Suchergebnisse

In the years since the UK Government embarked on its harsh austerity programme, food poverty has become a major issue, and food banks have been forced into a major role in the lives of countless citizens. This book is built on hundreds of hours of interviews with the people who rely on food banks today, as well as with the volunteers who keep them running on tight budgets and in difficult conditions.

Foodbanks and other forms of charitable welfare provision are fast becoming an established feature of the UK social security system. Drawing on over two years of ethnographic observation in a Trussell Trust foodbank in North East England, this paper explores the relationship between the construction of the 'active citizen' and lived experiences of foodbank users and volunteers. Findings show how participants' experiences and behaviour challenges popular political and policy narratives that individuals are using foodbanks because of poor lifestyle choices. The internalisation or rejection of this narrative is then examined, contrasting the different forms of citizenship that arise. Through the significant work that goes into living on a low income, people both aligned with and challenged the ideas underpinning 'active citizenship'.

Foodbanks and other charitable activities are fast becoming an established part of austerity Britain. This paper is based on ethnographic research undertaken over a two-year period in North East England, exploring the lived experiences of health inequalities for residents in the most and least affluent areas. Findings show how the majority of foodbank users experienced stigma, fear, and embarrassment, which was at times aggravated by representations in 'poverty porn' television shows. Stigma could be overcome once people recognised that 'other people like us' were receiving a food parcel. Finally, the practice of 'Othering' was evident across the research sites.

AbstractThis article focuses upon social networks and their relationship to stigma and identity for long‐term sickness benefits recipients in the North East of England. Drawing on empirical qualitative research with long‐term sickness benefits recipients, this article demonstrates how the co‐construction of stigma is fundamental in shaping how long‐term sickness benefits recipients participate in social networks with friends, family and the community. The findings support the idea that the stigma of receiving benefits can be contrasted with nostalgia for the social elements of employment. Utilizing the work of Goffman, the article focuses on how the stigma and shame felt at receiving sickness benefits for an extended period of time interacts with social networks and identity. Reluctance to disclose a claimant identity to friends and family could lead to social isolation and a perceived need to 'keep meself to meself' which can be linked to a wider rhetoric surrounding benefits recipients that characterizes them as 'scroungers'.

Researching sensitive topics such as sickness and disability can encompass a wide range of demands that must be continually negotiated throughout the research process by both the researcher and research participants. Therefore, a studying the study approach is important when exploring the quality and ethical practice in qualitative research on sensitive issues with vulnerable populations. This becomes especially important within a UK context when considering the negative discourse surrounding the sickness benefits process in the UK. Drawing upon semi-structured interviews with 25 long-term sick and disabled benefits recipients in the UK, the study sought to uncover the health and illness narratives of long-term sickness benefits recipients. Within the presentation of methods that were used, a discussion of the methods used in conducting a "study of the study" are considered, providing an illustration of how to do this and what to do with the results of such a reflective piece. The challenges of doing such research are outlined, and the need for a reflective process surrounding the research process is emphasised. Finally, the approach of studying the study is an example of an illustration of how to adopt this approach when considering qualitative research with hard to reach groups.

AbstractThis article presents qualitative data taken from in‐depth interviews with 25 long‐term sickness benefits recipients in the north east of England, UK. A key theme emerging from the research is the importance of listening to the narratives of long‐term sick and disabled benefits recipients, particularly in relation to the formation of policy responses and in terms of practice. The findings also illustrate how stigma associated with claiming benefits can deter people from accessing the support they need, leading to under‐claiming and the risk of amplified financial strain and hardship. Further, the importance of evidence that emerges from research which focuses upon the lived experiences of sickness benefits recipients to provide evidence in the framing of disability and welfare policy is crucial. Lastly, the article discusses how the narratives presented have implications for social policy and practice, alongside the potential implications for sick and disabled people themselves.

Becker (1967) poses the question Whose side are we on?, a question which has become an enduring part of discussions within social scientific methodology. This paper explores the key issues in Becker's argument and considers its relevance to researchers today, locating this within a consideration of evaluation-based research and policy. Many of the issues Becker discusses remain relevant, yet what has changed radically is the context within which academics operate. In an era when academics and their research are becoming increasingly commodified, this paper contends that the question of who the academic serves and writes for is increasingly important.

COVID-19 caused levels of household food insecurity to spike, but the precarity of so many people in wealthy countries is an outgrowth of decades of eroding public provisions and labour protections that once protected people from hunger, setting the stage for the virus' unevenly-distributed harms. The prominence of corporate-sponsored foodbanking as a containment response to pandemic-aggravated food insecurity follows decades of replacing rights with charity. We review structural drivers of charity's growth to prominence as a hunger solution in North America, and of its spread to countries including the UK. By highlighting pre-pandemic pressures shaping foodbanking, including charities' efforts to retool themselves as health providers, we ask whether anti-hunger efforts during the pandemic serve to contain ongoing socioeconomic crises and the unjust living conditions they cause, or contest them through transformative pathways to a just food system. We suggest that pandemic-driven philanthropic and state funding flows have bolstered foodbanking and the food system logics that support it. By contextualising the complex and variegated politics of foodbanking in broader movements, from community food security to food sovereignty, we reframe simplistic narratives of charity and highlight the need for justice-oriented structural changes in wealth redistribution and food system organisation if we are to prevent the kinds of emergency-within-emergency that we witnessed as COVID-19 revealed the proximity of many to hunger.