Tobias Ritter

Hunger and nutritional poverty in Germany: quantitative and qualitative empirical insights

Despite increasing social inequality, hunger and nutritional poverty are not regarded as phenomena of German reality; Germanys debate on eating patterns is largely dominated by the issue of obesity. The article challenges this view and shows by means of empirical approaches that hunger and nutritional poverty tend to be underestimated in a supposedly affluent society. Due to a lack of appropriate food research in Germany, our study gives quantitative evidence drawn from a combination of studies to show that there is nutritional poverty in Germany, and that social welfare recipients are widely excluded from eating out, arguably an essential form of social and cultural participation. Furthermore, we provide insights, based on a qualitative longitudinal study, into day-to-day coping practices in response to food shortage. As the empirical results show, physiological hunger and hunger for social inclusion by eating out are a reality in contemporary German society. The predominant responses of the German political and social welfare system, however, can be characterised by delegation and denial of the problem and by a tendency to stigmatise the poor.

Food Insecurity in German households: Qualitative and Quantitative Data on Coping, Poverty Consumerism and Alimentary Participation

This article provides empirical results on food consumption patterns of German low-income households and those living under conditions of welfare as defined by Social Code II (Sozialgesetzbuch II). We focus on nutritional consumption patterns, strategies of food choices and typologies of coping with alimentary exclusion in Germany. Quantitative data from SILC/Eurostat are examined alongside qualitative data derived from a longitudinal study composed of more than 450 biographical interviews, conducted over a period of five years. The quantitative data reveal that food poverty and alimentary participation in German households is severe compared to the European average, the UK and even to Greece. The qualitative data give insight into a broad variety of individual coping strategies, eliciting evidence of the essential role of alimentary participation, as well as its tight restrictions.

Arbeitsvermögen in Zeiten des SGB II — Zwischen Reproduktion und Erosion

Mit den SGB-II-Reformen ist die Aktivierung der Leistungsempfanger zu einer der Kernaufgaben der neuen arbeitsmarktnahen sozialen Dienstleistungen“ geworden (Bartelheimer 2005). Mit diesem Paradigmenwechsel hin zu einem aktivierenden Wohlfahrtsstaat“ avanciert die Kommodifizierung von Arbeitskraft zum zentralen Ziel, das sowohl durch eine Verstarkung des Arbeitszwangs als auch durch eine Ausweitung befahigender Politiken umgesetzt werden soll (Dingeldey 2007). Im Mittelpunkt von Masnahmen und beruflicher Weiterbildung steht nun nicht mehr in erster Linie die (Wieder-) Eingliederung in regulare Beschaftigung, sondern der Erhalt bzw. die Wiedererlangung der Beschaftigungsfahigkeit (Dingeldey 2007/Thomson 2006: 330) sowie die Vermittlung allgemeiner und spezifischer Kenntnisse zu deren Verbesserung (Biewen u.a. 2006: 366).1 Dabei geht die Aktivierungsintention der Reform davon aus, dass allein die institutionell aufgezeigten Wahl- und Handlungsoptionen“ den einzelnen Arbeitslosen bereits befahigen“, Entscheidungen uber seine weiteren Beschaftigungsperspektiven zu treffen“ und die angebotenen Handlungsoptionen wahrzunehmen“ (Hartz u.a. 2002: 45). Dies scheint drei Unterstellungen zu implizieren: a) auf Seiten des Arbeitslosen findet sich ein individuelles Defizit vor; b) die Institutionen arbeitsmarktnaher Dienstleistungen sind fahig, diese Defizite treffsicher zu identifizieren und die jeweils passenden Angebote zu unterbreiten; und c) aus den institutionell angebotenen Optionen resultiert — quasi zwangslaufig und naturwuchsig — Aktivierung und Befahigung auf Seiten des einzelnen Arbeitslosen.

Subjektivierendes Arbeitshandeln – „Nice to have“ oder ein gesellschaftskritischer Blick auf „das Andere“ der Verwertung?

Das Konzept subjektivierenden Arbeitshandelns wurde seit den 1980er Jahren entwickelt und konnte damit schon zu den Traditionslinien arbeitsorganisatorischer Forschung gezahlt werden; es ist zugleich aber fur uns noch immer auch eine neue Herausforderung. Das Konzept hat sich als sowohl empirisch fruchtbar als auch theoretisch inspirierend erwiesen.

Food Insecurity and Poverty in Germany

As Germany is considered the most powerful economy in the European Union, one would not expect food insecurity to be a German problem. However, rising social inequality means that food insecurity is an increasingly serious problem in the Global North and in otherwise stable European economies. The predominant responses to food insecurity on the part of the German political and social welfare systems can be characterized by delegation and denial of the problem and by a tendency to stigmatize the poor. Food surveys conducted in Germany exclude from their focus key at-risk groups and suggest that unsatisfactory nutrition is merely a self-inflicted problem caused by unhealthy eating patterns. However, a differentiated look at the data points to a more problematic constellation for Germany. For example, in Germany, 46.6% cannot afford a drink or meal with others at least once a month—a very high percentage compared to the rates of the EU27 (28.8%), Greece (18.5%), and the UK (18.2%). Food insecurity could be an intermittent reality for some 7% of Germany’s population. The number of food banks in Germany increased from 480 in 2005 to 916 in 2013, and 60,000 volunteers currently serve food to 1.5 million so-called ‘regular customers’. These numbers alone could be interpreted as evidence of food insecurity in Germany. Understanding individual day-to-day coping strategies of at-risk population groups will help with the development of social policy strategies to minimize food insecurity not only in Germany but also throughout Europe—provided policy-makers care sufficiently about this issue.

Hidden and Neglected: Food Poverty in the Global North - The Case of Germany

Although still a powerful economy, Germany faces rising income inequality and food insecurity. Quantitative data show that nutritional poverty in Germany has become a fact, especially for social welfare recipients. This contribution gives an overview and discusses the limits of results from different data sources, such as German food surveys, and addresses how affected population groups are systematically underrepresented. To give a more thorough impression of food insecurity in Germany, the article compares nutritional consumption data from the Statistics on Income and Living Conditions/Eurostat survey for Germany, the members of the European Union 27 (EU27), and Greece. The figures for Germans with incomes below 60% of the median equivalised income who cannot afford one proper meal every second day are worse than those in the remaining EU27 member nations, and the figures for their children are not so far from the figures for crisis-stricken Greece. As eating is not only about nutrition but also a means of social activity, we consider the ability to eat and drink with friends an issue of alimentary participation. The percentages of Germans who cannot afford a drink or meal with others at least once a month is very high compared to the rates of the remaining EU27 member nations and Greece. The provided quantitative figures prove that we see serious signs of food poverty in portions of Germany, despite its comparatively strong economy. Data from hundreds of qualitative interviews describing how people stricken by food insecurity try to cope with the situation complement these results. Such data are very important, as governments widely underestimate the problem and leave it to be dealt with by food banks as the only institutional solution.