Food insecurity interventions can take different approaches, and their long-term outcomes depend on how communities collaborate and define shared objectives. Dr. Megan Blake developed the Food Ladder approach to help communities transition from emergency-based models to participatory, community-centred interventions. Her framework advocates for food systems based on mutual support and food as a common good, challenging the dominant individualistic and profit-driven system.
The Food Ladder consists of three “rungs”, reflecting different levels of intervention:
- Catching (rung 1) provides immediate relief for individuals in crisis, including emergency food aid, mental health support, and social services.
- Capability Enhancement and Repair (rung 2) aims to move beyond food access to repair the physical, mental, and social damage of food insecurity. It enhances people’s long-term resilience and food security through initiatives like social eating events and education programs.
- Self-organized transformation (rung 3) focuses on systemic change, fostering collaborations between different stakeholders to develop inclusive, sustainable, and localized food networks.
In this interview, we explore the implications of the Food Ladder with Dr. Megan Blake, Senior Lecturer at the School of Geography and Planning at the University of Sheffield. She is a recognized expert in food security and food justice, collaborating closely with organisations and policymakers to drive real-world change. To learn more about her work, visit her blog.
How can the Food Ladder prompt better and innovative food insecurity interventions?
Rather than being prescriptive, the Food Ladder helps communities think differently about the assumptions behind their actions. The approach intersects three main dimensions:
- Food: Challenges the convenience narrative to shift food culture towards choice, knowledge and positive relationships with food.
- Social: Centres on building social networks that ensure community well-being through knowledge sharing and mutual support.
- Economic: Focuses on ensuring access to adequate food, while creating fair and sustainable local food systems.
However, the framework continues to evolve to focus on additional dimensions, like health or the environment.
Many communities already engage with the Food Ladder ideas, mainly in transitioning from rung one to rung two. The approach encourages people to think more systematically about the implications of their interventions, recognizing that both those who are struggling and those who provide support need new capabilities to better engage with their communities.
By shifting the language from “poverty” to “struggle”, the Food Ladder encourages conversations about shared visions for food futures. This approach bridges the divide between those focused on local food production and environmental sustainability and those engaged in emergency food support, helping to create a more interconnected community and achieve transformational change.
How can the Food Ladder address systemic inequalities and structural causes of food poverty?
The Food Ladder is designed to support values that allow people to flourish. Values like equality, inclusion and diversity are central to how many communities envision their futures. While efforts and resources often focus on immediate needs, thinking about long-term goals helps communities to understand the necessary changes and avoid falling back to the starting point. Even if the ideal is not fully achieved, the process opens up new possibilities that are socially just and environmentally sensitive. Social justice is implicit in the Food Ladder, as the approach seeks systemic transformation by setting inclusion and food landscapes at the core.
The framework recognizes that, even when organizations lack the capability, resources or desire to change, creating connections between interventions can develop opportunities for shared learning, generating potential for transformation. It is essential to develop interventions that create social networks and have an open access, so that everyone can participate in making the whole community better.
How flexible is the Food Ladder across diverse socioeconomic and geographic contexts?
This approach is inherently flexible because it is designed to help people think about how they engage within their communities and how interventions fit the local characteristics. By adapting the issues, it can be easily applied to different contexts and policy areas (like farming or city planning) while keeping the fundamental focus on creating a connection between people, communities, and services.
People living within these communities understand their own needs best but can benefit from guidance and examples of alternative approaches. These can be adapted to their specific context or inspire entirely new solutions. When given the space, opportunity, and permission to think differently, communities show incredible creativity in exploring new possibilities.
How does the Food Ladder address geographic disparities in access to resources and social capital?
It is important to distinguish between resources, which are depleted with use (e.g., money), and assets, which do not diminish (e.g., shared community history). While highly deprived areas are often framed solely as places of lack, every place has some assets. Community organization and local sense of pride can help build the community, leveraging local history, innovation, and creativity. Local authorities have a crucial role in providing additional resources and in coordinating communities’ efforts. While change does not always occur spontaneously, people need to recognize that they have permission to change. So, the first step is reconnecting people and giving them the confidence to recognize that they have assets they can use.
What are the implications of the Food Ladder approach for young people and adolescents?
Young people are a crucial part of communities. Ensuring that they are included in decision-making and have the opportunity to create their own spaces fosters better, more inclusive communities. Intergenerational engagement can build a positive exchange, breaking down generational divides that can lead to social isolation. Young people have valuable skills for addressing poverty, while elders can share valuable food knowledge that kids are missing, benefitting from opportunities to feel important.
Additionally, ensuring dignified solutions that integrate kids from different backgrounds, like before school clubs, is fundamental to removing the social stigma of existing interventions. Moreover, kids are extremely aware when their parents are struggling or not eating. Therefore, it is important to create programs that make kids feel like they are contributing to their family’s well-being and take pride in sharing food with them. Cooking classes or other food education activities can create involvement, allowing everyone to learn and have fun. Moreover, they should provide kids with assets that enable them to manage their budgets when they become independent. While older adolescents need more sophisticated activities, it is important to offer fun group activities that include sharing a meal and cooking together, fostering a positive relationship with food.