Food & Environment

Food Deserts and Food Swamps: How Systemic Inequality Shapes Access to Healthy Food

By Tony Chavez, YouthCare Connect

Countless low-income communities lack grocery stores that sell fresh, healthy, affordable food. The lack of access to nutritious options in these communities — often referred to as food deserts or swamps — directly contributes to poor diet and other health complications. How can communities improve health outcomes when unhealthy food is often the most accessible option?

In a nation that wastes billions of pounds of food annually, it’s almost unimaginable that millions of Americans live in areas where fresh produce is practically impossible to find. Be that as it may, this is the reality for countless individuals experiencing the very real, modern threat of food deserts in the United States. And contrary to popular misconception, food deserts are not simply the result of geography, but rather are shaped by systemic inequality through harmful urban planning habits and governmental economic disinvestment. But when unhealthy food is the most accessible option, what solutions are available for communities to avoid the detrimental effects of poor diets?

Approximately 18.8 to 23.5 million Americans live in food deserts, or areas with limited access to affordable, nutritious food. And while USDA data previously identified over 6,500 such regions nationwide, newer estimates indicate that over 40 million people live in low-income, low-access areas (Nulph et al.). These areas are strongly correlated with and in part caused by income inequality, as food deserts disproportionately affect high-poverty areas, minority communities, and neighborhoods with low car ownership. Many studies have additionally discovered that these communities also suffer partially due to a lack of supermarkets, which often avoid low-income areas, preferring to locate in wealthier neighborhoods in order to increase profit margins (Li and Yuan).

For that reason, in recent years, many experts have begun preferring the term “food swamps” over “food deserts.” Such experts argue that while food deserts imply a vast, arid lack of food, food swamps highlight the fact that — although food may be plentiful in many low-income neighborhoods — these areas are often limited to unhealthier options, rather than fruits or vegetables (Cooksey-Stowers et al. 1.1). For instance, picture the tens of thousands of highway exits across the country. Visualize the clusters of drive-thrus and gas stations selling snacks, quick meals and other high-calorie, convenience foods — did you happen to picture a grocery store as well? Probably not. Because for millions of Americans, eating unhealthy isn’t a choice of their own volition, but rather, it’s simply their only option. Residents of these areas are often pressured to rely on fast food chains or convenience stores, which offer fewer healthy options and frequently push higher prices onto consumers.

But however they are categorized, the health impacts of food deserts and food swamps are indisputable. Individuals living in these specialized regions often experience significantly higher risks of obesity, type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, cardiovascular diseases, and even certain types of cancer linked to poor nutrition (National Research Council 4). And in the case of food swamps, residents often suffer from malnutrition, despite having high-calorie intake, since food options in these regions are often nutrient-poor and lack the vitamins needed to properly sustain their customers, forcing individuals to either turn to vitamin supplements or face the aforementioned detriments to their health. The results are grim, but these food deserts can be turned around with strategic policy changes and improved food access programs.

Although there exists many proposed solutions, one idea that many communities tend to lean towards is the support of small corner stores or local markets. These stores are often within walking distance, alleviating transportation barriers and tailoring their inventory to local community tastes. And as an added bonus, the net revenue generated through local grocery stores flows back into the community, potentially alleviating the systemic financial pressures associated with food deserts. Nevertheless, many critics point out evident flaws behind this approach to combatting food inequality; these stores often struggle to match the prices of large supermarket chains, and moreover, often lack the necessary space to stock a wide range of perishable products.

For those reasons, many experts advocate for the use of government grants, tax breaks, or relaxed zoning laws to encourage large grocery chains to open stores in low-income neighborhoods. Contrary to other more expensive options, supermarkets such as Walmart or Target provide a wide variety of fresh and high-quality produce. These grocery chains benefit communities by facilitating economic development, creating jobs and increasing neighborhood satisfaction. And on top of that, these larger corporations can afford to lower their prices compared to smaller stores, providing much-needed affordable food options to low-income neighborhoods.

The spread of food deserts and swamps is ultimately not a matter of personal choice, but of the failures of systemic urban planning and economic disinvestment. While supporting local corner stores can provide immediate, community-based relief, long-term solutions will need to take a dual approach of combining local efforts with incentivized, large-scale supermarket development. Nutrition is a right, not a privilege — and it’s time to demand a system that guarantees it for everyone.