Words Matter.
Why we use the term "food apartheid"
By Natalie Rodgers
Our consulting firm has chosen the use the terminology of “food apartheid” instead the colloquial terminology of “food desert” to emphasize the societal determinants that have created and cause such locations to persist.
The term "food desert" is commonly used to refer to locations that both experience poverty and have low access to food. However, the terminology “food desert" to describe these geographic areas is inaccurate for two primary main reasons. The first reason is that the word "desert" implies that these geographic locations are naturally occurring and the second reason is that the term devalues the life and food systems that are present in these areas by casting them as though barren and worthless (Sevilla, 2021). Whereas deserts represent a natural biome on our planet, characterized by hot dry climate and little rain, “food deserts” are results of societal processes directed by people in power. Systemic racism, oppression, and redlining are used to maintain a system of white supremacy and create food deserts in the process (See SuperMarket Redlining for more details on theses processes). It is no mistake that the people who often fall at the intersectional identities of being a person of color and earning low income live in these areas that lack access to healthy food from grocery stores. The use of terminology “food desert” can obscure such systemic causes of these areas and therefore hinder the long-term transformative solutions requiring large scale societal restructuring towards greater equity.
The second reason that we avoid use of the term "food desert" is because it mischaracterizes the geographic areas that it refers to and the deserts biome alike. Desert biomes are still full of all types of human and animal life that are adaptive and vibrant; the use of the term “food deserts” makes life in such areas seem nonexistent or inferior (Sevilla, 2021). However, many people in “food deserts” can host farmer’s markets, own small community stores, have restaurants and gardens, among other efforts that demonstrate liveliness highly contrasted to the visions of food deserts commonly upheld (Sevilla, 2021). The residents of food deserts are adaptive and have built communities worth sustaining and appreciating, despite policies that have harmed them and led to disproportionate EDC exposures and poorer health outcomes. The use of the word "desert" simply further belittles the diverse residents of food apartheids.
Why the Term "Food Desert" is Inaccurate
Desert Life
Exploring "Apartheids"
Benches in South Africa
The term “apartheid," although now used in the English language originates from Afrikaans, the official language of South Africa. "Apartheid" translates to “apartness," and its use originated to describe South African legislation that maintained segregation between citizens of color and white citizens beginning in 1948 with a new regime (A&E Television Networks, 2010). Much like segregation in the US, governmental policies enforced separate residential areas and separate use of public facilities for people of color, despite people of color making up the majority of the South Africa population.
​
Now, the term can be used in English to denote any separatism on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, socioeconomic status and so on. This term more accurately reflects the nature of areas designated as “food deserts” as manmade results of social separatism on the basis of socio-economic class and race. In order to demonstrate the common historical pattern being repeated in the United States right now, We also believe that it is important to emphasize how both the South African "apartheids" and residents of "food apartheids" shared the common trait of differential treatment and conditions due to skin color. The use of the term “food apartheid” also better frames the solution as attainable given transformative societal change. Hence, in our consulting firm we acknowledge the painful history through which food deserts have come to be in order to better inform future change as intentional and necessarily transformative. Through acknowledging that such unfair conditions cause disproportionate EDC exposure, we can begin to work towards solutions to lessen this burden.