Faces of hunger: an intersectional approach to children's right to food in the United Kingdom
| Published date | 01 December 2022 |
| Author | KATIE MORRIS |
| Date | 01 December 2022 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12397 |
DOI: ./j ols.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Faces of hunger: an intersectional approach to
children’s right to food in the United Kingdom
KATIE MORRIS
Durham Law School, Durham University,
Palatine Building, Stockton Road,
Durham, DH LE, England
Correspondence
Katie Morris, Durham Law School,
Durham University, PalatineBuilding,
Stockton Road, Durham, DH LE,
England
Email: katie.a.morris@durham.ac.uk
Abstract
This article explores the extent to which the right to
food is currently enjoyed by children within the United
Kingdom (UK) using image analysis of the food parcels
received by children eligible for free school meals dur-
ing the COVID- pandemic. It argues that child food
poverty serves as an illustration of the failings of neolib-
eralism in the UK context, which had already been
observed prior to the pandemic in relation to the current
Universal Credit system. The article adopts an intersec-
tional approach, connecting the increased risk of food
insecurity experienced by Black, Asian, and minority
ethnic (BAME) children from low-income backgrounds
to the broader notions of racial capitalism and food
oppression. It concludes by offering proposals to target
inequalities and improve the realization of the right to
food for all children in the UK, which could be adopted
by other states to enhance the protection of children’s
right to food around the globe.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits
use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or
adaptations are made.
© The Author.Journal of Law and Society published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cardiff University (CU).
726 wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jols J.Law Soc. ;:–.
727
1 INTRODUCTION
While the United Kingdom (UK) is the sixth richest nation in the world,approximately four mil-
lion of the country’s children live in food insecurity– understood as households with ‘limited
or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to
acquire acceptable food in socially acceptable ways .. . without resorting to emergency supplies,
scavenging, stealing or other coping strategies’.The pervasiveness of food insecurity is indicative
of the more complex issue of food poverty, which captures the underlying economic, socio-legal,
and political causes of hunger.This has coincided with the prevalenceof neoliberalism, an ideol-
ogy predicated on the free market whereby personal responsibilitysupersedes state intervention.
Moreover, the COVID- pandemic and, most recently, the rising cost of living in the UK have
inflamed the issue, further impeding children’s access to food.Yet, as a matter of international
law,the state is legally bound to realize the right to food under Article of the International Con-
specifically via Articles and of the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the
strably, there is a huge discrepancy between the UK’s obligations under international law and its
fulfilment of the right.
This article contributes to the burgeoning literature that transposes the intersectional frame-
work from feminist theory to human rights law ‘to shape a more just and equitable society’,
particularly as states rebuild after the COVID- pandemic.This lens is used to highlight the
barriers that hinder access to food for Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) children from
low-income backgrounds and to inform proposals designed to redress inequalities.
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Economic Outlook Database (), at <https://www.imf.org/en/
Publications/WEO/weo-database//October>.
Food Foundation, ‘Food Insecurity Tracking’ Food Foundation, September , at <https://foodfoundation.org.uk/
initiatives/food-insecurity-tracking#:∼:text=month%(September%)-, %million%children,past%month%
(September%)>.
A. Taylor and R. Loopstra,Too Poor to Eat: Food Insecurity in the UK () , at <https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/
sites/default/files/files/FoodInsecurityBriefing%May%%FINAL().pdf>.
N. O’Connor et al., ‘What Is Food Poverty?A Conceptual Framework’ () Brit. Food J. , at –.
D. S. Grewal and J.Purdy, ‘Introduction: Law and Neoliberalism’ () Law and Contemporary Problems .
Trussel l Trust, Trussell Trust Data Briefing on End-of-YearStatistics Relating to Use of Food Banks: April 2021–March 2022
(), at <https://www.trusselltrust.org/wp-content/uploads/sites////EOY-Stats-- Data-Briefing.pdf>.
International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted December , entered into force
January ) UNTS (ICESCR) Art. , at <https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/
international-covenant-economic- social-and-cultural- rights>.
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted November , entered into force September )
UNTS (UNCRC) Arts and , at <https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-
rights-child>.
S. Sekalala et al., ‘An Intersectional Human Rights Approach to Prioritising Access to COVID-Vaccines’ () Brit
Medical J. Global Health , at , at <https://gh.bmj.com/content///e>.See also K. Crenshaw, ‘Mapping the Mar-
gins: Intersectionality,Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color’ () Stanford Law Rev. ; I. Truscan
and J. Bourke-Martignoni, ‘International Human Rights Law and Intersectional Discrimination’ () Equal Rights
Rev. ; G. De Beco, ‘Protecting the Invisible: An Intersectional Approach to International Human Rights Law’ ()
Human Rights Law Rev..
Sekalala et al., id., p. .
To continue reading
Request your trial