The Effects of Food Rescue on Food Insecurity: Results of Interview and Questionnaire Development Studies

Background and Purpose: In the United States more than 42 million people are food insecure, and more than 40% of fresh food is sent to landfill.  Grassroots “Food Rescue” organizations glean usable fresh food slated for disposal and redistribute it to people living in poverty.  Over 3 billion pounds of rescued food was redistributed in 2016, with the goals of reducing food insecurity and the environmental impact of discarded food.  These goals are only achieved if redistributed food is consumed, yet there may be substantial obstacles to its consumption.  Unwieldy quantities of unfamiliar fresh foods may be difficult to store or prepare, or recipients may prefer to choose the food they serve and eat.  To date, nothing is known about whether re-distributed food is consumed, or whether it has its intended effects on the diet and budgets of food insecure people. 

Methods: In Study 1, 29 food recipients participated in group interviews regarding their use of redistributed food and its effects on their diet and budget.  Interviews were analyzed for themes.  In Study 2, those themes were used to create a questionnaire that can be used with larger, more representative populations.  22 people participated in cognitive interviews.  Ten items were finalized to address the effects of food rescue on recipients. 

Results: In Study 1, recipients reported consuming their entire share of redistributed food.  Many innovative techniques to successfully store, prepare, and serve rescued food were described.  Participants reported that food rescue improved their diet and their access to fresh food, and a subset of participants perceived improvements in their chronic diet-related medical conditions.  Effects on budgets were also positive.  Contrary to expectations, food rescue resulted in an increased, rather than decreased, sense of choice.  Participants reported that the modest relief to their budgets gave them a sense of choice and empowerment, as it freed limited resources for preferred foods or interesting activities.  In Study 2, cognitive interviews led to important refinements of the questionnaire.  For example, participants prefer to discuss their budget in general, rather than specific terms, and requesting information about budget relief in specific dollar amounts is likely to result in missing values. 

Conclusions and Implications: Food security is a fundamental equity and social justice issue.  These studies suggest that Food Rescue programs can be successful, and have produced a brief questionnaire that can be used to assess larger, more representative populations.  The United States has the weakest social safety net of any advanced nation, and the existing safety net is currently under significant threat.  Food Rescue programs have the potential to have substantial impact on food security as well as on the environment.  There are inherent risks in shifting responsibility for this fundamental human need from government to volunteer efforts.  Nonetheless, the results of this work suggest that food rescue may provide a critical stopgap for families in poverty who are experiencing food insecurity, and who cannot always gain access to fresh food.