Too much and too little? Debates on surplus food redistribution

Summary
better to redirect the money which funds
redistribution to community self-help schemes?
Or could the surplus food be used as part of
community food initiatives such as cooking
classes? Are there lessons to be learnt in this
'h<strong>and</strong>out' versus 'self-help' debate from the
analysis of emergency food aid to poorer nations?
l There are benefits to food retailers when they
donate their surplus. So what is the aim of the
retailer when it donates surplus? Financial
benefits <strong>and</strong> corporate kudos, or an educated
contribution to problems of deprivation? Why do
retailers have so <strong>much</strong> surplus anyway? If they
have costed surplus into prices borne by the
consumer, are they really part of the solution -
or part of the problem?
l There are many different ways to redistribute
surplus food. Are some ways better than others?
Should we be encouraging certain schemes -
those which have potential to boost the
nutritional intake of the recipients at a local level,
for example, while arguing against others -
perhaps national schemes which have no
particular underst<strong>and</strong>ing of food insecurity
issues? How can, or how should, the benefits of
the different schemes be evaluated?
l In the UK, most surplus food is redistributed to
charities to supplement their supplies bought
with charity funds, or donated 'harvest-festival'
style. Are the arguments against surplus food
redistribution also arguments against any
'h<strong>and</strong>out' based food charity, whether the food
is surplus or not? How does the surplus nature of
the food affect the nature of the debate?
l Many advocates of surplus food redistribution see
it as a practical solution; others see it as a political
minefield. So should the issue of surplus food
redistribution be argued in a political context, or
a non-ideological, practical one?
l Critics of surplus food redistribution have
assessed the situation in North America, a
situation very different from the UK. For example,
North America has a very different system of
government <strong>and</strong> welfare. Also, 'hunger' is a
<strong>much</strong>-talked about issue, whereas in the UK, the
problem is rarely named as 'hunger', but as
'homelessness' or 'poverty'. Do such differences
render the criticisms irrelevant to this country, or
can they shine light on what might happen in the
UK? For example, will welfare reform in the UK
favour privatised surplus food redistribution in
the future as the U.S. government does now?
viii Published by Sustain: The alliance for better food <strong>and</strong> farming - 2000 viii