14
Policy intervention at the local level: incentives for increasing fresh food retail
The interest in food deserts extends beyond just a concern for individuals who have
increased transportation costs associated with shopping. Food deserts are a reflection of
contextual problems. A number of articles have demonstrated an association between
accessibility of retail food and consumption or health outcomes (Chen, et al., 2009, Jago, et al.,
2007, Laraia, et al., 2004, Lopez, 2007, Moore, et al., 2008, Morland, et al., 2006, Morland, et
al., 2002, Powell, et al., 2007, Rose and Richards, 2004). Some of the impact of environment on
behavior may be related to promotional effects. The early marketing literature on shelf space
experiments certainly indicates that supply can drive demand, independent of price (Curhan,
1974, Curhan, 1972, Wilkinson, et al., 1982). Areas of poor access to retail food often have poor
access to health care and other basic services. Although it can be argued that general
development strategies, such as tax incentives for businesses to locate in these areas, are more
appropriate (Bitler and Haider, 2009), incentives to promote retail food outlets, in particular,
often garner political support, since most urban communities see such business as desirable.
In 2007, the New Orleans City Council authorized a Food Policy Advisory Committee to
draft a report on the food access situation in New Orleans, with recommendations for
improvement. The report of this Committee was released in early 2008 and called for strategies
to increase fresh food retail activities in underserved areas (New Orleans FPAC, 2008).
Currently winding their way through the policy process are three such programs: a fresh food
retail incentives program, a community markets initiative, and an urban food gardens initiative.
The first, further along in the process, seeks to provide low-interest or forgivable loans for those
intending to open or restore a supermarket or other grocery retail outlet in an underserved area,
or to current outlets with limited or no produce that intend to substantially improve the stocking
of fresh fruits and vegetables.
Supermarkets might not locate in poor areas because of a real or perceived lack of
sufficient demand. Supermarkets operate at low margins, and owners tend to be risk averse.
Low-interest or forgivable loans, such as those in the initiative described above, might cause
reassessment of specific situations, causing store-owners to invest in an underserved area. This,
of course, is counter-productive in areas that cannot support a supermarket. Part of the risk in
post-Katrina New Orleans concerns how much of the pre-storm population of a given area will
return. A city-led reduction in the barriers to "reentry" of grocery stores could actually help
precipitate such a return, since former residents might view their neighborhoods as being viable
once again. The population of Orleans parish continues to increase, with the most recent
estimates indicating it is at 74% of its pre-Katrina size (GNOCDC, 2009).
All neighborhoods cannot support a supermarket, nor are supermarkets the only way to
assure access to healthy food. Low density areas of New Orleans, as well as other cities, do
support smaller functioning markets. As was seen with the tracts in Treme and Village de L’est,
small stores can provide fruits and vegetables, sufficient enough in variety to meet Thrifty Food
Plan guidelines and in quantity to be roughly comparable with small supermarkets. The city’s
fresh food financing initiative also has these types of stores in mind. Retrofitting such markets
with extra refrigerators to carry fruits and vegetables could be a more efficient or lasting way to