tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/household-poverty-28024/articleshousehold poverty – The Conversation2018-05-21T19:49:54Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/961032018-05-21T19:49:54Z2018-05-21T19:49:54ZHousing affordability stress affects one in nine households, but which ones are really struggling?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/217881/original/file-20180507-166903-1jv3l9k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Housing is just one of the essentials in household budgets and it's when there's no way to manage all these costs that financial stress really sets in.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Emma Baker</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Meeting the cost of buying a home or renting privately is difficult for many in Australia, and sadly impossible for some. Governments are concerned about the housing affordability “crisis” to varying extents, but it’s probably fair to say that we have not seen many effective solutions so far. That’s a result of the complexity of both understanding and solving the problem.</p>
<p>Anglicare’s <a href="http://www.anglicare.asn.au/news-and-media/latest-news/2018/04/29/anglicare-australia-releases-rental-affordability-snapshot-the-rental-crisis-is-worse-than-ever">Rental Affordability Snapshot</a> has, for nearly a decade, painted a worrying picture of almost all of our major cities. Again this year only a tiny proportion of rental properties on the market are affordable for people receiving government support.</p>
<p>But analyses by economists, geographers, the building industry, think tanks, housing researchers and governments themselves define the problem of affordability differently. (And they disagree on the solutions, often relying on <a href="https://theconversation.com/affordable-housing-policy-failure-still-being-fuelled-by-flawed-analysis-92993">flawed assumptions</a>.) </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/affordable-housing-policy-failure-still-being-fuelled-by-flawed-analysis-92993">Affordable housing policy failure still being fuelled by flawed analysis</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What do we mean by unaffordable?</h2>
<p>We aim to contribute to the conversation by challenging how we think about and what we mean by “unaffordable housing”.</p>
<p>The way you measure housing (un)affordability matters – a lot. It affects how big the problem is estimated to be, who is identified as affected, where they live, what interventions might help, and how much these will cost. </p>
<p>In addition, it is tricky to generate simple, usable statistics. This is because Australian households have such varied housing experiences (and costs). Sometimes we <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-this-the-budget-that-forgot-renters-77101">forget renters</a>. Sometimes we don’t distinguish between unaffordable <a href="https://theconversation.com/four-outdated-assumptions-prevent-progress-on-affordable-housing-to-everyones-cost-80198">housing costs for low-income and high-income households</a>. And, importantly, sometimes we confuse the risk of housing affordability problems with the experience of them.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/facts-sink-glib-housing-supply-mantra-the-focus-must-be-on-affordable-rental-87757">Facts sink glib housing supply mantra – the focus must be on affordable rental</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Here is an example. The most commonly used measure of housing affordability in both policy and research settings is the relatively simple measure of “housing affordability stress”. We classify people as having housing stress if they are in the bottom 40% for household incomes and paying more than 30% of their income in housing costs. </p>
<p>This allows us to identify low-income households that are paying high housing costs. (It’s generally assumed that people with higher incomes can meet their basic housing needs.) Using this measure, it is estimated that roughly <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08111146.2018.1460267">11% of Australian households</a> have unaffordable housing costs.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=668&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=668&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=668&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/217880/original/file-20180507-166874-1ule7wh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Affordability stress isn’t just a matter of having to juggle income and housing costs, but whether a household can afford other essentials.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/great-concept-household-bills-woman-calculating-1082188298?src=fpPOWyJMq-feiiiw9phV7g-1-23">ThiagoSantos/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But housing costs are just one part of a household’s weekly spending. In <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08111146.2018.1460267">recent work</a>, we were interested to see if we could identify who is actually experiencing financial hardship because of high housing costs by looking at their capacity to meet other essential non-housing costs. A substantial meal at least once a day, medical and dental treatment when needed, and warm clothes when it’s cold – these are things that most Australians regard as essential. When people cannot afford these things, we describe them as being materially deprived (you can read <a href="https://www.sprc.unsw.edu.au/media/SPRCFile/Report12_07_Deprivation_and_exclusion_in_Australia.pdf">more about deprivation here</a>).</p>
<p>Within the 11% of the households classified as having unaffordable housing costs, only a small proportion (just under 3% of households) are also materially deprived. When we take a closer look at who is in this smaller group, they are distinct in that they have lower incomes, poorer health, are more financially strained, live in the rental sector, and move house more often.</p>
<p>Some households may be able to cope with high housing costs by “shuffling” other parts of their life. They may, for example, take on more hours at work, draw on savings, or reduce discretionary spending. </p>
<p>Expensive housing becomes a problem when households are unable to make these adjustments. This might be because of illness, for example, or a relationship breakdown, or long-term precarious employment.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/housing-affordability-problems-might-not-be-all-bad-72354">Housing affordability problems might not be all bad</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>At risk or in trouble: an important distinction</h2>
<p>This simple analysis suggests that there is a probably a big difference between who is classified as having unaffordable housing costs and who is likely to be most affected by them. It also raises the question of whether trickle-down housing supply solutions will ever reach the people who are genuinely affected by housing affordability problems.</p>
<p>As a starting point, maybe we should give priority to those households that are facing high housing costs <em>and</em> multiple deprivations. This approach encourages a significant shift in where we perceive our housing affordability crisis to be – with less focus on broader market conditions and more on people’s lived experience. </p>
<p>Finally, reflecting on the Anglicare report, perhaps it points to another important conclusion. The fact that so few people on government support can afford decent housing suggests that the problem might not be a housing one, but a welfare one.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-budget-standards-show-just-how-inadequate-the-newstart-allowance-has-become-82903">New budget standards show just how inadequate the Newstart Allowance has become</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96103/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Emma Baker receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI)</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lyrian Daniel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Housing affordability is one of Australia’s great unsolved problems. Some households can make adjustments to cover high housing costs, but the ones deprived of essentials are under real stress.Lyrian Daniel, University Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of AdelaideEmma Baker, Associate Professor, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/918132018-02-15T11:37:40Z2018-02-15T11:37:40ZFrom FDR’s food stamps to Trump’s harvest boxes: The history of helping the poor get enough to eat<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206394/original/file-20180214-174997-1ewc7k1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The first food stamps program, created amid the Great Depression, lasted four years. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/images/photodb/27-0844a.gif">Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Trump administration would like to <a href="http://www.supermarketnews.com/laws-regulations/trump-s-proposed-budget-makes-changes-snap">slash what the government spends on food</a> for low-income Americans.</p>
<p>Its latest budget proposal calls for reducing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) outlays by US$200 billion over the next decade and replacing about half of the aid delivered through this mainstay of the American safety net with what it’s calling “<a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/12/food-stamps-trump-administration-343245">harvest boxes</a>” of nonperishable items like pasta, canned meat and peanut butter. <a href="https://www.agri-pulse.com/ext/resources/pdfs/Americas-Harvest-Box.pdf">Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue</a> says this new approach would cut costs and give states, which administer the SNAP program, “flexibility.” </p>
<p>While <a href="https://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9781137520913">researching the history of SNAP</a> and other government efforts to help Americans who face economic hardship get enough to eat, I have been struck by how, while the leaders who pioneered the program and its precursors were Democrats, it has long benefited from bipartisan support. Even as other welfare spending was cut, the kind of assistance that used to be called food stamps has persisted.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8uwDjPIphdg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">This USDA video, which includes some graphic images, recounts the history of food stamps.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>SNAP’s backstory</h2>
<p>As part of his <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/history_4">New Deal</a>, President Franklin D. Roosevelt broke with a governmental tradition of leaving the job of fighting hunger entirely to charities.</p>
<p>Initially, his administration sought to alleviate the spiking poverty rate brought about by the Great Depression by directly distributing surplus pork, dairy products, flour and other surplus food to people who had trouble getting food on the table. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=585&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=585&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206448/original/file-20180214-124893-by3srg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=585&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A mother loading children, potatoes, cabbage and butter obtained through a New Deal-era program into a wagon.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Associated-Press-Domestic-News-Illinois-United-/6cbe8e8058e4da11af9f0014c2589dfb/4/0">AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>FDR’s administration then adopted a new model in 1939 that used food stamps for the first time in a short-lived program. Low-income people could buy stamps and redeem them for groceries worth 50 percent more than what they spent – as long as they spent the bonus ones on items designated as “surplus,” such as eggs, butter and beans. </p>
<p>Beneficiaries could, for example, pay $10 for $15 worth of stamps. They would be free to spend the orange-colored stamps they’d get with the $10 from their own pockets on any groceries they wanted. The $5 in free blue-colored stamps that came as a bonus, however, could buy only surplus food.</p>
<p>The program ended four years later amid the <a href="http://prospect.org/article/way-we-won-americas-economic-breakthrough-during-world-war-ii">economic and employment boom</a> World War II brought about. But some lawmakers continued to support the concept of establishing a permanent version. </p>
<p>President John F. Kennedy, who had expressed shock upon witnessing dire poverty in <a href="https://livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe50s/money_09.html">West Virginia</a> when he ran for office, immediately made food stamps widely available again through an <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=58853">executive order</a> that expanded a <a href="http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=8801">small-scale USDA program</a> already in place. Like its FDR-era precursor, the measure required beneficiaries to spend some of their own money before they could get this assistance.</p>
<p>Lyndon B. Johnson, Kennedy’s successor, signed the <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/short-history-snap">Food Stamp Act of 1964</a>, codifying the program, which took another decade to spread nationwide.</p>
<p>Republicans also championed food stamps. President Richard Nixon expanded the program’s reach during his administration. Senator Bob Dole, a Kansas Republican, led the charge with Sen. George McGovern, a South Dakota Democrat. Working together, they got the <a href="http://doleinstitute.org/timeline/event/food-and-agriculture-act-of-1977/">Food and Agriculture Act of 1977</a> passed. </p>
<p>Following that law’s enactment, beneficiaries no longer had to buy the food stamps. The measure also made <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/2013/fns-001213">food stamp fraud much harder</a> to pull off and therefore rare by introducing <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/short-history-snap">federal funding for states to crack down</a> on abuses and introducing incentives for low error rates.</p>
<p>Food stamps then survived the <a href="https://theconversation.com/welfare-as-we-know-it-now-6-questions-answered-81367">welfare overhaul of 1996</a>, which sharply restricted eligibility for other kinds of government assistance for the poor. Yet lawmakers left the food stamp program intact, making it the only remaining option available for millions of low-income Americans.</p>
<p>In 2002, President <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137520920_1">George W. Bush</a> expanded access to this nutritional support program for immigrants with legal status in a concrete example of what he meant when he embraced “<a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?169821-1/compassionate-conservatism">compassionate conservatism</a>.”</p>
<p>Six years later, the government rebranded the program as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. By that point, the stamps themselves had been gradually replaced across the country with a more modern mechanism. Americans eligible for these benefits were instead getting their groceries subsidized electronically at checkout counters by using <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/ebt/general-electronic-benefit-transfer-ebt-information">plastic cards known as EBTs</a> – as mandated when the government undertook <a href="https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/short-history-snap">welfare reform</a>. Among other things, the cards made it harder to commit fraud because no one could sell the stamps instead of using them to buy their own groceries.</p>
<p><iframe id="iitHT" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/iitHT/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>For the most part, the federal government has avoided getting involved with the direct distribution of food. Exceptions include its decision to give “<a href="https://www.csmonitor.com/1982/1021/102153.html">government cheese</a>” to the poor during the recession of the early 1980s and a longstanding practice of distributing food – especially <a href="http://seedsofnativehealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Hunts.pdf">nonperishable items</a> – on <a href="https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/fdpir/pfs-fdpir.pdf">Indian reservations</a>.</p>
<p>The bid to fight hunger with stockpiled processed cheese during the Reagan administration proved relatively brief and hard to pull off for logistical reasons. But “government cheese” has lived on through punchlines in <a href="https://youtu.be/TOryVF_iM9Q?t=1m31s">movies</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv2VIEY9-A8">TV shows</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyvMdqvH2zg">music</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Xv2VIEY9-A8?wmode=transparent&start=173" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The late Chris Farley warned two characters in this ‘Saturday Night Live’ sketch that they could wind up ‘eating a steady diet of government cheese.’</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Carrying on</h2>
<p><a href="https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/pd/29SNAPcurrPP.pdf">More than 40 million Americans</a> now get food assistance through SNAP, a federal program administered by the states. Large shares of the households getting these benefits include children or members who earn money but not enough to make ends meet. And the program has a proven track record of reducing <a href="https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/article/food-stamps-helped-reduce-poverty-rate-study-finds">poverty and hunger</a>.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://time.com/5155362/trump-cut-food-stamps/">total tab</a>, which <a href="https://www.cbpp.org/blog/snap-caseloads-and-costs-still-falling">rises when the economy falters</a> and declines during boom times, was about $68 billion in 2017.</p>
<p>I believe that Trump’s harvest-box concept would be a logistical nightmare to carry out. In the <a href="https://newfoodeconomy.org/trump-snap-harvest-boxes-blue-apron-infrastructure-cost/">rather unlikely</a> event that the cuts he seeks do happen, it would become harder for low-income people to get healthy food.</p>
<p>That, in turn, would increase the already large burden on <a href="http://www.feedingamerica.org/our-work/food-bank-network.html">food banks</a> and other nonprofits helping the many Americans who slip through the safety net in good times and bad to avoid hunger.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Jw7uT1jOt0o?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Feeding America, a nonprofit network of food banks, describes how SNAP works.</span></figcaption>
</figure><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91813/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matt Gritter does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>SNAP and its precursors have weathered plenty of efforts to shrink the safety net. Its decades of bipartisan support make it likely to survive this one.Matt Gritter, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Angelo State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/602242016-06-02T15:03:09Z2016-06-02T15:03:09ZWhy child malnutrition is still a problem in South Africa 22 years into democracy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124935/original/image-20160602-23302-1nk1gti.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">An unacceptably high proportion of children in South Africa live in poor conditions.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Megan Trace/Flickr</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>High rates of malnutrition translate into poor child outcomes. Preventing this should start early: good nutrition and health of mothers and their children during the first 1,000 days – from conception to about two years – is described as a unique window of opportunity for later human development. By the age of five years the outcomes of any deprivation experienced during this stage of growth may be irreversible.</p>
<p>Globally, it is estimated that a third of the six million preventable deaths of young children in poor and middle-income countries each year can be ascribed to undernutrition. </p>
<p>Of those who survive, an <a href="http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs178/en/">estimated 200 million</a> children under five fail to reach their potential in cognitive development because of poverty, poor health and nutrition, and deficient care.</p>
<p>Two reports have been released in South Africa that show the unacceptably high proportion of children in poor living conditions. The first is Statistics South Africa’s <a href="http://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=6395">profile of the youth</a> and the second is the <a href="http://www.ci.org.za/depts/ci/pubs/pdf/resources/general/2016/SA_ECD_Review_2016.pdf">South African Early Childhood Review</a>, published by the University of Cape Town’s Children’s Institute as well as an early childhood development non-governmental organisation <a href="http://www.ilifalabantwana.co.za">Ilifa Labantwana</a> and the South African goverment’s Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation. Both focused attention on the plight of young people in South Africa.</p>
<p>They show that South Africa’s stunting rate lies well above the trend for most countries that are at a similar level of economic prosperity. This is despite the improvement in the prevalence of stunting as a result of policy interventions in the two decades since the end of apartheid. The reality is that the bulk of South Africa’s children continue to live in households that are below the poverty line. </p>
<p>This means that, while inequities in nutritional status may have been mitigated through the existing suite of social protection policies, children remain at risk in South Africa. </p>
<h2>Poverty</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.ci.org.za/depts/ci/pubs/pdf/resources/general/2016/SA_ECD_Review_2016.pdf">South African Early Childhood Review</a> shows that children are more likely to be living in poor households than adults. About 53% of children under six live in poor households. The vast majority of these children are African and live in rural areas. The figures can be compared with just less than 33% of households and 45% of individuals categorised as poor in terms of South Africa’s official <a href="http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-03-10-06/Report-03-10-06March2014.pdf">upper-bound poverty line</a> of R779 ($50) per month. </p>
<p>South Africa’s high levels of inequality are well documented. In terms of income, the <a href="http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-03-10-06/Report-03-10-06March2014.pdf">bottom 20% of the population</a> receives less than 5% of income while the wealthiest 20% <a href="http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-03-10-06/Report-03-10-06March2014.pdf">receives more than 60%</a>. This situation has hardly changed over the past two decades and translates into dramatic differences in expenditure patterns.</p>
<p>Statistics South Africa has shown that <a href="http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-03-10-06/Report-03-10-06March2014.pdf">poor households spend</a> about R8,485 per year (US$540 at current rates) on food. This makes up 34% of their total household expenditure. Non-poor households spend R14,020 ($894) on average per year on food. It makes up only 10% of their total household expenditure. </p>
<h2>Stunting</h2>
<p>For infants, one consequence of poverty is stunting: having low height-for-age. Stunting results from failure to grow at an adequate rate. It is considered a long-term indicator of undernutrition that reflects the cumulative effects of poor socioeconomic, environmental, health and nutritional conditions.</p>
<p>Nutritional status is important both during the period prior to a child being born, as it develops in the womb, as well as during the first two years of the child’s life. </p>
<p>Child nutritional status has long been identified as an important concern in South Africa. And the food security and nutritional status of infants under the age of two years is of particular concern. </p>
<p>In 1993, about <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0376835X.2014.952896">30% of children under five</a> suffered from stunting. The data that exists prior to 1993 suggests this level was maintained and perhaps exceeded in some parts of South Africa, for at least a decade.</p>
<p>Most <a href="http://www.ci.org.za/depts/ci/pubs/pdf/resources/general/2016/SA_ECD_Review_2016.pdf">studies</a> now agree that this prevalence has declined. It currently sits at about 25%. And there are differences across groups and areas. Stunting is highest among the coloured population (at 28%) and higher in rural areas than in urban areas.</p>
<p>In the context of such extreme inequalities, differences in the prevalence of stunting across income groups might also be expected.</p>
<p>But the trend of height-for-age status of children diverges from that of other forms of inequality when mapped against income. In 1993, almost 50% of children in the poorest tenth were stunted, compared with 15% of children in the richest tenth. </p>
<p>The most recently available data shows that although inequalities have persisted, they are far lower. Today, 26% of under-five children in the poorest quintile are stunted compared with 14% of children in the richest quintile. The implication is that there has been a <a href="http://jutaacademic.co.za/print/academic_products/AcademicProduct/1893">significant decline</a> in terms of inequality in health outcomes for children since 1993.</p>
<h2>A change of direction</h2>
<p>This reduction – in the face of little change in the prevalence of income poverty and widening income inequality – points to the impact of polices that have provided a “social wage” to the poor. This refers to the package of services and grants intended to reduce the cost of living of the intended beneficiaries. The social wage is a component of South Africa’s <a href="http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/Executive%20Summary-NDP%202030%20-%20Our%20future%20-%20make%20it%20work.pdf">National Development Plan</a>. </p>
<p>Currently, close to 60% of <a href="http://www.treasury.gov.za/documents/national%20budget/2013/review/chapter%206.pdf">government spending</a> is allocated to the social wage. Expenditure on these services has more than doubled in real terms over the past decade. Social wage policies that are relevant for nutritional status of children include:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>free clinic-based primary health care for women and children under six; </p></li>
<li><p>subsidies on housing, electricity, water, sanitation and solid waste management; and</p></li>
<li><p>the child support grant, most importantly.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>But addressing this challenge will require more than spending additional money by increasing the child support grant, or extending it to older age groups. Alternative interventions must be found to achieve greater progress in improving the food security and nutrition of children. </p>
<p>This includes strategies to support better diets for infants, such as the promotion of breast-feeding, which has been shown internationally to improve nutritional status. It is concerning that the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund <a href="http://www.unicef.org/southafrica/media_10469.htm">reports</a> that South Africa has one of the lowest rates of exclusive breast-feeding in the world.</p>
<p>Strategies must also provide access to adequate water and sanitation where children are living. Unhygienic conditions, including those that arise when toilets are shared by a number of households, have been <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002010">linked to</a> moderate to severe diarrhoea in children. This in turn leads to malnutrition. </p>
<p>Finally, there is a role for the delivery of other forms of social protection to children, including prenatal care for prospective mothers. </p>
<p>Interventions such as these need to be included in the implementation strategies of policies such as the recent <a href="http://www.nda.agric.za/docs/media/NATIONAL%20POLICYon%20food%20and%20nutrirition%20security.pdf">National Policy on Food and Nutrition Security</a>, and in provincial and municipal strategies for food security. </p>
<p>In addition, civil society organisations concerned with food security and the right of children to adequate nutrition should consider broadening the pathways through which they try to influence policy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60224/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julian May receives funding from the National Research Foundation, Mellon Foundation, Western Cape Government, International Development Research Centre, German Academic Exchange Service, Office of the President, Statistics South Africa, KwaZulu-Natal Government, National Department of Social Development, Economic and Social Research Council, World Bank.</span></em></p>Inequalities in the nutritional status of poor and rich have been mitigated through various social protection policies, but children in South Africa remain at risk of malnutrition.Julian May, Director DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Food Security, University of the Western CapeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.