Thread by @apjwilliams

#ENUF2020 This recently came out in print and might interest to academics and practitioners

Argument (thread):
1) Austerity used vocabulary of scarcity & rationing / thrift to legitimise attack on state welfare spending & welfare recipients

rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…

2) Austerity led to material scarcities (housing, health, food insecurity...) but also excesses of wealth and profit

3) Food banks now negotiate real scarcities because of growing levels of need and highly uneven donations (seasonal, rural/urban).

4) Some Independent foodbanks struggle to get donations from nearby supermarkets because of exclusive agreements with The Trussell Trust. Yet some TT foodbanks also share donations with IND foodbanks (NB since COVID, there has been incredible collaboration btw food bank org)

5) While some food banks are often at crisis point, we illustrate how food banks practices e.g. standardised list of items, rationing, time-limited support and referral systems can exacerbate the hardships and stigma of those food banks seek to support

6) We challenge the image of 'absolute hunger' and the ‘empty cupboard' (through which only those without any food at all are determined to be in need, and those seeking to augment a limited supply of food on a more regular basis are viewed as seeking to ‘cheat the system’).

7) Amid increasing evidence of chronic food insecurity in the UK, the image of ‘empty cupboards’ (alongside time-limited and referral systems) discourage people in need from seeking support, and lead to the self-rationing of food and food vouchers

8) For instance, saving up vouchers until desperate, and making a 3 day food parcel stretch two weeks

9) The paper also highlights how volunteers navigate these rationing and referral systems, alongside the role of food bank orgs which do not ration or use referral systems