Unequal Food Distribution is Putting the Blame on Pacific Islanders.

Illustrated by Marie Bailey

As we focus in on food for this issue of Massive, I think it’s important to recognise the unequal distribution of quality nutritional food within our country. I’m sure many of us have been privy to conversations where blame tends to be placed onto Pacific communities for high rates of diabetes, obesity or other health related issues. I’m sure many of us have heard palagi New Zealanders laugh and remark that “iT’s their cHOicE” to put unhealthy products in their bodies. I’m sure many of us have tried to explain the different layers that actually remove one’s ‘choice’ from this equation. I’m sure many of us have felt exhausted and frustrated as the health inequities of Pacific communities are framed as the individual failings of Pacific Islanders themselves.

The truth is that most unhealthy foods are cheaper and more convenient than healthier food options. For many who are working within low-paying jobs, or do not have access to high quality education, this creates an issue of accessibility, in which Pacific families do not have the same capabilities and opportunities to source and produce healthy meals.

Studies has shown that compared to other ethnic groups, Pacific people are more likely to live in neighbourhoods of ‘high deprivation’, have the lowest median household incomes, higher unemployment rates, the lowest rates of home ownership, and the highest rates of household crowding (Ryan, Grey & Mischewski, 2019).

This narrative of blame that is currently operating in Aotearoa needs to be changed to one that is more reflective of reality.

I sat down with Elaine Rush, Professor of Nutrition at Auckland University of Technology, to further understand how these issues interplay for Pacific communities.

When asked what the biggest drivers leading to food insecurity were for Pacific communities, Elaine noted that, “part of it is poverty. Part of it is location – where you live, what’s available, where the supermarkets are… how much time for shopping, and ability to store food. Part of it is having such large families to look after. We know the more in the family, the more likely to be food insecure.”

After also sitting down with Dr. Ridvan Tupai-Firestone, Associate Professor at Massey University Research Centre for Hauora and Health, these points were repeated.

Ridvan acknowledges, for Pacific communities, “we’re talking about families living under one household or under one roof”.

Many Pacific families are living in households that are made of up of more family members than you see in western nuclear family units. This is shown through statistics which state that 50 per cent of Pacific households in Aotearoa have five or more people living within the same home, with 25 per cent of Pacific households having seven or more occupants (Rush, 2009).

This means that Pacific families have many more mouths to feed while also tending to work multiple jobs, often in shift work. The ability then, to coordinate time to purchase and produce meals while also providing income for the family is strained.

It takes time, and enough money left over after rent, transport and other commitments are paid, to be able to prepare healthy, nutritious meals for large groups of people. With low-paying shift work constricting the time and budget available to cook and shop, it is not surprising that meals tend to be the cheapest and most convenient options found at the supermarket or local dairy.

“That accessibility has another layer under it,” says Ridvan, “and that is financial means to be able to access food and cook good quality food.”

“With all the other insecurities, how can you possibly say ‘oh people have a choice – it’s their choice to have sugary drinks’,” continues Elaine.

“The sugary drinks are far much cheaper than milk and they’re in vending machines. Where’s the milk or vegetable and fruit vending machines? It’s just wrong.”

This is the same case with the placement of fast-food chains within lower socioeconomic neighbourhoods. In more deprived neighbourhoods, supermarkets are further away (1.2-1.3km) while fast-food outlets are within 0.7km-0.8km (Rush, 2009). This adds another layer to food insecurity, in which the types of stores that are physically available to communities and the types of transport they have access to, directly impact their accessibility to nutritional food. We have seen this issue emphasised throughout Covid-19 as the need to isolate makes these problems worse.

A definition from ‘Food Security for Pacific Peoples in New Zealand’ states that “food security is determined by what foods are available and the resources and the knowledge (the desire and motivation) to access and use that food” (Rush, 2009).

“When I talk about accessibility… it’s in the broader sense, knowing the types of food groups that are out there, having that knowledge, financially being able to afford quality food,” explains Ridvan.

“This also includes accessing or being able to provide for a large group of families rather than just thinking about the typical family of four.”

“It does come back down to knowledge and financial capability – that’s one major factor that is driving food insecurity,” says Ridvan.

The knowledge needed to maintain a healthy lifestyle refers to accessibility and education that informs individuals, families and communities about the types of nutritional food needed to be healthy, and teaches the skills needed to produce quality food, inclusive of budgeting.

Without this knowledge or budget, families are ill-equipped to work with a diversity of food types and struggle to produce meals with good nutritional value. There needs to be prioritisation of support for those experiencing food insecurity and education to enable the self-determination and empowerment of Pacific communities to be able to make nutritional choices for their aiga.

While there are currently a multitude of community-driven or local initiatives that aim to improve food security for marginalised communities, there is more that could be done.

“It’s not enough and winter’s coming soon, so it’s going to be harder,” says Elaine Rush.

When asked what could be changed, Elaine explains, “At an individual level, there are many things that will contribute... but first of all, lifting families out of poverty, having secure housing, secure jobs, secure income would make a huge difference.”

There are also positive initiatives and organisations currently working to tackle these issues. Elaine mentions Pacific Heartbeat, which is part of the Heart Foundation. It has worked with the Pacific community for 20 years to share knowledge around eating better, budgeting and cooking – by Pacific for Pacific. She comments that people who have completed these courses have gone back into their community and shared the knowledge learnt through their experiences with Pacific Heartbeat.

Ridvan also indicates that community initiatives that are co-designed within the community can play a significant role in improving food security for Pacific communities.

Ridvan refers to the free school lunch programme run by the Government as a positive initiative that shows potential for success, especially for schools in high deprivation areas. Although, she comments that there has been dissatisfaction among students with some of the food types that they are not familiar with, or food that is not palatable. This is an area in which co-design could be implemented more heavily, whereby community involvement in the planning of the initiative could make lunch packs more relevant and healthier. Ridvan notes that having genuine community involvement could lead to an important social-economic enterprise for Pacific communities.

There could be different ways to approach providing free lunch to students other than contracting outside services to provide ready-made meals wrapped in plastic. Focusing on not only the physical health of students but also prioritising the environment and building student’s skill sets, could open up many opportunities for students to grow and use their own produce.

“They have home economics for example,” explains Ridvan, “where they’re using their own produce to make food for the school community.”

“That’s not only providing the food to all children, it’s also giving these kids good knowledge and life skill sets that can be used for life. If that starts early, like in primary school, that would probably be a better approach than finding a supplier that the school would charge out services to produce lots of ready-made meals that look flash,” says Ridvan.

Pātaka Kai Hall at Kokiri Marae in Wainuiomata is a great grass-roots initiative that Ridvan mentions. It functions in a similar way to a food bank, where different community groups contribute food and also grow some of their own vegetables on their council-owned land.

The importance of knowledge was extenuated in the experience of recipients of Pātaka Kai Hall. It was found that many families were wasting their food because they didn’t know how to cook with the ingredients provided. In response to this, Pātaka Kai Hall adapted and now provides recipes to use alongside the vegetables provided to the community.

This example shows that while providing actual food resources is essential, this needs to be paired with access to resources that inform our communities on how to utilise different types of food.

It is therefore imperative that any community initiative is relevant to the people that the service is being delivered to. Without cultural relevance or significance, community initiatives could be a wasted resource – as has been seen across a range of past and current government projects.

This is acknowledged by Ridvan, who explains, “Having community gardens ... Yes, they’re great social initiatives, but they have to be relevant to the community. They need to be able to use the food that they’re growing.”

In this sense, we are brought back to the importance of co-designing initiatives with communities themselves to ensure that they are appropriate and relevant. Without having direct conversations with those with lived experience, how can these initiatives see any form of success?

“Giving [communities] the knowledge to be able to make some of those changes and make an informed decision about some of these projects we’re working on - that’s really important,” explains Ridvan.

“These initiatives, they have to be able to work, and they’ve got to be relevant for these communities… if it’s not relevant, if it’s not a good fit with the Pasifika values and the way that they view things, then it’s not going to be a sustainable initiative.”

For the Government, I hope we see this type of approach be used more broadly across community initiatives. Ensuring that these programmes are co-designed and align with the cultural values of the community will be essential for any initiative aiming to tackle food insecurity.

For those of us who are living in positions of food security, as you move through your daily lives I hope you look at your access to food a little bit differently. I hope that you can see your ability to budget, access ingredients, plan and produce diverse meals, as something that is not as easily accessible for many families across Aotearoa.

When the breadth of this issue is placed on the table, it is hard to prove that obesity rates within Pacific communities are the result of a multitude of individuals making bad personal choices. We need to widen our understanding of accessibility to understand the different ‘choices’ that groups across Aotearoa have access to.

These are not personal choices that are being sacrificed at the expense of healthier options, but rather structural barriers that restrict Pacific communities from accessing healthy food at the same ease as other New Zealanders.