access.
The survey found that some 44% of food
insecure respondents in NSW/ACT lived within
a short distance of the place they went to
buy groceries, travelling for up to 10 minutes
to get to the local shops. However 12% of
respondents (n=20) travelled for over half an
hour to an hour to get to the shops, and a small
percentage (4%, n=7) travelled for at least an
hour or more to get to the shops. Most of these
5
95% had run out of food because of an unexpected
expense or event.
90% did not have enough Money to buy the food
they needed
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
24 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 25
respondents felt that not having access to a car
had contributed to their food insecurity.
Respondents were also asked which mode of
transport they generally used to access the local
shops. Just under half (46%) drove their own
car and 44% walked at least some of the way
to get to the shops. Almost one in four (23%)
relied on public transport. A small proportion
of clients used other transport options instead
of, or in addition to, public transport or walking.
These included using a bicycle (1%), getting
a lift from a family member or friend (3%),
borrowing someone’s car (1%) or catching a
taxi (2%).
A subsequent question found that one in three
respondents (34%) indicated that they had
difficulty accessing shops because of health
and mobility problems.
Questions were also asked in relation to
transport access; the findings indicate that
there are also physical access issues:
• One in five respondents (22%) considered
that public transport was inadequate and
unreliable
• More than one third (37%) identified that
not having access to a car for shopping
worsened their food situation
• 41% felt that transport was too expensive.
The literature is divided regarding the impact
that distance to shops and transport availability
has on a household’s food security. Undoubtedly
however location can play a part in exacerbating
food insecurity and lead to difficult choices in
order to be able to cope. Fewer supermarkets
spaced further apart in low income areas is
a particular problem for car-less, low income
households in areas with poor local public
transport. For instance, whilst a food supply outlet
may be within reasonable driving distance, there
is only so much that a single mother with small
children and without a car can carry home on the
bus. This complication can also prevent people
without cars from buying food in bulk, as the
volume can make the shopping bag too heavy to
carry a distance. Furthermore, although cheaper
per unit, the overall price can be significant and
other things may have to be foregone.
If I have a seizure, I can’t go out. It’s hard to
take all the shopping on your own.
Have to buy small amounts due to living situation, can’t bulk shop.
Ride bike everywhere - difficult to carry groceries.
Other Australian studies have identified lack of
access to food outlets in disadvantaged areas.
In its 2005 food security report, the City of Port
Philip in victoria observed that the lack of low
cost food outlets located within easy walking
or close to public transport was an issue for
many vulnerable and low income residents.50
O’Dwyer and Covney’s 2006 research identified
the presence of food ‘deserts’ in Adelaide,
where there was poor access to supermarkets
due to distance (less supermarkets were found
in the lower socioeconomic suburbs) and low
car ownership.51
5.1.3 Cooking and Food Storage Access
Another issue which constrains choice is access
to appropriate cooking and food preparation
facilities. Some low cost accommodation,
especially hostels and boarding houses, may
not provide all the facilities necessary for
cooking and have limited secure storage for
food. Limited fridge and freezer space can also
restrict the amount of cheaper bulk items that
can be bought. Furthermore, when a fridge
breaks down, food will not only be lost but there
may not be enough cash on hand to replace
this essential item. Eating low-cost, healthy
meals is the most difficult for homeless people
without any space in which to cook or store
food. Housing overcrowding and inadequate
cooking facilities have also been cited as
factors contributing to food insecurity in some
Indigenous communities.52
In the Anglicare Australia study these issues were
evident. Almost one in ten food insecure clients
in the NSW/ACT sample did not have a fridge
(9%), 11% did not have a working stove, oven
or microwave and 7% did not have the power
connected. For almost one in four respondents
(23%) health and mobility problems reduced
their capacity to be able to cook for themselves:
Being a diabetic and heart condition have to buy more expensive food. Some nights can’t cook due to pain.
Disease in spine and leg makes it hard to stand
- recent fall at a bus stand.
5.2. WHAT CHOICES ARE BEING MADE ABOUT FOOD?
People living on the margins with significant
levels of food insecurity are forced to make
difficult choices about food. This can range
from choosing poorer quality food, protecting
children by going hungry and accessing
emergency food relief outlets, to changed
cooking and shopping strategies. In the most
extreme cases, people go hungry, skip meals or
obtain food in socially unacceptable ways such
as stealing.
5.2.1 Choosing Poorer Quality Food
Food insecurity is not just about accessing
sufficient food but also being able to access
food of an appropriate quality. More than half
of the survey respondents (58%) indicated
that on a weekly basis they had not been able
to eat the kinds of food they wanted to, and
for a further 21% this occurred at least once
a fortnight (Table 7).
TaBle 7: hoW oFTen Could you noT eaT
The KindS oF Food you WanTed To?
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
numBer PerCenT
ONCE A WEEk OR MORE
79 58.1%
ONCE EVERY TWO WEEkS
28 20.6%
ONCE A MONTH 19 14.0%
LESS THAN ONCE A MONTH
10 7.4%
TOTAL 136 100.0%
In subsequent questions a third of NSW/ACT
respondents indicated that it was difficult to
access food of the right quality (31%) and for
43% they could not get a variety of foods
31% could not access quality food, 43% could not get easy
access to fresh food.
one in ten did not have a fridge or working stove
5. hard ChoiCeS and Food
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
26 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 27
such as meat, vegetables, fruit, dairy products
and bread. Respondents commented on the
issues around having the same sort of meals
every week:
We have three meals but we have them twice
a week. The kids will say “not again!” and I’ll have
to explain to them that things are expensive
now. I had my business before. We always had
a variety of foods. Our shopping bill used to be
$300 per week. You’ve got to find cheap food
now, it’s the same food you’ve got to eat [over
and over again].
various overseas studies indicate that low-
income families who have a less nutritious
diet are aware that they are not eating well,
however they cannot afford more healthy
food, such as fresh fruit and vegetables53.
This was also found in the Anglicare Australia
study where 68% of respondents felt they
should eat more fresh foods but that these
were too expensive. For 17% there was an
acknowledgement that they needed to know
more about making healthier meals.
Respondents were also asked about special
dietary needs and how these were met. Over one
third (40%) indicated that they needed special
foods but could not purchase them because of
the expense. Some clients commented:
I’m a diabetic and supposed to eat 6 meals a
day with carbs and most nights I put meat and
chips on the table ‘cause that’s all I can afford.
Diabetic... Supposed to eat certain yoghurt but
not cheap.
For a small number (10%), reflecting the lack of
ethnic diversity in the client profile, there was
difficulty in accessing culturally appropriate
food. As one respondent commented:
I can’t buy cultural foods with food vouchers.
In the open ended questions there were
concerns around the price of meat, fresh fruit
and vegetables and the need to substitute with
cheap filling food, often not nutritious and high
in carbohydrates. There was also concern about
the sameness of the food which households
had to eat on a regular basis, as evidenced by
the following comments:.
I can eat porridge 24 hours a day if I have to.
A lot of people around here live on cereal
and milk...
My kids love corn, so sometimes I’ve just given
them that for dinner. Cereal-sometimes that
has become dinner for a night...until pay day.
We buy a bag of potatoes to live on until there’s
money for food
Choosing low cost, poorer quality and high
carbohydrate food to bulk out family meals
is well recognised in the literature as a coping
strategy for families on low incomes. A study
in New Zealand by Wang et al53 found the
‘healthy’ foods were always more expensive
than the ‘regular’ alternatives in both urban
and rural outlets. Wang et al argue that the
high cost of healthy alternatives, particularly of
less processed foods and foods that are low in
sugar, are more likely to prevent people from
adopting healthier diets and preventing early
onset diabetes.
It should be noted that these choices are often
influenced by the timing of the receipt of income.
When funds are received households tend to
buy more variety and more nutritious foods but
as the period lengthens to receipt of the next
instalment of income less nutritious foods are
substituted and food supplies are stretched.
US research suggests that changes in financial
resources throughout the month, either because
of the timing of income or assistance, can result
in the change in type and quantity of food
available.55 This is consistent with comments
received as part of the Anglicare research:
Just rationing...knowing that I’ve got 4 days
before I get paid and spreading what food I have
over the days I have to wait ( like plain pasta) just
so I have food in my stomach every day.
My main strategy is to do my shopping on the
Monday and Tuesday straight after my pay...
that way if we run out I know there’s food in the
cupboard...(it’s harder when daughter comes
for access visits).
5.2.2 Going Hungry to Protect Children
Perhaps the hardest choice is that faced by
parents who desperately try and protect their
children from the worst forms of food insecurity
by going without food themselves so that their
children can eat. This trend has been recognised
in international studies:
As the situation becomes more severe, the
food intake of adults is reduced and adults
experience hunger, but they spare the children
this experience. In [the most severe stage],
children also suffer reduced food intake and
hunger and adults’ reductions in food intake
are more dramatic.56
This trend was also seen within the NSW/ACT
sample of the national study. The majority of
respondents living with children (63.2%) were
living in households where children fell into
a less severe food insecurity category than
the adults. Just over one third (34.4%) of
respondents were living in households where
children and adults fell into the same food
insecurity severity category (Table 8).
adulTS: Food inSeCuriTy SeVeriTy
FOOD SECURE
FOOD INSECURE
SEVERELY FOOD
INSECURETOTAL
Ch
ild
re
n:
Fo
od
in
Se
Cu
riT
y S
eV
er
iTy
FOOD SECURE 0.0% 6.9% 16.1% 23.0%
FOOD INSECURE 0.0% 8.0% 40.2% 48.3%
SEVERELY FOOD INSECURE
0.0% 2.3% 26.4% 28.7%
TOTAL 0.0% 17.2% 82.8% 100.0%
TaBle 8: SeVeriTy oF adulT and Child Food inSeCuriTy, houSeholdS WiTh Children
nSW/aCT Food insecure households
Households where child
food insecurity is less severe
than adult food insecurity
Households where child food
insecurity and adult food
insecurity are equally severe
Households where child
food insecurity is more
severe than adult food
insecurity
Key:
adults go hungry to protect their children
5. hard ChoiCeS and Food
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
28 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 29
In the open ended questions parents also
indicated the choices they made when
endeavouring to protect their children from the
worst effects of not having enough food:
I just go without. As long as the kids have
got theirs, that’s the main thing.
Look after kids as number one priority.
Always try to feed my daughter first. Have to
make do with what you’ve got.
Don’t worry me so much, it’s only making sure
that I have enough for my kids, my own - plus
the street kids.
If your kids have got food you’re OK.
The three adults might have less food on their
plates so we always make sure the little one gets
the nutrition she needs cause she’s growing.
5.2.3 Shopping Choices
In the open ended questions participants
indicated that they chose to prepare well for
their shopping trips by planning before they
set out, by scouring catalogues, noting items
on sale and writing a shopping list and not
deviating from it. Some people sourced local
markets and the larger chain supermarkets for
food and others spoke of buying hampers on
a lay-by system. The most common technique
cited was simply hunting for bargains, which
was described as ‘buying specials’, ‘discount
grocery shopping’, or variations on these
comments. In so doing, the purchase of
‘generic’, ‘homebrand’ or just ‘cheaper’ food
items was suggested. Additionally, buying in
bulk when the price of a particular item was
reduced, and therefore creating a stockpile
for future consumption, was recommended
although – for some- this was limited if they
had to carry it home either by walking or using
public transport.
When things are cheap (on special) then I
buy for two weeks. If it’s too expensive I won’t
buy. In Liverpool, I only buy on sale... I go to
Coles when they mark down the price reduction.
I ask the shop workers when the chicken will be
reduced... after 6 hours I come back.
Write a list of definite needs for when I go to
shops, trying to allow for a few extra items of
known need if they are on special, and sticking
to list at the shops.
Some made mention of specific items to seek
out, such as powdered milk as a cheaper and
longer lasting alternative to fresh milk. Others
described buying whatever was either past its
‘best before’ date or close to its ‘use by date’,
because such goods are sold off cheaply to clear
the shelves. The latter practice, buying items
close to the ‘use by’ date, has the potential to
pose a threat to physical health and well-being
if these items are stored and consumed after
this date. Respondents commented:
We cannot always get fresh food and have
to buy food that’s expired.
Sometimes you get sick if the sale food is no
good but you ’learn your stomach’ to cope.
Discovered that low fat [milk] lasts way beyond
its use by date... It’s full cream milk that goes
off. I buy low fat milk up to 15 days past its use
by date. It can last up to 21 days.
Rather than shop some people opted to try
and grow their own:
...Growing a tomato plant that self seeded.
Started training it with pickets I found lying
around. Tomatoes are growing a bloody beauty
- giving it away to neighbours. It’s a kilo every
couple of days.
My pet aim is to grow native food and fruit/
vegetables in a native corridor so homeless
people can access it directly. Local councils
should invest in community food cultivation in
reserves.
5.2.4 Seeking Assistance
The literature indicates that a common choice
for many is to seek assistance from ER outlets,
community kitchens, family and friends. The
Anglicare research supports this finding. In the
last three months, 92% of households in the
NSW/ACT sample had asked for food from an
Emergency Relief (ER) centre and 29% indicated
they had eaten somewhere that gave out free.
Nor was this assistance limited to community
agencies. A number of people (50%) had
chosen to seek help from family and 41% had
also sought the assistance of neighbours and
friends. Participants reported that parents and
siblings had come to their assistance either
through monetary assistance or provision of
meals to share.
5.2.5 Desperate Choices
One of the most common coping strategies
was simply going without food – 69% of all food
insecure adults indicated that this had occurred
in the last three months. Portion control, was
sometimes used in varying degrees of severity.
Some comments received were as follows:
Make meals that little bit smaller so I am not
using as much.
Make food to last 2 or 3 days.
I drink coffee to reduce my appetite.
Sleep longer to skip breakfast.
Some families commented that when food ran
really short they would send their children to
stay with friends or relatives:
We get rid of the kids... ask my son to go
to a mate’s place for a weekend to eat there.
He understands the situation. He will ask and
I’ll say can you nick off and come back after the
weekend?... the 6 year old doesn’t understand
but she’ll go and stay with my mum for a few
days and me and my hubby will stay home and
eat toast and sandwiches. We’ve got loads of
bread in the freezer. We’ve started having to do
this since the last year.
Other more desperate strategies involved
scavenger schemes such as collection and
sale of bottles and cans for recycling used
to bolster the household income. Some
turned to busking, which was described by
one participant as being ‘one step up from
begging’. A few mentioned going through bins
and stealing food:
Start[ed] stealing to survive.
I feel like running into Woollies, grabbing a
trolley and running out. I haven’t done it but
92% of food insecure households sought help
froM eMergency relief
5. hard ChoiCeS and Food
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
30 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 31
I don’t want to be locked away from the kids.
Then the kids will struggle more.
It can make you feel desperate so you do
desperate things... I know people who go out
and steal...
Once my landlord killed a sheep for us...
Everything is on the verge of being disconnected.
I have a padlock on the gate. If they can’t get
in, they can’t do reads. I’ve got disconnection
notices on everything. It’s like living in a jail.
Have had to steal food (e.g. a pack of sausages)....
Not proud of it. Ex wife is also stealing food.
She has lost $200 payment for the 17 year
old...hunger forces you to do things you don’t
normally do... fear of getting caught.
I pick up food off the street that’s discarded but
is still OK.
At times raided garbage bins. ALDI throw out
heaps of stuff. Things are only 1 day old. I used
to go out and raid and got good stuff...
For some, one of the most important bills was
that of electricity and there was a decided
preference for using as little as possible. This
rationing included not heating in winter but
rugging up in warm clothes and retreating to
bed early at night to stay warm.
5.2.6 Choosing between Food and other Essentials
People living the precarious existence of
poverty need to juggle their budgets and
make decisions around which bills to pay and
which to extend. In the Anglicare study, two
out of every three respondents in the NSW/
ACT sample identified extending the due date
of paying a bill (65%) and putting off paying
a bill (67%). Some households bought food on
credit (17%) and almost half (49%) had pawned
or sold personal possessions in order to get
money for food:
...Took out a loan from Cash Converters.
Live on credit card, pay off at tax time because
partner’s tax pay off credit card. Living beyond
means but what more can I do?
Others would choose to just exclude from the
budget such items as cigarettes and alcohol,
junk food and treats, outings and recreational
pursuits, and buying presents. They would
also spend less on clothing which could be
supplemented by buying from secondhand
retail outlets.
5.3. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
For people deeply entrenched in poverty and
food insecure the choices they have in life are
deeply constrained by their lack of income. This
can lead to a precarious existence where one bill
or life event can throw a household into crisis.
What is evident from both the quantitative
and qualitative data in this report is that such
households make a number of rational choices
in order to survive. These include budgeting,
planning, putting off bills, extending the
payment period for such bills, and seeking
assistance form community agencies, family
and friends. For some however, the measures
chosen appear to be desperate – going hungry
on a regular basis, pawning possessions, eating
food that is expired, busking, shoplifting and
sometimes stealing.
The anxiety and stress which such uncertainty
and difficult choices engenders is more fully
explored in the next section.
I�feel�sad.�No�one’s�happy�if�there’s�no�food.
5. hard ChoiCeS and Food
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
32 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 33
6
Food insecurity and the consequent difficult
choices this creates for both individuals and
households affects nutritional status and health,
which are contributing factors to wellbeing.
Statistics Canada found that food insecure
respondents were 3.2 times more likely to have
experienced high levels of distress and were 3.7
times more likely to have ‘reported symptoms
suggesting a high probability of having had a
major depressive episode in the previous year.’57
Indeed food insecurity is known to lead to a range
of social and emotional consequences including:
• worrying about the likelihood of going
without food58
• anxiety about not having enough food to
show hospitality to friends and family59
• anxiety amongst children60
• feelings of deprivation61
• a range of feelings associated with a lack of
control over the food situation and the need
to hide this (e.g., powerlessness, shame,
inequity, exclusion, fear)62
• coping strategies that may be considered
socially unacceptable such as accessing
emergency food relief, stealing, eating at
soup kitchens, etc.63
Respondents were given the opportunity in
the Anglicare Australia study, via open ended
questions, to give feedback on and impressions
of the impact that food insecurity has had
both on themselves and their households. This
section of the report details the accumulated
responses for NSW and the ACT for the key
impacts identified in the literature.
6.1 STRESS, ANGER AND ANxIETYA number of respondents indicated the
presence of stress and anxiety and, for some,
this was overwhelming, sometimes leading to
a sense of frustration. Anger was a recurring
theme with people specifically using terms such
as ‘angry’, ‘sad’, ‘cranky’, and ‘grumpy’ and feral
along with references to fighting and arguments
in the household as a result of being hungry:
Everyone gets irate, cranky with each other.
Relationships are strained.
It affects your life. You argue. It causes family
breakdown.
It’s very stressful and upsetting. You feel like
you’re stuck in a rut no matter what you do.
Stressful not knowing where next feed
from or how you will get by until you can get
to ER.
Get moody and angry, more depressed.
I just start growling at people.
Some equated this stress with low energy and
lethargy, others with family conflict, impaired
capacity to think and function, and feelings of
inadequacy. Several mentioned a sense of isolation
and disconnection and others that the constant
worry about accessing more food and how to
access it was causing mental health issues:
...Causes undue stress with my partner, [feel]
cranky, lack of energy.
I don’t talk to others. It stresses me and my
mental health goes down.
In the open ended section of the survey
parents made a number of comments which
reflected their concern for their children, the
stress this has created and the attempts being
made to protect them from the worst impacts
of food insecurity. Parental stress and anxiety
over the lack of food in the household for their
children was clearly evident. Also apparent
was the overriding sense of guilt that some
experienced over not being able to feed their
children, leading to anger and frustration:
Worrying...stressful with kids... wondering if
they’re getting enough.
It’s depressing...There’s’ nothing more depressing
than not being able to feed your kids. You feel
worthless as a parent... It’s the increasing prices
of everything. You think, “shit, what kind of
parent gives their kids cereal?”
Hurts to say no to the kids...
... feel embarrassed if teachers see the [kids]
have unhealthy lunch[es].
It stresses me out when it happens and I cry. I
think “God why can’t I have enough money for
food? It’s food, you know what I mean?”
Not to be able to feed your kid is unforgiveable.
With kids it’s hard to explain to them: we’ve run
out. It makes me want to burst into tears. It’s
very hard.
6.2 DEPRESSION AND SELF ESTEEM
Respondents made comments in relation to
depression, sadness, anger, loss of self worth,
feelings of inadequacy and uselessness. Some
referred to the food insecure experience as
degrading, demoralising, devastating and
disempowering. Others referred again to a
sense of isolation and disconnection which
appeared to be a self reinforcing cycle. For
those who still had friends there was guilt that
their friends had to help them out.
It’s quite depressing and humiliating and
makes you feel like you fail at the most basic
of needs.
Just depression. Feel like you are not worth it.
It’s depressing. Affects your social life.
Frustrating, can get angry about it and not
want to talk about it.
Feel sad. No one’s happy if there’s no food.
We’re still under the lowest income - we can’t
afford anything.
Less able to cope mentally and emotionally,
lower self esteem, poor self image, definitely
socially disadvantaged, spiritually confused.
6.3 SHAME AND EMBARRASSMENTA small number of respondents specifically
indicated feelings of shame and embarrassment
as a result of food insecurity. For some this related
to other people feeling sorry for them, shame at
not being able to pay their way when they went
out with friends or not being able to offer visitors
a cup of coffee or biscuits. This in turn led to
reduced social interactions and connections:
...Can only go around to mate’s places so often.
People looking down on you...
For others accessing help from a service for
food made them feel ashamed:
They don’t care that you’ve worked all your
life and paid your taxes. Now you’re pigeonholed
as scrounging off the government. I get help
from friends but it’s embarrassing. EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
34 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 35
6.4 COMPROMISED HEALTHA number of respondents indicated that food
insecurity had compromised their health.
Specific health issues related to being diabetic
and losing weight. A number spoke of being
hungry and several described the feeling in
some detail:
I’m starving... get hunger pains.
You don’t have energy - you start getting stomach pains and you get to a point where you don’t feel like eating anymore because you become nauseous and stressed.
Health-wise, not having enough food in general, not being able to eat healthy food... missing out on meals is bad for your health. The more unhealthy foods are less expensive than the healthy foods. It you’re budgeting you have to buy unhealthy foods.
I’ve lost weight; I used to be 110kg, now I’m down to 85.
I’ve been losing weight from not having enough food.
I was a size 36 jeans, now I’m size 32.
Blood sugars and history of diabetes is a problem.
Some people on DSP [the Disability Support Pension] just live on chips and chocolate but get very sick - it’s cheap.
Bad because I feel sorry for my dad [father-in -law] because he has the insulin so he has to have food, so sometimes I don’t do my kid’s food but I do his food.
As long as I have potatoes I can eat. Doctor wants fresh vegetables instead.
Respondents mentioned feeling tired, weary
and lethargic, finding it difficult to get out of
bed and get through the day’s chores, leading
to a sense of depression, frustration, stress and
hopelessness. Some maintained they needed to
sleep more and others that hunger generated
sleeplessness and disrupted sleeping patterns.
You sleep a lot and you can’t do anything.
Your life is hopeless. You don’t feel like
showering.
It affects my motivation, my concentration and
energy-wise on a daily basis. Not being able to
do everything that I’d like to do in that day.
6.5 IMPACTS ON CHILDRENThe vulnerability of households with children
to food insecurity has been documented in
international studies.64 The risks for such children
have been well documented. Children who live
in food insecure households and are themselves
food insecure are at risk and vulnerable to a
broad range of significant and sometimes long
lasting consequences. The US-based Center
on Hunger and Poverty cites numerous studies
that point to such consequences which include
both psychological and behavioural impacts
expressed through higher levels of aggression,
hyperactivity and anxiety as well as passivity.
Such children often have difficulties getting along
with their peers and have an increased need
to access mental health services. However the
consequences of food insecurity for such children
are not limited to these areas alone. There can
be a lifelong impact on learning and education
as shown by impaired cognitive functioning and
diminished capacity to learn, lower school test
scores and poorer overall academic achievement,
repeating grades in school, truancy, tardiness
and school suspension.65
In the open ended responses participants
commented on the perceived impacts of food
insecurity on their children, particularly on their
capacity to concentrate, their relationship with
peers and evident anger and stress:
The kids can’t concentrate on education
when they don’t have enough to eat. Sometimes
they go in the morning without breakfast. It
affects them when they see other kids that
have so much. It makes them feel worthless.
Because we have medical issues are the children
supposed to suffer as well? The children become
very angry.
Kids embarrassed... different to other kids.
Kids see others have more and judge home...
Difficult as a parent.
Affects my child’s feeling of being cosy - when
she looks in the cupboard and nothing is there.
End up with cravings for junk food.
Caused my daughter to attempt to commit
suicide, frustrated that no one could or would
help us.
6.5 DISCONNECTION AND ISOLATIONA number of participants spoke of the isolation
and disconnection from friends and family
that going without food on a regular basis
engendered. There were comments about the
embarrassment of having friends over when
there was very little food in the fridge to not
being able to invite the friends of their children
since there was nothing for afternoon tea.
These comments included:
You don’t want people dropping by when
you don’t have biscuits to put out. You don’t
invite them.
I don’t like to bother other people too much.
It can be quite embarrassing sometimes when
you have people come over and they go to the
fridge and there’s one carton of milk and one
thing of margarine.
Decreased pleasure and leisure activities like
clothes shopping, movies, dinner out, coffee
with friends at a cafe because the money needs
to be spent on my son’s needs...
I don’t go places because I haven’t eaten.
Gives you bad name...makes people not want to
hang out with you because they have to pay for
you... Or they hang out with you because they
feel sorry for you.
6.6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGSNever being sure of where to find the next
meal or not being sure if the family will be fed
adequately for the rest of the week clearly
generates stress, anger and anxiety, which is
well documented in both the literature and
in the responses in the open ended section
of the survey. Respondents indicated a range
of emotions including anger and frustration,
depression and low self esteem, and shame
and embarrassment over their circumstances.
There was clear evidence of compromised
health, lethargy and a sense of hopelessness.
The perceived impacts on children were
concerning as they included reduced
capacity to learn at school, going to school
hungry, being embarrassed and angry in front
of peers and being unwilling to invite friends
home after school. For some people all these
factors led to a sense of disconnection from
both family and friends along with a sense of
isolation and exclusion.
6. The imPaCT oF hard ChoiCeS oVer Food
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
36 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 37
7
Food insecurity is an issue that needs be
tackled at a number of policy levels. Such
policies need to provide better options
for people which will prevent the need
to make the kind of hard choices outlined in
this research.
7.1 FOOD SPECIFIC POLICIES
A number of strategies to address food
issues are being employed locally around
Australia by state government, community
groups, area health services, local councils
and other agencies to improve the access to
and supply of food in the local area. Some
of these initiatives are being delivered in
collaborative partnerships with businesses
and the local community. Power discusses
the two main approaches to redressing food
insecurity - poverty elimination (anti-poverty
or social justice approach) and making
food systems sustainable (sustainable food
systems approach).66 She further catalogues
the latter interventions in terms of ‘self-
provisioning’, and alternate food distribution
and marketing.
There have been a number of other food
policies and/or strategies developed at Federal,
State and local levels and these include:67
• The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Nutrition Strategy and Action
Plan 2000-2010 (NATSINSAP): a COAG
strategy, which included improving
standards in remote community stores,
as well as nutritional education and
other local actions in remote Aboriginal
communities. This strategy unfortunately
does not assist the many urban Indigenous
Australians at risk of food insecurity
• Victorian Food for All, including subsidies
and information for local councils to
implement local food policies
• Eat Well Australia policy, which finished
in 2010, and individual State/Territory Eat
Well policies
• Shared disaster management and resilience
and critical infrastructure development
arrangements
• Food chain information sharing and
development
• Regular healthy food basket price
monitoring, as is conducted in Queensland68
and more recently in victoria
• Dietary recommendations which include low
cost meals for economically disadvantaged
households, as recommended by the Public
Health Association of Australia (PHAA)69
• Funding for local initiatives that address
issues specific to the local area. The
victorian Government’s Food for All
policy provides such funding to local
governments.
However a coordinated and systematic
approach needs to be developed across
all jurisdictions to ensure food policies are
implemented in all disadvantaged communities.
reCommendaTionS
1. The NSW and ACT Governments to
develop food plans, which incorporate a
range of strategies mentioned in this report
and informed by the literature. Responses
should take into account physical and
economic access barriers which exist in
regions, communities and neighbourhoods.
7.2 MONITORING FOOD INSECURITY AT A STATE AND TERRITORY LEvEL
After years of advocacy by nutrition peak bodies
and researchers, food security is once again
being measured in the general population, as
well as in the Indigenous population. Results of
the Australian Health Survey, incorporating the
National Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey,
will be available mid 2013 and mid 2014 for the
general and Indigenous populations.
A number of bodies70 have advocated for
monitoring of food security in the general
population by utilising:
• A short food insufficiency question71
• A separate question on separate coping
strategies that incorporates cutting or
skipping meals and reducing the variety
of food72
• More in depth measurement of food security
for disadvantaged groups73
• Food price and supply surveys in urban and
rural areas.74
Given the issues for low income, food insecure
households as shown by this report it is
imperative that regular monitoring of food
insecurity occur across both NSW and the ACT.
7.3 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE Infrastructure can be developed and supported
by State or Territory Governments or local
councils to enhance local food security,
including:
• Land zoning to reserve arable land for food
production
• Planning new housing developments which
incorporate supermarkets or other food
outlets within walking distance, public
transport routes to shops and a density
level to enable food outlets to remain
economically viable
• Offering free or low-cost community
transport to major food outlets and/or
encouraging outlets to provide transport or
home delivery
• Inspecting the adequacy of food preparation
and storage facilities at boarding houses,
caravan parks, refuges and low cost
temporary accommodation
• Allowing community open spaces
to become productive food growing
areas, including incorporating community
gardening and edible landscapes.
Many of the interventions relating to transport
and placement of groceries aim to redress
reCommendaTionS
2. The inclusion of food sufficiency
measures in the Australian Health Survey
is welcomed and should occur periodically
to monitor levels of food insecurity in the
general population. As the questions used
can underestimate population incidence,
further testing of a deeper measure, such
as the Household Food Security Survey
Module, for the Australian context, needs
to be employed in nationally representative
samples.
3. Regular monitoring of the cost of healthy
foods in disadvantaged communities across
all jurisdictions in NSW and the ACT.
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
38 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 39
food ‘deserts’, particularly in under-resourced
and low socio-economic suburbs. Policy
recommendations from Larson and Mosely
include the following:75
It is vital that administrators and policymakers
at all levels of government understand that
hunger cannot be completely resolved
through emergency food programs.
Government tax incentives to encourage
grocery stores to move into existing food
deserts may help alleviate spatial accessibility
problems... Food intervention programs
that encourage supermarkets to place new
stores in food deserts have also been found
to change the behaviour and accessibility of
residents in those areas.
These strategies are also important
considerations when developing food policies.
reCommendaTionS
4. Local Councils and the NSW and ACT
Governments to address public transport
costs and routes to supermarkets as a key
component of food security plans in their
jurisdictions.
5. Local Councils and the NSW Government
use leasing arrangements and other powers
such as local bylaws to encourage the
provision of good quality and low cost fresh
food in low socio-economic suburbs.
6. Anglicare in the ACT to map food
insecurity hotspots, in order to better inform
Government and community stakeholders of
the factors hampering access to good quality
and low cost fresh food in the Territory.
7.4 EMERGENCY RELIEF
The provision of food provides immediate
emergency relief to food insecure households.
In NSW and the ACT there are a number of such
programs in operation at a local level, developed
to mitigate the worst effects of food insecurity
in communities. Indeed the Anglicare Australia
study explored food insecurity, primarily through
the many local emergency relief programs
operating across the Anglicare network.
Emergency Relief can take the form of food,
grocery vouchers, payment of medications,
contribution towards utility bills, assistance with
housing and moving costs, and other forms
of material aid. At times this is combined with
further support such as financial counselling,
no-interest loans, case management, brokerage,
advocacy and a range of other support services.
Provision of food can be an incentive for clients
to connect to the service system and receive a
deeper level of support that addresses not just
the lack of food but some of the more complex
underlying issues.
The provision of emergency food relief occurs
on a daily basis around Australia. In 2010-11
approximately 700 community organisations,
operating 1350 outlets, provided FaHCSIA-
funded Emergency Relief.76 Emergency Relief
was provided on 324,000 occasions in 2009-
10.77 Food is a commonly provided form of
assistance by ER centres. Agencies report
increasing demand on an annual basis but do
not receive a concomitant increase in funding
to meet this increasing need.
Consequently, there is a need for increased
support for agencies which provide emergency
food relief. Further research and evaluation of
outcomes for food insecure clients are also
required as a matter of priority. Such initiatives
should focus on food insecurity risks, food
consumption patterns among disadvantaged
groups, and the effectiveness of existing
measures designed to mitigate food insecurity.
reCommendaTionS
7. The NSW and ACT Governments increase
financial support to agencies delivering
food relief to low income households
in Australia.
7.5 CASE MANAGEMENT
The people who seek assistance from ER
services are among the most socially excluded
households in the nation – a social exclusion
that is represented by complex, multiple and
diverse disadvantage. It is a recognition of
the deep and entrenched nature of social
exclusion and its multi causal and interacting
nature that has led some Anglicare agencies
to pilot intensive case management for people
experiencing complex and multiple issues.
ANGLICARE Sydney conducted such a pilot in
its Wollongong ER service in 2010, based on
three fundamental premises:
• Efficacy: Case management was anticipated
to provide the person seeking assistance
with more control over decision-making
and the opportunity to develop reasonable
and feasible personal goals. Each client
would assist in the development of an
individualised case plan to address their
specific needs through the identification of
their strengths and existing resources, which
would be leveraged into strategies to resolve
their presenting crisis and other underlying
issues. It was expected that this strategy
would increase levels of client engagement
and ownership with the case plan.
• Resilience: People experiencing recurrent
crises in their lives may struggle to do more
than just meet their immediate needs for
food, shelter and paying bills, which can
leave them feeling anxious and hopeless
about the future. Case management is
aimed at breaking the cycle of recurrent
crises by improving the living skills, resilience
and wellbeing of the person accessing the
service in an environment of emotional
support, trust and Christian care.
• Inclusion: Given the case manager had
significant access to service network
information and would follow up on referrals
using a ‘warm’ referral process, it was
anticipated that case management would
improve service access and engagement for
the individual, build wellbeing and resilience,
improve individual relationships with family
members, and enhance their capacity to
participate in the local community.
The evaluation carried out on the pilot and
completed in 2012 demonstrated benefits across
all these domains for clients and recommended
continuation and expansion of the pilot across
other ER sites. However the development of
case management pilots has been funded by the
NGO sector, not by government, and financial
support is required if these innovative models of
care are to be expanded.
reCommendaTionS
8. The NSW and ACT Governments provide
financial incentives to community agencies
for the development of innovative service
models, which are both long term and
address multi causal, compounding and
complex issues.
7. PoliCieS ThaT Could maKe a diFFerenCe
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
40 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 41
7.6 INADEQUACY OF NEWSTART
A particular concern in the national Anglicare
Australia study was the number of food
insecure households reliant upon the Newstart
Allowance (30%). In the NSW and ACT sample
a similar percentage (33%) was also reliant. It
should be noted that income support payments
have generally failed to keep pace with wages
growth. This is especially true for payments
such as the Newstart and Youth Allowances:
In most cases, out-of-work income as a proportion
of in-work income has fallen, in part due to
allowance rates failing to keep pace with wage
growth. Only lone parents, whose income support
is tied to an average earnings measure and who
benefitted from more generous family benefits,
were excepted. The flattening of the personal
income tax system in the mid-2000s (e.g. through
increases to the top threshold) contributed to
a reduced capacity of redistribution.78
The gap between Newstart and the Disability
Support and Aged Pensions has been
increasing since 1997. This disparity is caused
by the current system of indexation which
benchmarks pensions to 25% of Male Total
Average Weekly Earnings (MTAWE) and
Newstart which is indexed to the Consumer
Price Index. Wages have grown strongly in
recent years while inflationary pressures have
not been significant – causing the gap between
pensions and Newstart to widen. Currently
Newstart is below 50% of the median income
poverty threshold.79 The Newstart Allowance
is now so low that the OECD in a 2010 report
recommended that it needed to be increased.
‘Measures of relative poverty ... indicate that
the Newstart Allowance should be raised...
to provide a more adequate level of income
support’.80 While the 2012 Senate inquiry into
Newstart did not recommend raising the base
rate they did recognise that the current level
was seriously inadequate.
Anglicare believes that the levels of Newstart
are now so low that it has become a significant
contributor to poverty, financial hardship, food
insecurity and social exclusion.
The relatively low rate of the Newstart Allowance,
especially in the first year of unemployment:
‘raises issues about its effectiveness in providing
sufficient support for those experiencing a job
loss, or enabling someone to look for a suitable
job’.81 Children are particularly impacted by
food insecurity as evidenced in the Anglicare
Australia study. Forcing single mothers
with dependent children onto the Newstart
Allowance, once their youngest child turns 8
years old, without complementary child care
support arrangements and benefits, has pitched
these households with children into deeper food
insecurity and financial hardship. The NSW and
ACT Governments need to actively lobby the
Federal Government to repeal section 1 of the
Social Security Amendment (Fair Incentives
to Work) Bill 2012, which has removed access
to the Parenting Payment (single) for single
parents whose youngest child is 8 years old
and raise the level of Newstart by at least $50
per week.
7.6 HOUSING
Anglicare research indicates that a significant
number of households who are food insecure
are also housing insecure (12%). Furthermore,
a significant number of food insecure
households in this study also experience
rental stress. The 2012 Anglicare Australia’s
Rental Affordability Snapshot82 revealed
that a single person receiving the Newstart
Allowance, Youth Allowance or Austudy would
have found no rental options in most capital
cities. Surprisingly, a single person earning the
minimum wage would have still encountered
limited housing options in nearly all capital
cities. In contrast, families with children who
were reliant upon government benefits also
had significantly reduced options that mostly
ranged from between 0% and 2% of available
rental housing stock in each capital city.
Consequently, only families earning a double
reCommendaTionS
9. The NSW and ACT Governments lobby
the Federal Government to constitute
an independent body to regularly review
the adequacy of all government funded
allowances to ensure that payments are
sufficiently indexed to increase the capacity
of individuals to enter or re-enter the
workforce.
10. The NSW and ACT Governments lobby
the Federal Government to repeal section
1 of the Social Security Amendment (Fair
Incentives to Work) Bill 2012, which has
removed access to the Parenting Payment
(single) for single parents whose youngest
child turns 8 years old.
11. The NSW and ACT Governments lobby the
Federal Government to increase the Newstart
Allowance (NSA) and other allowance
payments for single persons by at least $50
per week, as per the recommendations of
the Henry Taxation Review and consistent
with the previous increases to DSP and the
Aged Pension in 2008.
I�pick�up�food��off�the�street��
that’s�discarded��but�is�still�OK
7. PoliCieS ThaT Could maKe a diFFerenCe
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
42 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 43
minimum wage were generally found to be in
a position to secure suitable housing, although
these results were wildly varied across capital
cities. Rental affordability is as much a regional
issue as an urban one, as it has the potential
to affect a household’s capacity to absorb cost
of living pressures, and ultimately, to overcome
long term disadvantage and participate fully in
employment, education and/or community life.
It is evident that there is an urgent need for
the NSW and ACT Governments to increase
the supply of either affordable, supported
or public housing to reduce the rental stress
and housing insecurity experienced by low
income households. Supported housing offers
long-term or permanent housing to people
experiencing long-term homelessness as a
secure foundation for recovery and social
inclusion, in conjunction with the provision of
on-site and off-site support services, such as:
case management, substance use treatment,
counselling and psychosocial treatment.83 In
Australia, the most well-known examples of
supported housing are the Common Ground,
Youth Foyer and Housing First models,
which received funding from the Federal
Government’s National Partnership Agreement
on Homelessness.
This needs to be further supplemented by
an increase in the current Commonwealth
Rental Assistance (CRA) package. CRA is
a rent supplement provided by the Federal
Government through Centrelink to assist 1.2
million low-income households renting on
the private market. The Australian Institute
of Health and Welfare has shown that single
person households comprise the majority
of CRA recipients (52%), followed by single
parents (22%) and couples with children
(17%).84 The CRA’s Rent Assistance thresholds
and maximum rates are adjusted twice annually
in line with the Consumer Price Index. However,
the Tenants Union of victoria has found that
between 1995 and 2009, median weekly prices in
all capital cities rose by 41%. At the same time, the
maximum rates of CRA remained steady in real
terms, meaning that this assistance now covers
a smaller proportion of rent in 2009 (between
17% and 24%) when compared with 1995.85
The Henry Taxation Review recommended that
the CRA be reformed as an urgent priority.
Consequently, it is important that no current
recipients are disadvantaged financially through
any future reforms that would tighten up the
eligibility requirements for the payment, as such
changes could further jeopardise the housing
security of low-income households. As a result,
additional financial support is imperative in
reducing the gap caused by the significant
growth in market-driven private rents and the
real terms assistance provided through the
CRA. The assumption that all private landlords
will increase rents in line with an increased CRA
payment is a short-sighted argument that fails to
improve the capacity of low-income households
to gain stability and independence. It is
therefore recommended that the NSW and ACT
Governments lobby the Federal Government to
increase the CRA by $30 per fortnight for all
current recipients and have this matter tabled as
an urgent priority at COAG.
reCommendaTionS
12. The NSW and ACT Governments commit
to substantially increasing the supply of
social and affordable housing over the next
four years.
13. The NSW and ACT Governments to lobby
the Federal Government to increase the rate
of Commonwealth Rent Assistance by $30
per fortnight for all current recipients.
It�affects�your�life.�You�argue.��It�causes�family�breakdown.
7. PoliCieS ThaT Could maKe a diFFerenCe
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
44 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 45
8
This research shows that low income households
are involved in a daily juggling act, making hard
choices between food, housing and utilities.
Those most at risk of having to make these
difficult choices are the unemployed, single
parents and people with a disability. Being
indigenous also increases risk as does being a
private renter. Low income combined with cost
of living pressures and significant rental stress
contributes to food insecurity.
For such households the choices around food
are particularly difficult. In this study of NSW
and the ACT 98.8% of households were food
insecure and four out of five (82%) were severely
food insecure. What does this mean? For
many it means being constantly worried about
whether food would run out (87%) or actually
running out of food and not being able to buy
more (68%). It means cutting the size of meals,
skipping meals and sometimes going hungry. In
the worst cases it means going without food for
a whole day on a recurrent basis.
A number of children are exposed to food
insecurity, despite the attempts of parents
to buffer them as much as possible by going
hungry themselves. In 14% of households
children were forced to skip meals and in a third
of households children were hungry because
there was no more food. In the very worst cases,
7% of households had children frequently went
without food for a whole day because the family
could not afford to buy food.
How do households cope with food insecurity?
For many their choices reflect a rational response
to what appears to be an untenable situation.
Respondents spoke of careful budgeting and
planning, scouring stores for specials and lining up
in the late afternoon and evening in supermarkets
in order to get food which was being reduced in
price. When these measures were not successful,
respondents spoke of cutting the portions of
their meals, skipping meals and going hungry.
People were creative in their cooking and some
indicated they grew their own vegetables to try
and make ends meet. Respondents also spoke
of extending electricity bills, not paying them,
pawning possessions and buying food on credit.
In the worst case scenarios people became
more desperate in their choices, some scouring
garbage bins, shoplifting and stealing.
What impact do these hard choices have on
people? Respondents cited anger, shame,
embarrassment and depression. They spoke
of guilt – particularly when they could not feed
their children adequately. In some cases their
health was compromised – people spoke of
losing weight and not being able to adequately
look after medical conditions such as diabetes.
There was also a sense of being isolated and
disconnected from family and friends as they felt
they could not go out with friends and pay their
way nor could they invite anyone home because
they could not offer them a cup of coffee.
Governments need to not only be aware of the
extent of the problem of food insecurity and
the nature of the choices such households are
forced to make but to develop and implement
policies which mitigate the worst effects of food
insecurity. These include food specific policies
and locally based strategies but must also include
regular monitoring for prevalence. Emergency
relief outlets should be funded to widen their
capacity and scope to include case management
and capacity building. One of the most critical
issues for food insecure households is access to
more affordable housing: this needs to be a high
priority on government agendas and includes
increasing the stock of affordable housing as well
as raising Commonwealth Rental Assistance.
Furthermore both the NSW and ACT
Governments need to lobby the Federal
Government to raise the level of the Newstart
Allowance so that unemployed households are
no longer living so far below the poverty line that
their situation is not sustainable or tenable.
While prosperity in Australia is generally
rising, it is not being shared by all. A number
of households are living in significant poverty,
finding it difficult to put food on their table
and pay bills. Their short term horizon which
involves juggling and balancing the family
budget often outweighs their capacity to
plan for the future. Current well being takes
precedence over future life chances. This is
particularly concerning for the number of
children who, in a prosperous Australia, are
experiencing poverty which compromises their
pathways to education and employment.
When�things�are�cheap�then�I�buy�for�two�weeks.�If�it’s�too�
expensive�I�won’t�buy.
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
46 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 47
1. United Nations Development Program (2012) The United Nations 2011 Human Development Index, sighted at http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/PR2-HDI-2011HDR-Eng_rev3.pdf
2. Australian Trade Commission (2013) Australia – consistently in the world’s Prosperity Index top five since 2009, data alert March 2013.
3. ACOSS (2012) Poverty in Australia, sighted at http://www.acoss.org.au/uploads/ACOSS%20Poverty%20Report%202012_Final.pdf
4. Saunders, P., Naidoo, Y. And Griffiths, M (2007) Towards New Indicators of Disadvantage, Social Policy Research Centre, University of NSW, Sydney. pviii
5. ibid pp 34-35
6. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007) ‘Low Income Low Wealth Households’, Australian Social Trends, Cat No 4102, Australian Government, Canberra.
7. Pennings, J.M. & Garcia, P. (2005), ‘The Poverty Challenge: How individual decision making behaviour influences poverty’, Economic Letters, Elsevier press, at www.sciencedirect.com, p115.
8. Hamilton, K., (2011) ‘Low Income Families and Coping Through Brands: Social Inclusion or Stigma’, Sociology, 46:74 at www.sagepub.com/content/46/1/74
9. Anderson. W., White, V. & Finney, A. (2012) ‘Coping with Low Incomes and Cold Homes’, Energy Policy, 49:40-52.
10. ibid
11. Bickel, G., Nord, M., Price, C., Hamilton, W.L. and Cook, J.T. (2000) Guide to Measuring Household Food Security, Revised 2000, USDA, Food and Nutrition Service, Alexandria, VA, viewed 4.6.03, <ht tp : / /www. fns .usda.gov/ fsec/F ILES/FSGuide.pdf pp.23-24
12. Life Sciences Research Office (LSRO) of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, (1990) cited in Bickel, G., Nord, M., Price, C., Hamilton, W.L. and Cook, J.T. (2000) Guide to Measuring Household Food Security, Revised 2000, USDA, Food and Nutrition Service, Alexandria, VA, viewed 4.6.03, http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/FILES/FSGuide.pdf, p.6.
13. ibid
14. Kirkpatrick S I and Tarasuk V (2010) ‘Assessing the relevance of neighbourhood characteristics to the household food security of low income Toronto families’ Public Health Nutrition, 13(7), pp1139-1148; Heflin, C., Corcoran, M., Siefert, K., 2007. ‘Work trajectories, income changes, and food insufficiency in a Michigan welfare population’. Social Service Review 81 (1), 3–25; Bartfeld, J., Dunifon, R., Nord, M. And Carlson, S (2006) ‘What factors account for state to state differences in food security?’, Economic Information Bulletin no. 20, Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, viewed 20.6.12 http://webarchives.cdlib.org/sw1s17tt5t/http://ers.usda.
gov/publications/EIB20/eib20.pdf; Ramsey R, Giskes K, Turrell G and Gallegos D (2011) ‘Food insecurity among Australian children : Potential determinants, health and developmental consequences’ Journal of Child Health Care, 15:401
15. Kirkpatrick et.al. 2010 op.cit.
16. Bartfeld et.al. 2006 op.cit
17. Jacobs G,. Morrison M., Irvine D. and Palermo C (2012) Assessment of Food Security in the City of Melbourne: Interviews with Vulnerable Population Groups, City of Melbourne; Dauchner, N., & Tarasuk, V. (2002). ‘Homeless “squeegee kids”: Food insecurity and daily survival’. Social Science & Medicine, 54(7), 1039; Various studies cited in Rychetnik (2003) op.cit.
18. ibid
19. Ramsey R, Giskes K, Turrell G and Gallegos D (2011) ‘Food insecurity among Australian children : Potential determinants, health and developmental consequences’ Journal of Child Health Care, 15:401; Martin KS, Rogers BL, Cook JT, Joseph HM (2004) ‘Social capital is associated with decreased risk of hunger’ Social Science & Medicine, no. 58, pp. 2645–2654
20. Bartfeld et.al. 2006 op.cit
21. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2009) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework 2008 Report, Detailed analysis, AIHW Cat. No. IHW 22, viewed 30.6.12, http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=6442468199;Ramsey R, Giskes K, Turrell G and Gallegos D (2012)’Food insecurity among adults residing in disadvantaged urban areas: potential health and dietary consequences’, Public Health Nutrition, vol.15, issue 2 pg:227; Foley, W. et al (2009) ‘An ecological analysis of factors associated with food insecurity in South Australia, 2002-07’ Public Health and Nutrition, 13(2), pp215-221; Various studies cited in Rychetnik (2003) op.cit.
22. Various studies cited in Rychetnik (2003) op.cit. However, the evidence here is mixed. See Palermo et.al. 2008 op.cit. and Ward et.al. 2012 op.cit.
23. Various studies cited in Rychetnik (2003) op.cit.
24. NSW Health (2000) Older People’s Health Survey, NSW Public Health Bulletin Supplement, 11:S-2, December 2000, viewed 1.6.07, http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/public-health/ophs99/ophs1999.pdf.; Quine S and Morrell S (2006) ‘Food insecurity in community-dwelling older Australians’ Public Health Nutrition, 9(2), pp219-224;Deeming C (2006) ‘Food and Nutrition Security at Risk in Later Life: Evidence from the United Kingdom Expenditure & Food Survey’ Journal of Social Policy, available on Cambridge Journals Online, 06 Oct 2010, doi:10.1017/S004727941000070X Evidence is mixed - also see Bartfeld et.al. 2006 op.cit and Temple 2008 op.cit.
25. Huang J, Guo B and Kim Y (2010) ‘Food insecurity and disability: Do economic resources matter?’ Social Science
Research, 39, pp111-124; Bartfeld et.al. 2006 op.cit; Various studies cited in Rychetnik (2003) op.cit.
26. Seniloli S. (1995) ‘Household Food Security in Australia’, thesis submitted to the Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, viewed 4.6.03, http://www.sph.uq.edu.au/acithn/thesis/SENILOLI.html.
27. Radimer KL, Allsopp R, Harvey PW, Firman DW and Watson EK (1997) ‘Food insufficiency in Queensland’, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, vol.21 no.3 June, pp303-10.
28. ibid
29. Heflin, C., Corcoran, M., Siefert, K., (2007) ‘Work trajectories, income changes, and food insufficiency in a Michigan welfare population’, Social Service Review, 81 (1), 3–25:
30. ibid
31. Bartfeld et.al. 2006 op.cit
32. ibid
33. Heflin et.al. (2007)
34. ibid
35. Foley et.al.(2009), op cit
36. Palermo et al (2008) “The cost of healthy food in rural Victoria”, Rural and Remote Health, p6.
37. Bartfeld et.al. (2006) op.cit
38. Temple, J. B., (2008) ‘Severe and Moderate Forms of Food Insecurity: Are They Distinguishable?’ Australian Journal of Social Issues, 43(4), pp 649-668.
39. ibid
40. Foley et.al. 2009, op cit
41. Foley et.al. 2009; Martin et.al. 2004
42. Bartfeld et.al. 2006 op.cit
43. Stevens C A (2010) ‘Exploring Food Insecurity Among Young Mothers’ Journal for Specialists in Paediatric Nursing, 15(2), pp163-171
44. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2011), The 2011 National Census, sighted at www.abs.gov.au.
45. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2009) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework 2008 Report, Detailed analysis, AIHW Cat. No. IHW 22, viewed 30.6.12, http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=6442468199
46. For example, Foley et.al. 2009 op.cit. found that Aboriginality appeared to increase the likelihood of experiencing food insufficiency in South Australia.
47. Bickel et al (2000), op cit,p10
48. Trethewey 1989, Malseed 1990 and Whitehead 1987, cited in Lester (1994) Australia’s Food and Nutrition, Chapter 6, AIHW, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, viewed 12.5.03, http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/health/afn94/afn94-c06.pdf.
49. ACOSS (2003) Key Challenges for Emergency Relief, viewed 20.1.06, http://www.acoss.org.au/upload/publications /submissions/344__ACOSS%20ER%20Submission.doc, p.4
50. Wood, B and Streker, P (2005) City of Port Philip, Food Security Report, City of Port Phillip Community & Health Development Team, St Kilda
51. O’Dwyer , LA and CoveneyJ (2006) ‘Scoping supermarket availability and accessibility by socio-economic status in Adelaide’, Health Promotion Journal of Australia 2006 : 17 (3)
52. Browne J, Laurence S and Thorpe S (2009) Acting on Food Insecurity in Urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities: Policy and Practice interventions to improve local access and supply of nutritious food, accessed 28.6.2012, http://www.healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au/uploads/docs/food_insecurity.pdf
53. Leather 1995, Lang 1992 and Tarasuk et al 1998 cited in Else (1999) op.cit.
54. Wang J et al (2009) ‘Mapping the availability and accessibility of healthy food in rural and urban New Zealand - Te Wai o Rona: Diabetes Prevention Strategy’ Public Health Nutrition, 13(7), pp1049-1055
55. Darko, J; Eggett, DL & Richards, R (2013) Shopping behaviours of low-income families during a 1-month period of time. Journal of Nutrition, Education and Behaviour, Vol 45(1)20-9.
56. Bickel et al (2010) Op cit
57. Che, J and Chen, J (2001) ‘Food security in Canadian households’ in: Statistics Canada (ed) Health Reports, 12:4, Spring 2001, Statistics Canada, Ottawa [online] Available: http://www.statcan.ca/english/indepth/82-003/feature/hrar2001012004s0a01.pdf Date: 23.6.03.
58. Examples include (1) the Radimer Cornell study: Radimer KL, Olson CM, Greene JC, Campbell CC and Habicht, JP (1992) ‘Understanding hunger and developing indicators to assess it in women and children’, Journal of Nutrition Education, 24 (supplement); Kendall A, Olson CM and Frongillo EA Jr (1995) ‘Validation of the Radimer/Cornell Hunger and food insecurity measures’, Journal of Nutrition Education, 125; (2) the Food and Feelings study: Hamelin A-M, Beaudry M and Habicht J-P (2002) ‘Characterization of household food insecurity in Quebec: food and feelings,’ Social Science and Medicine, 54(1); and (3) the NZ Food-NZ People study: Quigley and Watts (1997) ‘Food Comes First: Methodologies for the National Nutrition Survey of New Zealand’, Ministry of Health, viewed 6.3.06, http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/49b6bf07a4b7346dcc256fb300005a51/8bf3be812cd9ec5e4c25667000341ba2?OpenDocument
59. Quigley and Watts (1997) op. cit.; Russell, et al. (1999) op. cit.
60. Hamelin, et al. (2002) op. cit.
61. Radimer et al. (1992) and Kendall et al. (1995) op. cit.
62. Hamelin, et al. (2002) op. cit.
63. Radimer, et al. (1992) op. cit.; Kendall, et al. (1995) op. cit.
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
48 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 49
64. Fletcher, J. M. et al (2009) “Assessing the effect of changes in housing costs on food insecurity” Journal of Children and Poverty, 15(2), pp79-93
65. Evidence from Recent Scientific Studies, June 2002 [online] Available: http://www.centeronhunger.org/pdf/ConsequencesofHunger.pdf Date: 4.6.03 p1
66. Power E.M. ‘Combining social justice and sustainability for food security’, in Koc Met.al. Eds. (1999) For Hunger-Proof Cities:Sustainable Urban Food Systems, The International Development Research Center, Toronto
67. Gallegos D and Ramsey R (2010) Food Security Environmental Scan, Red Cross Research Paper, not for distribution.
68. Queensland Health and Queensland Treasury (2012) The 2010 Healthy Food Access Basket (HFAB) Survey, Queensland Health, Brisbane, viewed 24.7.12, http://www.health.qld.gov.au/ph/documents/hpu/hafb-2010.pdf
69. PHAA (2009) A Future For Food: Addressing Public Health, Sustainability And Equity From Paddock To Plate, Public Health Association of Australia, viewed 22.7.12, http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/PHAA%20Report.pdf
70. Public Health Association of Australia (2011) ‘Public Health Association of Australia: Policy-at-a-glance – Food & Nutrition Monitoring & Surveillance in Australia Policy’, Public Health Association of Australia, viewed 23.7.12 http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/111204_Food%20&%20Nutrition%20Monitoring%20&%20Surveillance%20in%20Australia%20Policy%20FINAL-with%20cover%20sheet.pdf
71. Flood V, Webb K and Rangan A (2005) Recommendations for short questions to assess food consumption in children for the NSW Health Surveys, NSW Centre for Public Health Nutrition, Sydney, viewed 17.7.12, http://sydney.edu.au/science/molecular_bioscience/cphn/pdfs/2005_short_questions_children.pdf
72. ibid
73. Centre for Public Health Nutrition (2000) Recommendations for Food and Nutrition Monitoring in NSW, State Publication No (HP) 000027, NSW Department of Health, viewed 17.7.12, http://sydney.edu.au/science/molecular_bioscience/cphn /pdfs/food_nutrition_monitoring.pdf
74. ibid
75. Larson J and Moseley W G (2010) ‘Reaching the limits: a geographic approach for understanding food insecurity and household hunger mitigation strategies in Minneapolis-Saint Paul, USA’ GeoJournal, 28 Aug 2010, online http://www.macalester.edu/dotAsset/851e1eee-5d21-493a-a777-b2f66facfc13.pdf, pp11-12
76. Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (2012) ‘Emergency Relief’, FaHCSIA, viewed 26.7.12, http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/our-responsibilities/communities-and-vulnerable-people/programs-services/emergency-relief
77. ibid
78. ibid
79. Anglicare Australia et al, (2011). ‘What if Employers say No’, sighted at: http://disabilityemployment.org.au/static/items/CSSA_what_if_employers_say_no_EMBARGO.pdf
80. Koutsogeorgopoulo,V (2011) ‘Enhancing Labour Utilisation in a Socially Inclusive Society in Australia’,OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 852, OECD Publishing.
81. Ibid p15.
82. Anglicare Australia, (2012) ‘Anglicare Australia Rental Affordability Snapshot’, Canberra
83. Cheng, A., Lin, H., Kasprow, W., & Rosenheck, R.A. (2007) ‘Impact of supported housing on clinical outcomes: Analysis of a randomized trial using multiple imputation technique’, Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 195(1), 83-88.
84. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2010) The Health of Australia’s Prisoners 2009, Cat. no. PHE, AIHW, Canberra
85. Colic-Peisker, V., Ong, R., and McMurray, C. (2009) ‘Falling behind: The growing gap between rent and rent assistance 1995-2009’, RMIT University and the Tenants Union of Victoria: Melbourne http://www.tuv.org.au/articles/files/housing_statistics/Falling_Behind_CRA.pdf
endnoTeS
ACOSS, (2003) Key Challenges for Emergency Relief, viewed 20.1.06, at http://www.acoss.org.
au/upload/publications/submissions/344__
ACOSS%20ER%20Submission.doc
ACOSS (2012) Poverty in Australia, sighted at
http://www.acoss.org.au/uploads/ACOSS%20
Poverty%20Report%202012_Final.pdf
Anderson. W., White, v. & Finney, A. (2012)
‘Coping with Low Incomes and Cold Homes’,
Energy Policy, 49:40-52.
Anglicare Australia et al, (2011) ‘What if Employers
say No’. sighted at: http://disabilityemployment.
org.au/static/items/CSSA_what_if_employers_
say_no_EMBARCO.pdf
Anglicare Australia, (2012) ‘Anglicare Australia
Rental Affordability Snapshot’, Canberra.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2011), The 2011 National Census, sighted at www.abs.gov.au.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007) ‘Low
Income Low Wealth Households’, Australian Social Trends, Cat No 4102, Australian Government,
Canberra.
Australian Government Department of Families,
Housing, Community Services and Indigenous
Affairs (2012) Emergency Relief, FaHCSIA,
viewed 26.7.12, http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/our-
responsibilities/communities-and-vulnerable-
people/programs-services/emergency-relief
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, (2010)
The Health of Australia’s Prisoners 2009, Cat. no.
PHE, AIHW, Canberra.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare,
(2009) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework 2008 Report, Detailed analysis, AIHW Cat. No. IHW 22, viewed
30.6.12, http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-
detail/?id=6442468199
Australian Trade Commission (2013), Australia –
‘Consistently in the World’s Prosperity Index Top
Five since 2009’, Australian Government, Data
Alert, March.
Bartfeld, J., Dunifon, R., Nord, M. and Carlson,
S., (2006) ‘What factors account for state to
state differences in food security?,’ Economic Information Bulletin no. 20, Economic Research
Service, United States Department of Agriculture,
Washington, viewed 20.6.12 http://webarchives.
cdlib.org/sw1s17tt5t/http://ers.usda.gov/
publications/EIB20/eib20.pdf
Bickel, G., Nord, M., Price, C., Hamilton, W.L. and
Cook, J.T. (2000) Guide to Measuring Household Food Security, Revised 2000, USDA, Food and
Nutrition Service, Alexandria, vA, viewed 4.6.03,
http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/FILES/FSGuide.pdf
Browne, J., Laurence, S. and Thorpe, S. (2009)
Acting on Food Insecurity in Urban Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities: Policy and Practice interventions to improve local access and supply of nutritious food, accessed
28.6.2012, http://www.healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au/
uploads/docs/food_insecurity.pdf
Centre for Public Health Nutrition, (2000)
Recommendations for Food and Nutrition Monitoring in NSW, State Publication No (HP)
000027, NSW Department of Health, viewed
17.7.12, http://sydney.edu.au/science/molecular_
bioscience/cphn/pdfs/food_nutr i t ion_
monitoring.pdf
Che, J. and Chen, J. (2001) ‘Food security in
Canadian households’ in Statistics Canada (ed) Health Reports, 12:4, Spring 2001, Statistics
Canada, Ottawa, viewed 23.6.03, http://www.
statcan.ca/english/indepth/82-003/feature/
hrar2001012004s0a01.pdf.
Cheng, A., Lin, H., Kasprow, W., and Rosenheck,
R.A. (2007) ‘Impact of supported housing on
clinical outcomes: Analysis of a randomized trial
using multiple imputation technique’, Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 195(1), 83-88.EMBARGOED – until 8
May 2013
EMBARGOED – until 8
May 2013
50 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 51
Coleman-Jensen, A., Nord, M., Andrews M., &
Steven Carlson, (2011) ‘Household Food Security
in the United States in 2010’, Economic Research Report No. (ERR-125) 37 pp, September.
Colic-Peisker, v., Ong, R., and McMurray, C. (2009)
‘Falling behind: The growing gap between rent
and rent assistance 1995-2009’, RMIT University
and the Tenants Union of victoria: Melbourne
http://www.tuv.org.au/articles/files/housing_
statistics/Falling_Behind_CRA.pdf
Darko, J; Eggett, DL & Richards, R (2013) ‘Shopping
behaviours of low-income families during a
1-month period of time.’ Journal of Nutrition, Education and Behaviour, vol 45(1)20-9
Dauchner, N and Tarasuk, v. (2002) ‘Homeless’
“squeegee kids”: Food insecurity and daily survival’
Social Science and Medicine, 54(7)
Deeming, C. (2006) ‘Food and Nutrition
Security at Risk in Later Life: Evidence from the
United Kingdom Expenditure & Food Survey’
Journal of Social Policy, available on Cambridge
Journals Online, 06 Oct 2010, doi:10.1017/
S004727941000070x
Else, A. (1999) Hidden Hunger: Food and low income in New Zealand, Second Edition, New
Zealand Network against Food Poverty, viewed
21.3.03 http://www.dcm.org.nz/
Fletcher, J. M. et al (2009) ‘Assessing the effect
of changes in housing costs on food insecurity’
Journal of Children and Poverty, 15(2), pp79-93.
Flood, v., Webb, K. and Rangan, A. (2005)
Recommendations for short questions to assess food consumption in children for the NSW Health Surveys, NSW Centre for Public Health
Nutrition, Sydney, viewed 17.7.12, http://sydney.
edu.au/science/molecular_bioscience/cphn/
pdfs/2005_short_questions_children.pdf
Foley, W. et al (2009) ‘An ecological analysis of
factors associated with food insecurity in South
Australia, 2002-07’ Public Health and Nutrition, 13(2), pp215-221.
Gallegos, D. (2008) ‘Still there’s no food! Food
insecurity in a refugee population, Western
Australia’ Nutrition & Dietetics, 65, pp78-83.
Gallegos, D. and Ramsey, R .(2010) Food Security Environmental Scan, Red Cross Research Paper,
not for distribution.
Hamelin, A.-M., Beaudry, M. and Habicht, J.-P.
(2002) ‘Characterization of household food
insecurity in Quebec: food and feelings,’ Social Science and Medicine, vol 54, issue 1.
Hamelin, A .(2010) ‘Discrepancies in households
and other stakeholders viewpoints on the food
security experience: a gap to address’ Health Education Research, 25(3), pp401-412.
Hamilton, K., (2011) ‘Low Income Families and
Coping Through Brands: Social Inclusion or
Stigma’, Sociology, 46:74 at www.sagepub.com/
content/46/1/74
Heflin, C., Corcoran, M., Siefert, K., (2007)
‘Work trajectories, income changes, and food
insufficiency in a Michigan welfare population’,
Social Service Review, 81 (1), 3–25:
Huang, J. Guo, B. and Kim, Y. (2010) ’Food
insecurity and disability: Do economic resources
matter?’ Social Science Research, 39, pp.111-124
Hulse, K. and Saugeres, L. (2009) ‘Housing
Insecurity and its Link to the Social Inclusion
Agenda’, AHURI Research and Policy Bulletin, Issue 113, AHURI: Melbourne.
Jacobs, G., Morrison, M., Irvine, D. and Palermo, C.
(2012) Assessment of Food Security in the City of Melbourne: Interviews with Vulnerable Population Groups, City of Melbourne.
Kendall A., Oslon O.M., and Frangelo E.A. Jr (1995)
‘validation of the Radimer/Cornell Hunger and
food insecurity measures’. Journal of Nutrition Education, 125
Kendall and Kennedy 1998 cited in Booth, S. and
Smith, A. (2001) ‘Food security and Poverty in
Australia: Challenges for Dieticians’, Australian
Journal of Nutrition and Dietetics, vol. 58, issue
3, p150.
Kirkpatrick, S. I. and Tarasuk, v. (2010) ‘Assessing
the relevance of neighbourhood characteristics
to the household food security of low income
Toronto families’, Public Health Nutrition, 13(7),
pp1139-1148.
Koutsogeorgopoulo, v. (2011) ‘Enhancing
Labour Utilisation in a Socially Inclusive Society
in Australia’, OECD Economics Department
Working Papers, No. 852, OECD Publishing
Larson, J. and Moseley, W. G. (2010) ‘Reaching the
limits: a geographic approach for understanding
food insecurity and household hunger mitigation
strategies in Minneapolis-Saint Paul, USA’
GeoJournal, 28 Aug 2010, online http://www.
macalester.edu/dotAsset/851e1eee-5d21-493a-
a777-b2f66facfc13.pdf
Lester, I.H. (1994) Australia’s food and nutrition, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare,
Canberra.
Life Sciences Research Office (LSRO) of
the Federation of American Societies for
Experimental Biology, (1990) cited in Bickel,
G., Nord, M., Price, c., Hamilton, W.L. and Cook,
J.T. (2000) Guide to Measuring Household Food Security, Revised 2000, USDA, Food and
Nutrition Service, Alexandria, vA, viewed 4.6.03,
http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/FILES/FSGuide.
pdf, p.6.
Martin, K.S., Rodgers, B.L., Cook, J.T. and Joseph,
H.M. (2004) ‘Social capital is associated with a
decreased risk of hunger’ Social Science and Medicine, no. 58, pp. 2645 - 2654
Nord, M., Kabbani, N., Tiehe, L., Andrews, M.,
Bickel, G. and Carlson, S. (2002) Household Food Security in the United States 2000, Food and Rural
Economics Division, Economic Research Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Assistance
and Nutrition Research Report No. 21 [online]
Available: www.ers.uda.gov/publications/fanrr21/
fanrr21.pdf Date: 4.6.03.
Nord, M., and Parker, L. (2010) ‘How adequately
are food needs of children in low-income
households being met?’ Child and Youth Services Review, 32, pp1175-1185.
NSW Health, (2000) Older People’s Health
Survey, NSW Public Health Bulletin Supplement, 11:S-2, December 2000, viewed 1.6.07, http://
www.health.nsw.gov.au/public-health/ophs99/
ophs1999.pdf.
O’Dwyer , L.A. and Coveney, J. (2006) ‘Scoping
supermarket availability and accessibility by
socio-economic status in Adelaide’, Health Promotion Journal of Australia 2006 : 17 (3).
Palermo et al (2008) ‘The cost of healthy food in
rural victoria’, Rural and Remote Health, p6.
Pennings, J.M. & Garcia, P. (2005), ‘The Poverty
Challenge: How individual decision making
behaviour influences poverty’, Economic Letters, Elsevier press, at www.sciencedirect.com
Public Health Association of Australia,
(2009) A Future for Food: Addressing Public Health, Sustainability And Equity From Paddock To Plate, Public Health
Association of Australia, viewed 22.7.12,
http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/PHAA
%20Report.pdf.
Public Health Association of Australia, (2011)
‘Public Health Association of Australia: Policy-
at-a-glance – Food & Nutrition Monitoring &
Surveillance in Australia Policy’, Public Health
Association of Australia, viewed 23.7.12 http://
www.phaa.net.au/documents/111204_Food%20
&%20Nutrit ion%20Monitoring%20&%20
Surveillance%20in%20Australia%20Policy%20
FINAL-with%20cover%20sheet.pdf
Power, E.M. ‘Combining social justice and
sustainability for food security’, in Koc Met.al. Eds.
(1999) For Hunger-Proof Cities: Sustainable Urban Food Systems, The International Development
Research Center, Toronto.
BiBlioGraPhy
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
52 ANGLICARE SYDNEY ANGLICARE SYDNEY 53
Queensland Health and Queensland Treasury
(2012) The 2010 Healthy Food Access Basket
(HFAB) Survey. Queensland Health, Brisbane,
viewed 24.7.12, http://www.health.qld.gov.au/ph/
documents/hpu/hafb-2010.pdf
Quigley and Watts (1997) ‘Food Comes First:
Methodologies for the National Nutrition Survey
of New Zealand,’ Ministry of Health, viewed
6.3.06, http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/49b6b
f07a4b7346dcc256fb300005a51/8bf3be812cd9
ec5e4c25667000341ba2?OpenDocument;
Quine, S., and Morrell, S. (2006) ‘Food insecurity
in community-dwelling older Australians’ Public Health Nutrition, 9(2), pp219-224.
Radimer, K.L., Allsopp, R., Harvey, P.W., Firman,
D.W. and Watson EK (1997) ‘Food insufficiency in
Queensland’, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, vol.21 no.3 June, pp303-10.
Radimer, K.L., Oslon, C.M., Greene, J.C.,
Campbell, C.C. and Habioht, J.P.(1992)
‘Understanding hunger and developing
indicators to assess it in women and
children’, Journal of Nutrition Education, 24 (supplement):
Ramsey, R., Giskes, K., Turrell, G. And Danielle
Galagos (2011) ‘Food Insecurity among Australian
children: Potential determinants, health and
developmental consequences’, Journal of Child Health Care, December, sighted at http://chc.
sagepub.com/content/15/4/01.
Russell, D., Parnell, W. and Wilson, N. (1999), NZ Food: NZ People: Key Results of the 1997 National Nutrition Survey, August 1999, Ministry of Health,
Wellington, viewed 12.5.03, http://www.moh.
govt.nz/moh.nsf/ea6005dc347e7bd44c2566a4
0079ae6f/8f1dbeb1e0e1c70c4c2567d80009b77
0/$FILE/nns.pdf.
Rychetnik, L., Webb, K., Story, L. and Katz, T
(2003) Food Security Options Paper: A Planning Framework and Menu of Options for Policy and Practice Interventions, NSW Centre for Public
Health Nutrition (CPHN), viewed 13.5.04, http://
www.cphn.biochem.usyd.edu.au/resources/
foodsecurity.pdf.
Saunders, P., Naidoo, Y. And Griffiths, M (2007)
Towards New Indicators of Disadvantage, Social
Policy Research Centre, University of NSW, Sydney.
Seniloli, S. (1995) ‘Household Food Security in
Australia’, thesis submitted to the Faculty of
Medicine, University of Queensland, viewed
4.6.03, http://www.sph.uq.edu.au/acithn/thesis/
SENILOLI.html
Stevens, C. A., (2010) ‘Exploring Food Insecurity
among Young Mothers’ Journal for Specialists in Paediatric Nursing, 15(2), pp163-171.
Temple, J. B., (2008) ‘Severe and Moderate Forms
of Food Insecurity: Are They Distinguishable?’
Australian Journal of Social Issues, 43(4), pp
649-668.
United Nations Development Program (2012)
The United Nations 2011 Human Development Index, sighted at http:www//hdr.undp.org/en/
media/PR2-HDI-2011HDR-Eng_rev3.pdf.
Wang, J., et al (2009) ‘Mapping the availability
and accessibility of healthy food in rural and
urban New Zealand Te Wai o Rona: Diabetes
Prevention Strategy’ Public Health Nutrition, 13(7), pp1049-1055.
Wood, B and Streker, P (2005) City of Port
Philip : Food Security Report, City of Port Phillip
Community & Health Development Team: St Kilda.
Wood, Dolores K. et al, (2009) ‘Patterns of food
coping strategies among food pantry clients’,
Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition, vol 4, pp 185-202.
BiBlioGraPhy
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
E
MBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
ANGLICARE Sydney 16 Parkes Street, Parramatta NSW 2150 PO Box 427, Parramatta NSW 2124
Tel: 02 9895 8000 Fax: 02 9633 4620 www.anglicare.org.au ABN 88 851 368 006
For thousands of families in NSW, life is a precarious existence – a daily battle to provide the essentials. The constant stress of juggling the most basic necessities has far-reaching impacts, further entrenching the social exclusion of families and children.
This timely report presents research findings and stories of people who face hard choices between paying the rent, paying bills and putting food on the table. The report’s conclusions and policy recommendations highlight this increasingly difficult juggling act which all levels of Government urgently need to address.
EMBARGOED – until 8 May 2013
Top Related