Center for American Progress

The United States Can End Hunger and Food Insecurity for Millions of People

The United States Can End Hunger and Food Insecurity for Millions of People

Policymakers must reimagine the United States’ long-term approach to food production and distribution to build an equitable and sustainable system that works for all.

In this article
A pastor organizes bags of carrots for delivery to those in need.
A pastor sorts food for a soup kitchen in Lawrence, Massachusetts, on April 15, 2020. (Getty/The Boston Globe/Craig F. Walker)

Introduction and summary

Food is a fundamental human right, much like air and water. Yet hunger and food insecurity are widespread in the United States. In 2020, almost 14 million households—10.5 percent of the population—did not having enough food to meet their needs,1 which greatly affected their health, well-being, and quality of life. From June 1 to June 13, 2022, almost 24 million households—including 11.6 million households with children under the age of 18—reported that they sometimes or often did not have enough to eat during the week. More than 7 million households were food insecure despite receiving federal food and nutrition benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and almost 4 million of these households included children. Notably, low-income households of color, often led by single mothers, tend to have higher rates of hunger and food insecurity2due to historic and structural racism and discrimination in economic opportunity, employment, education, housing, and lending.3

Defining food insecurity

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) refers to food security as “access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life.” Food insecurity, then, can be understood as the lack of access to or the limited availability of nutritionally adequate foods that prevents all household members from leading active and healthy lives. Food-insecure households are not necessarily food insecure all the time, but food insecurity reflects the choices households sometimes need to make between meeting basic needs such as housing, health and child care, and purchasing nutritionally adequate foods.4

America’s acute hunger crisis hinders the success of its people—especially children and youth5—as well as its economic growth. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent economic crisis, coupled with supply chain issues and other challenges, have resulted in rising prices for goods and services—including food. This has worsened the U.S. hunger crisis, shining a light on decades of policy failures in the U.S. food system and the racial and poverty-related disparities that have existed for far too long.6

Read for an example of how the U.S. food system fails those most in need

Policymakers must immediately take action to combat food insecurity and eliminate the root causes and barriers that prevent millions of individuals and families from succeeding. With several key pieces of food and nutrition legislation coming up for reauthorization in Congress, and with the recent White House announcement that a national conference on hunger, nutrition, and health will be held in September 2022,7the United States has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reform all of the connected systems that address domestic hunger and food insecurity, focusing on building a whole-of-government, cross-sectoral approach to eliminating hunger.

This report outlines the long-term strategies necessary to end hunger in the United States:

  • Reduce poverty as an integral step to reducing hunger
  • Create more accessible and affordable food production and distribution systems
  • Address the impacts of climate change and improve market competition to ensure long-term food sustainability for all

The report explains why, with the right interventions, hunger is wholly preventable and highlights interviews with Americans who have experienced hunger and food insecurity.

Hunger and food insecurity are wholly preventable

This nation knows how to fix the problem of hunger and food insecurity. Plenty of programs and services attack hunger and food insecurity from various angles—supporting mothers and babies, school-aged children, older adults, low-income workers, and more. These programs are designed to reduce hunger by supplementing incomes and lifting individuals and families out of poverty.8

But reducing hunger is quite different from eliminating it entirely. The United States has the resources to build an equitable, sustainable food system that ensures no individual, child, or family goes hungry within its borders. However, this is impossible without the political will necessary to make bold decisions that prioritize the health, well-being, and economic security of everyone, not just the lucky few.

No one should have to wonder where their next meal will come from. We must take bold steps now—with government, the private sector, nonprofits, and communities working together—to build a healthier future for every American. Susan E. Rice, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council and former ambassador

Two upcoming legislative opportunities would allow Congress to take meaningful action to build a food system that is more affordable, accessible, and resilient. In 2022, Congress is due to reauthorize the USDA Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC),9which authorizes all the federal child nutrition programs that reach millions of children and their families every day. In 2023, Congress is set to reauthorize the Farm Bill, which includes funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. SNAP is the nation’s largest anti-hunger program, supplementing the food budget of vulnerable families so they can purchase healthy food and move toward self-sufficiency. And, as stated above, the upcoming White House conference offers an unprecedented opportunity to discuss a whole-of-government, cross-sectoral approach to reforming food systems and eliminating hunger.

Hunger’s impact on poverty and economic growth

Hunger plays a pivotal role in how economies function and thrive. When individuals, families, and their children are hungry, they struggle with high levels of toxic stress and have little bandwidth to do much more than meet their basic needs.10Food-insecure adults and children have higher rates of mental health issues, including depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder, and are at high risk for chronic diseases.11Hungry children are sick more often and can suffer from physical, developmental, and cognitive impairments, resulting in lower academic achievement than that of their peers.12In short, hunger weakens individuals and families; impairs their ability to reach their full potential; and creates a drag on the economy in the long term through increased health care costs, increased reliance on government programs, and high levels of economic precarity.13And the burden of hunger and food insecurity falls most heavily on low-income people, rural communities, people of color, women, children, older adults, and disabled people. Families with children, especially single-parent families, are also more likely to face hunger.

Fortunately, the United States has tools to address hunger. The USDA has a range of hunger and nutrition programs designed to meet the needs of the most vulnerable and underserved, including infants and toddlers in child care, school-aged children, mothers and their infants, older adults, people with disabilities, Native communities, rural communities, and more.14The main goal of the USDA’s food programs is to improve access to nutritious foods and reduce food insecurity.15Furthermore, the agency’s food and nutrition programs can also help in reducing the hardship of poverty. When low-income and working Americans receive federal food and nutrition benefits, they can use money from their food budget for other necessities, including housing, child care, utilities, and transportation. This can help individuals and families become more financially stable.

Yet the USDA still has room to improve access and service delivery to meet the needs of all people. Its programs have limitations; they target the consequences of hunger, rather than its root causes. Policymakers must do more to confront the choices that have led to poverty and food insecurity in the United States.

The root causes of hunger are the policy choices that prioritize profits over people

America’s hunger crisis is not due to a lack of food production or scarcity in food supply.16Rather, hunger and food insecurity in the United States are symptoms of policy choices and an economic system that prioritizes the needs of corporations and the wealthy over those of the general population.17Across the nation, households experience hunger due to a combination of factors, including limited income from jobs that pay less than living wages; underemployment or unemployment, which has been exacerbated by the pandemic; few economic opportunities within communities; low rates of educational attainment; the nation’s history of discrimination based on race, gender, and disability; and more.18Millions of Americans who work full time or even at multiple jobs still find themselves in poverty due to low wages, unstable work schedules, and the high costs of child care, housing, education, transportation, and health care. Furthermore, policy choices that underfund state safety net programs or require individuals and families to jump through burdensome hoops to prove need have weakened the effectiveness of food safety net programs, resulting in a hunger crisis that is unprecedented in any peer industrial nation.19For example, to reload WIC benefits, some states require participants to mail in their benefit cards or travel to local offices every few months. In part because it was unsafe for many people to engage in such travel at the height of the pandemic, WIC saw a 9.3 percent decline from March 2020 to January 2021 despite increasing rates of child hunger.20

Also read

Simply put, while hunger is a direct result of poverty, it is further exacerbated by policy decisions that reduce funding, restrict eligibility, put time limits on participation, and create other onerous burdens that force low-income people to prove need. Such policy decisions serve to undermine the effectiveness of food and nutrition safety net programs, frequently leaving many of the most vulnerable Americans without access to lifesaving supports.21Although policymakers can make specific choices to address hunger, effective anti-hunger strategies must be centered in addressing the economic conditions that lead to hunger and reforming the policies that create systematic barriers.

Strategies to address hunger and food insecurity in the United States

The nation has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take bold action to create an equitable, sustainable food system that meets the needs of all individuals and communities. To inform these opportunities, this report offers the following strategies to eliminate food insecurity and hunger in the United States by anchoring solutions in the lived experiences of food-insecure mothers living in different areas of the country.22

I would say 100 times over, it’s impossible to make policies that will be effective if you don’t include the people that will be impacted. If you’ve never lived it, then you don’t know. Stormy Johnson, single mother of three from Kingwood, West Virginia

Reduce poverty as an integral step to reducing hunger

Financial stability and economic empowerment is a necessary condition to ensure that everyone can meet their food and nutrition needs. Poverty and hunger are inextricably linked, and when individuals and families face financial precarity, they often must make tough decisions between putting food on the table and paying for necessities such as rent, electricity bills, child care, and more.

There should never be a situation where families need food and don’t have access. There shouldn’t be situations where people have to steal food. Deanna Branch, single mother of two from Milwaukee, Wisconsin

As federal nutrition programs alone cannot eliminate hunger, policies that focus on reducing poverty are essential. At the federal, state, and local levels, broad-based solutions that address poverty—such as increasing the federal minimum wage; offering workers paid family and medical leave and health care benefits;23and providing affordable housing and transportation as well as quality child care and educational settings—are necessary to help individuals and families build financial stability and meet their needs. Employers, too, can play a crucial role in increasing economic stability through workplace strategies, including by offering living wages, flexible schedules and paid leave, and affordable higher education and other opportunities for upward mobility. Research shows that more than half of food-insecure adults would experience a major positive impact on their household finances if they had access to higher-quality jobs.24As Stormy Johnson of West Virginia said, “Let’s change our programs to help those who are … working poor. We need programs to help people keep their heads above water.”25

In addition, income supplement or cash assistance programs can go a long way toward helping low-income Americans increase labor force participation, build economic security, and better manage their family’s needs.26Consider the child tax credit (CTC), a program designed to help taxpayers with children support their families. The CTC was greatly expanded under the Biden administration’sAmerican Rescue Plan (ARP); it was made fully refundable, and full benefits were extended to approximately 27 million low-income children and children of color who would have otherwise received a partial benefit or none at all.27The ARP also increased the credit amount and distributed benefits on a monthly—rather than yearly—basis to help families meet ongoing needs. When the federal government began to distribute monthly CTC payments in July 2021, child poverty and food insufficiency among families with children dropped dramatically and immediately. The expanded CTC reduced monthly child poverty by almost 30 percent, and in December 2021, it reached 61.2 million children, keeping 3.7 million children out of poverty.28

Millions of parents used their CTC payments to meet their families’ basic needs, including by using the credit for their food budgets, which helped decrease food insecurity by 26 percent in eligible households.29Yet despite the proven success of the expanded CTC, the monthly payments ended in December 2021 as the ARP’s temporary expansions expired. According to a May 2022 survey of 500 parents conducted by Parents Together Action, nearly half of respondents who received monthly CTC checks now say they cannot afford enough food to feed their families.30Javona Brownlee, a single mother of three from Virginia, understands this struggle. She is currently experiencing homelessness after losing her apartment because of black mold. As Javona explains, “The child tax credit helped a lot with groceries. When I was getting the CTC, it was definitely making a difference. I want the government to bring that [income support] back. I could really use that not just for groceries.”31

Johnson concurs:

I’m kind of back to the situation I had before the monthly child tax credit, which was not eating so that my kids can eat, especially with the increasing cost of everything these days. The little bit of money I had left for food and gas after paying for everything else is now even less. Unfortunately, I’ve been having digestive and stomach issues recently, and I wonder if that’s connected to not eating. But if doing that means my kids can eat, I will do that every time.

A permanent, fully refundable CTC would improve the well-being and prospects of all American children and is one of the best anti-poverty investments the United States could make. Strengthening income support programs gives parents more financial stability and allows them to better manage their food budgets and meet the food and nutritional needs of their loved ones. An expanded earned income tax credit (EITC) and housing assistance are also critical means of support that can ensure stability and safety while individuals and families build financial security.32

Create more accessible and affordable food production and distribution systems

The Biden administration’s actions in 2021 did not eliminate hunger, but they certainly helped prevent severe hunger and food insecurity for millions of people.33Still, as the USDA points out, food assistance programs do not reach all populations equally.34Households with children, for example, are twice as likely to experience food insecurity as households without children. In 2020, Black and Hispanic Americans were 3.2 times and 2.5 times more likely, respectively, to be food insecure than white households.35

Southern states experience higher hunger rates than northern states, on average,36mostly due to deliberate policy choices that have weakened their safety nets and suppressed wages.37Rural households are more likely than urban ones to face food insecurity and lack access to food in their communities.38And disabled adults faced food insecurity at more than twice the rate of their nondisabled counterparts in 2020, with non-working disabled adults three times more likely to be food insecure than nondisabled adults.39

Food deserts are regions in which people have limited access to healthy, affordable food. The USDA defines food deserts as low-income census tracts where at least 500 people, or 33 percent of the population, live more than a half-mile from the nearest supermarket, supercenter, or large grocery store in an urban area or more than 10 miles from a grocery store in a rural area. Food deserts result from disinvestment, underinvestment, and historical exclusion of marginalized communities.40These inequities exist in rural,41Indigenous,42and urban43areas, all of which have unique characteristics that policymakers must address in order to promote access to affordable and culturally relevant foods. Estimates indicate that 18.8 million people, or 6.1 percent of the U.S. population, reside in a food desert,44putting them at great risk of diet-related health conditions, such as obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.

Consider this: A family that uses SNAP assistance must drive 25 to 30 miles to the nearest Walmart for their food and grocery needs. They require not only access to a car but also money for gas and time for the trip itself. Low-wage workers, many of whom rely on SNAP, work in poor conditions, marked by inconsistent hours and the inability to schedule their shifts in advance.45These barriers only compound for marginalized groups, such as single mothers of color who are less likely to have access to child care46or disabled people who may be unable to drive, use public transportation, or transport groceries.

For the U.S. food and nutrition systems to work effectively to eliminate hunger and food insecurity, they need a strong and diverse distribution network that considers the unique needs of different communities, individuals, and families. People need access to grocery stores in their communities and within their neighborhoods. They need cars or affordable and accessible transportation that enables them to bring groceries home. They need jobs with livable wages, benefits, and consistent hours so that they can meet their families’ food and nutritional needs more effectively. People with disabilities need access to services such as online ordering and grocery delivery; as parent Deanna Branch told the authors, “I can have groceries delivered to my door through an app. And we can get fresh, quality food delivered to our door. I like that I don’t necessarily have to go out and go shopping, especially with my disability now.”47

Due to the failures of the food system, individuals and families across the nation must rely on local nonprofits, food banks, and other charitable entities to meet their food needs. The spike in food insecurity during the pandemic increased reliance on food banks and pantries to supplement family food budgets and federal benefits that fell short of need.48But as food costs have increased by more than 10 percent in the past 12 months,49food banks, too, have struggled to maintain the increased demand for food supplies,50while taxing resources needed to cover the increased costs of refrigeration, vehicle maintenance, gas costs, and staff capacity. Reliance on food banks also sometimes means that people cannot get appropriate food, including food that is allergen free or that meets a specific nutritional need.

Lifting communities out of poverty is a long-term solution to food insecurity, but alleviating barriers to food access is the next step to achieving a community-based food system where communities develop their own foodways that are self-sustaining and less vulnerable to societal shocks. Strategies to take this step include:

  • Pass financing initiatives or zoning regulation changes to incentivize building supermarkets and local grocery stores in food deserts and underserved areas, similar to the S. Department of Treasury’s New Markets Tax Credit Program or a range of local policies around zoning.51
  • Create food hubs by partnering with schools, community colleges, hotels, and other food-related businesses that can act as community food kitchens to provide storage and distribution capacity in communities that lack such infrastructure.
  • Incentivize food companies to sell to smaller, local grocers in addition to supermarket chains and corporations.
  • Connect federal food programs with local family farms, community gardens, and community-supported agriculture to provide fresh vegetables and fruits to individuals in food deserts.
  • Incentivize local grocers to accept food benefits such as SNAP, WIC, and others.
  • Pass a universal free school meals program so that all school-aged children have access to food.
  • Enable eligible participants to use their SNAP and WIC funds for online grocery delivery to make food more easily accessible.

Strengthen government safety net programs to make them more responsive

Strong safety net programs reduce poverty and hunger, improve health, increase economic mobility, and strengthen the national economy. These programs are intended to protect individuals and families from the effect of economic shocks, natural disasters, and other emergencies. Low-income and working people frequently turn to SNAP and WIC when grappling with hunger and food insecurity caused by job loss, underemployment, low wage employment, pregnancy, or other life events that necessitate additional support to weather economic precarity.52Such programs can be essential for low-income parents such as Deanna Branch, who attests to WIC’s lifesaving impact on her life: “When I was pregnant and a breastfeeding mom, [WIC] had so many nutritious foods available. A healthy pregnancy takes a lot of healthy nutritious foods. And it’s hard to find what to eat when breastfeeding. WIC really looked out for me … WIC really saved my life.”53

SNAP, WIC, and other food programs also spur the economy. Every dollar in new SNAP benefits resulted in $1.74 in economic activity during the last recession. Eligible beneficiaries get $56 in value from every $1 the government spends on SNAP benefits. This money is immediately spent in local communities with around 80 percent of benefits redeemed within two weeks, and 97 percent spent within a month.54Despite the clear return on investment and the necessity of food security for survival, SNAP and other food safety net programs have not been comprehensively modernized in decades. The country’s outdated food safety net has resulted in a huge failure to get food to those in need during this crisis.

Even in good economic times, the nation’s fragmented safety net fails to serve all low-income individuals and families equally.55As mother Javona Brownlee puts it: “I receive food stamps [SNAP benefits], but sometimes I still have to go to the food bank … The food stamps are not enough to feed my family, especially with them being out of school [during the summer] and having to feed them three plus meals a day. I’m going to the food bank at least one a month.”56

Safety net programs, including SNAP and WIC, frequently come under threat of reduced funding and expanded eligibility requirements—such as additional, punitive work requirements or the restriction of personal choice in the kinds of foods people can buy with their benefits—especially when conservative policymakers propose budget cuts to safety net programs in order to offset tax cuts for the wealthy or other spending priorities. Former President Donald Trump’s FY 2021 budget, for example, proposed more than $180 billion in cuts to SNAP, a nearly 30 percent reduction to the program over 10 years,57that underscored decades of attempts by conservative Republican leaders in Congress to restrict access to food assistance.

Not surprisingly, weakening safety net programs undermines their efficacy. SNAP, for example, is an automatic stabilizer and is available to individuals and families who are struggling with unemployment or temporary economic precarity.58But even before the pandemic, SNAP benefits fell short of meeting a family’s typical needs; in fiscal years 2019 and 2020, they averaged less than $1.40 per person, per meal, severely underestimating the cost of a healthy diet.59Furthermore, unlike other safety net programs, the maximum SNAP benefit amounts are fixed across the United States, despite regional differences in food costs. As a result, the maximum SNAP benefit per meal does not cover the average cost of a modestly priced meal in most regions of the country. Even when the USDA updated the SNAP benefit amounts in October 2021, the maximum benefit amount still fell short of the cost of meals in 21 percent of U.S. counties.60

The Biden administration and the USDA addressed this shortcoming in pandemic-related legislation, including the Families First Coronavirus Response Act and American Rescue Plan Act, which temporarily removed barriers to receiving food assistance.61The administration also reevaluated SNAP benefits to account for inflation and family needs, modernizing the program and increasing benefits by about 25 percent—an average of $36.24 per person each month, or $1.19 per day.62This change represents the single-largest permanent increase in benefits in SNAP’s history, but it still does not provide adequate support to all who need it.63Receiving more food assistance through SNAP or other food programs allows households to use their limited food budgets to meet other basic needs such as rent, utilities, child care, and more.64But as many of the temporary pandemic-related safety net expansions—such as unemployment insurance and the eviction moratorium—expired in the last year,65low-income Americans again struggled to make ends meet. This further demonstrates the need for a robust and responsive safety net.66

The federal government should expand and strengthen existing safety net programs by addressing gaps in access and making them more responsive to emergencies. Additional strategies to modernize food and hunger-related programs are discussed below.

Provide maximum access to federal food programs

Expanded access would give everyone, especially the most vulnerable, access to food and nutrition during times of emergencies or economic precarity. Policymakers should expand the emergency flexibilities—such as online enrollment and grocery access—included in pandemic-related legislation to ensure better access to program benefits. Furthermore, policymakers should codify a “no wrong door” approach.67for struggling residents to provide them with cash, food, and housing assistance as needed, link their eligibility to multiple benefit programs, and provide an authentic safety net. They should also incentivize collaboration and coordination between key government agencies to ensure that individuals and families struggling with economic precarity can quickly access the food benefits they need to stabilize their lives. Finally, the federal government should work alongside state and local government agencies and nonprofits to expand and improve participation in food, nutritional, and other government support programs.

Tailor SNAP and WIC benefits to where families live

Tailoring benefits would stabilize families’ access to food and give them more purchasing power to stretch their food budgets. States should provide people with more flexibility to access a wider range of food and nutrition products that meet familial and cultural needs. States should also expand benefits to low-income immigrants, students, Puerto Ricans, and citizens in other U.S. territories,68as well as enable eligible participants to use their SNAP dollars for online grocery delivery. Finally, policymakers should raise the WIC age limit for children from age 5 to age 6, to eliminate the gap in eligibility between WIC and being old enough to go to school, where children will receive school meals.

Focus on equity

The use of an equity lens when considering solutions would ensure that communities of color, single parents, older adults, LGBTQ people, people with disabilities, college students, and residents of rural communities have access to affordable food and nutrition within their communities or along close and accessible transportation routes. Furthermore, federal and state policymakers should incentivize improved data collection and sharing across all programs that serve children and their parents or caregivers living in poverty to ensure that resources reach the most at-need populations.

Strengthen food and nutrition infrastructure

Policymakers should invest in food delivery services, food banks, mobile food pantries, and community-based food distribution sites such as schools and health centers. They should also incentivize stronger collaboration between federal, state, and local governments and private and nonprofit partners to build a wider, more resilient infrastructure for the provision of food and nutrition benefits. Additionally, federal and state policymakers should focus on updating their benefit infrastructure to ensure that participants have simplified access to enrollment and benefits, which will not only ease administrative oversight on case workers but also save costs through increased efficiencies.

Reduce administrative burdens that make accessing food programs so cumbersome

The federal and state governments must eliminate work requirements and asset limits, ease ID requirements, and reduce verification requests so that participants can access programs and benefits more easily, especially when they are dealing with economic precarity or a crisis in their life that necessitates reliance on benefits in the first place. The federal government should also incentivize collaboration and coordination with other relevant government agencies to streamline eligibility for, enrollment in, and access to benefits programs, especially during emergencies or when people need help stabilizing their lives. Finally, the federal government should waive time limits on how long people can receive benefits and expand eligibility during emergencies and climate-related events—such as flooding or wildfires—to ensure that no one goes hungry while trying to rebuild their life.

Strengthen coordination between the private, nonprofit, and public sectors

States and localities must expand and improve participation in federal nutrition programs to include all who need them by expanding food distribution, reducing food waste, and providing more accommodations, such as access to hot, prepared foods and beverages or online grocery ordering.

Address the impacts of climate change and improve market competition

Providing equitable and long-term access to food also requires a production system that is resilient and innovative in the face of future changes. This means adapting food production to meet the realities of a changing climate, a reduced dependence on fossil fuels in production and transportation, and a reversal of trends toward consolidation across the sector.

While the increases in overall agricultural production over the past half century are impressive, maintaining food availability in the face of a changing climate presents significant challenges. Food prices have risen over the past year due to climate change-driven droughts,69climbing input prices,70and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.71These price fluctuations are felt most acutely by food-insecure households.

Achieving national commitments to reduce emissions and address climate change would have significant implications for maintaining food security. There are also sector-specific opportunities to decouple current levels of food production from fossil fuel-derived inputs and make production systems more resilient to climate change. The agriculture sector is responsible for approximately 10 percent of annual emissions in the United States, and agricultural land also has the potential to sequester atmospheric carbon. Strategies that would make the food system more resilient to climate change and resilient to fossil fuel-driven price fluctuations include investing in decarbonization throughout the food production system—including inputs, harvesting, processing, and distribution—and offering technical assistance and incentives to agricultural producers that scale up climate-smart agricultural practices and conservation and restoration of nature to increase long-term sequestration and storage of carbon.

In addition to climate change affecting food prices and availability, the rising cost of food is due in part to competitive conditions at various steps of the food production and distribution process. When there is healthy competition in the market, prices tend to be lower. When competition is limited, however, prices can rise. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the impact of limited competition in the food supply chain. The U.S. meat processing industry, for example, is dominated by four large corporations that supply 55 to 85 percent of all beef, pork, and poultry consumed in the United States. In 2021, during the height of the pandemic, supply chain issues resulted in shortages across the country, and these corporations responded by dramatically increasing their price-cost margins—raising prices more rapidly than costs to take advantage of demand and increasing their profits accordingly.72This occurred even as millions of people were struggling to put food on their tables.

Headline-generating shortages of infant formula have also illustrated the risks of highly concentrated supply. Since a single manufacturing plant that provided the bulk of specialty and infant formulas was shut down in February 2022, parents and caregivers across the country have faced severe shortages and price gouging while seeking a vital necessity.73

Also read

Competition is limited in important parts of the agricultural supply chain, including in the production of important inputs such as seeds, fertilizer, and fuel,74in the processing of foods such as beef and pork, and in many local retail markets. This means that food prices are higher, and it is more difficult for consumers to buy basic food necessities.75

Because farmers must plant and produce food without knowing sales prices in advance, higher costs of inputs such as seeds, fertilizers, and fuel increase farmers’ risk, causing them to produce less. When there is less competition in the market for inputs, the costs of those inputs increase, which in turn raises the price of food and causes food availability to decrease.76Six corporations now dominate the global market for seeds and agricultural chemicals such as herbicides and insecticides, and consolidation has contributed to higher prices.77Competitive conditions also affect fuel prices, an important agricultural input. Reduced U.S. refinery capacity since 2020 appears to have increased refiners’ market power, allowing them to increase the price of gasoline and diesel more than in proportion to already rising crude oil prices.78This year, fuel prices have also been affected by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and increased refiner market power will lead to increased food costs.

A food system that only works for those who can pay premium prices or breaks down when confronted with a national emergency is a failure of massive proportions, threatening the health and well-being of millions of people across the country. Policymakers must address issues of market competition that hamper access to the nation’s food system, fostering a more sustainable and resilient system that ensures universal access to food and nutrition. They can do so by taking the following steps:

  • Address issues of market concentration by bringing new entrants into the food production system to decrease production costs and increase supply, availability, and affordability of critical foods.
  • Provide capital, loans, and other investments to small farmers, meat processors, food producers, and distributors to diversify the food system.
  • Reduce highly concentrated production of essential goods by encouraging antitrust enforcers to prevent additional consolidation and identify anti-competitive behavior by existing firms.
  • Direct relevant government agencies such as the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to monitor manufacturers and resellers for food price gouging behaviors, especially during times of emergencies and shortages.


Food is a fundamental human right necessary for survival, but the United States does not consider access to affordable, healthy food a right that necessitates governmental protection. As a result, the nation has a fragmented, broken food production and distribution system that fails to meet the basic needs of millions of people.

Yet it does not have to be this way. Traditionally, combating hunger is a bipartisan issue,79with many conservative policymakers supporting the programs and interventions designed to reduce hunger and food insecurity. As the United States stands on the precipice of several federal opportunities, including the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act and the Farm Bill, to address hunger in a more substantive and resilient way, policymakers can build a food system that prioritizes eliminating hunger as a key criterion of reducing poverty and increasing well-being.

Building a long-term, equitable, and sustainable food system that focuses on unmet needs is critical to the nation’s economic growth and success. When people’s basic needs are met, they can focus on building their own financial stability and realizing their American dreams. This helps build a stronger, more resilient economy. But public nutrition assistance programs alone cannot eliminate hunger and food insecurity. To truly eliminate hunger, the United States needs a plethora of interventions and strategies that encompass a whole-of-government approach, with coordinated and collaborative partnerships with the private and nonprofit sectors to meet the unique food needs of various communities and populations.


The authors would like to thank Javona Brownlee, Deanna Branch, and Stormy Johnson for their invaluable insight and generosity in sharing their stories. The authors would also like to extend their gratitude to Anona Neal, Justin Dorazio, Calli Singer, Don Wolford, Kyle Ross, Suzanne Harms, Emily DiMatteo, and American Progress’ Editorial team for their invaluable support and guidance on this report.


  1. Economic Research Service, “Food Security in the U.S.,” September 8, 2021, available at
  2. U.S. Census Bureau, “Week 44 Household Pulse Survey: March 30 to April 11,” April 20, 2022, available at; Food Research & Action Center, “The Impact of Food Insecurity on Women’s Health,” available at,14.7%20percent)%20are%20particularly%20high (last accessed August 2022).
  3. Move For Hunger, “Hunger is a Racial Equity Issue,” available at (last accessed August 2022).
  4. Economic Research Service, “Food Security in the U.S.”
  5. Feeding America, “Importance of Nutrition on Health in America: Hunger and health are deeply connected,” available at (last accessed June 2022); Feeding America, “Facts about child hunger in America,” available at (last accessed June 2022).
  6. Arohi Pathak and Rose Khattar, “Fighting Hunger: How Congress Should Combat Food Insecurity Among Low-income Americans” (Washington: Center for American Progress 2022), available at
  7. The White House, “White House Announces Conference on Hunger, Nutrition and Health in September,” Press release, May 4, 2022, available at
  8. Food and Nutrition Service, “FNS Nutrition Programs,” available at (last accessed August 2022).
  9. House of Representatives Education and Labor Committee, “Nutrition Leaders Introduce Comprehensive Proposal to Address and Prevent Child Hunger,” Press release, July 20, 2022, available at
  10. Mariana Chilton and Jennifer Rabinowich, “Toxic Stress and Child Hunger Over the Life Course: Three Case Studies,” Journal of Applied Research on Children: Informing Policy for Children at Risk 3 (1) (2012), available at
  11. Amelie Hecht and others, “Using a trauma-informed policy approach to create a resilient urban food system” (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2018), available at; Chilton and Rabinowich, “Toxic Stress and Child Hunger Over the Life Course.”
  12. John Cook and Karen Jeng, “Child Food Insecurity: The Economic Impact on Our Nation” (Chicago: Feeding America), available at
  13. Ibid.
  14. Food and Nutrition Service, “FNS Nutrition Programs.”
  15. Ibid.
  16. Feeding America, “How We Fight Food Waste in the US,” available at (last accessed May 2022).
  17. David Ballard, “The USDA Is Prioritizing Corporations Over Poor People During a Pandemic,” Center for American Progress, October 22, 2020, available at; Galen Hendricks, Seth Hanlon, and Mike Madowitz, “Trump’s Corporate Tax Cut Is Not Trickling Down,” Center for American Progress, September 26, 2019, available at
  18. Lorena Roque, Rose Khattar, and Arohi Pathak, “Black Men and the U.S. Economy: How The Economic Recovery Is Perpetuating Systemic Racism” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2022), available at;
  19. Joel Berg and Angelica Gibson, “Why the World Should Not Follow the Failed United States Model Of Fighting Domestic Hunger,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19 (2) (2022), available at
  20. Aditi Vasan, “To reduce child hunger, make WIC easier to access,” The Hill, September 16, 2021, available at
  21. Justin Schweitzer, “How to Address the Administrative Burdens of Accessing the Safety Net” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2022), available at
  22. Deanna Branch, single mother of two from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, interview with author, June 30, 2022, on file with author; Stormy Johnson, single mother of three from Kingwood, West Virginia, interview with author, June 30, 2022, on file with author; Javona Brownlee, single mother of three from Virginia, interview with author, June 24, 2022, on file with author.
  23. Arohi Pathak and Kyle Ross, “The Top 12 Solutions To Cut Poverty in the United States,” Center for American Progress, June 30, 2021, available at
  24. Capital Area Food Bank, “2022 Hunger Report” (Washington), available at (last accessed August 2022).
  25. Stormy Johnson, interview with author, June 30, 2022.
  26. Alex Samuels and Neil Lewis Jr., “Democrats Helped Build The Social Safety Net. Why Are Many Now Against Expanding It?”, FiveThirtyEight, February 15, 2022, available at
  27. The American Rescue Plan Act’s CTC expansion was modeled on the American Family Act, the House version of which is H.R. 928, co-sponsored by Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Suzan DelBene (D-WA), and Ritchie Torres (D-NY). See American Family Act of 2021, H.R. 928, 117th Cong., 1st sess. (February 8, 2021), available at For further discussion of the dramatic effects of the 2021 CTC expansion, see Sharon Parrott “Robust COVID Relief Achieved Historic Gains Against Poverty and Hardship, Bolstered Economy,” June 14, 2022, available at; Kyle Ross and others, “The ARP Grew the Economy, Reduced Poverty, and Eased Financial Hardship for Millions,” Center for American Progress, March 14, 2022, available at
  28. Zachary Parolin, Sophie Collyer, and Megan A. Curran, “Sixth Child Tax Credit Payment Kept 3.7 Million Children Out of Poverty in December” (New York: Columbia University Center on Poverty and Social Policy, 2022), available at
  29. Paul R. Shafer and others, “Association of the Implementation of Child Tax Credit Advance Payments With Food Insufficiency in US Households,” JAMA Network Open 5 (1) (2022): e2143296, available at
  30. Carmen Reinicke, “Nearly half of families with kids can no longer afford enough food 5 months after child tax credit ended,” CNBC, June 3, 2022, available at
  31. Javona Brownlee, interview with author,June 24, 2022.
  32. Pathak and Ross, “The Top 12 Solutions To Cut Poverty in the United States.”
  33. Ross and others, “The ARP Grew the Economy, Reduced Poverty, and Eased Financial Hardship for Millions.”
  34. Food and Nutrition Service, “USDA Supports Equity, Inclusion in Nutrition Assistance Programs,” Press release, January 20, 2022, available at
  35. Alisha Coleman-Jensen and others, “Household Food Security in the United States in 2020” (Washington: Economic Research Service, 2021), available at
  36. Laura Reiley, “New federal study shows safety net helped prevent widespread hunger during the pandemic,” The Washington Post, September 8, 2021, available at
  37. Alexandra Cawthorn Gaines, Bradley Hardy, and Justin Schweitzer, “How Weak Safety Net Policies Exacerbate Regional and Racial Inequality” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2021), available at
  38. Food Research & Action Center, “Rural Hunger in America: Get the Facts” (Washington: 2018), available at
  39. Mia Ives-Rublee and Christine Sloane, “Alleviating Food Insecurity in the Disabled Community: Lessons Learned From Community Solutions During the Pandemic” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2021), available at
  40. Renée Johnson and Nyah Stewart, “Defining Low-Income, Low-Access Food Areas (Food Deserts)” (Washington: Congressional Research Service Reports, 2021), available at
  41. Lindsay Haynes-Maslow and others, “Examining Food Insecurity in the Rural United States: A Qualitative Study” (Washington: No Kid Hungry and Chicago: Feeding America, 2020), available at
  42. First Nations Development Institute, “Food Deserts, Food Insecurity and Poverty in Native Communities” (Longmont, CO), available at accessed August 2022).
  43. Dr. Richard C. Sadler and others, “Linking Historical Discriminatory Housing Patterns to the Contemporary Environment in Baltimore,” Spatial and Spatio-temporal Epidemiology 36 (2020): 100387, available at
  44. Economic Research Service, “Food Access Research Atlas,” available at (last accessed August 2022).
  45. “Average gross cash income for all SNAP households was $872 per month, up from FY 2018.” See Food and Nutrition Service, “Characteristics of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Households: Fiscal Year 2019” (Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2021), available at; Adewale Maye and Asha Banerjee, “The Struggles of Low-Wage Work” (Washington: Center for Law and Social Policy, 2021), available at
  46. Sarah Jane Glynn, “Raising the Minimum Wage Is Key To Supporting the Breadwinning Mothers Who Drive the Economy,” Center for American Progress, February 23, 2021, available at
  47. Deanna Branch, interview with author, June 30, 2022.
  48. Amanda Little, “Hunger Is Getting Worse Since the Pandemic,” The Washington Post, June 23, 2022, available at
  49. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Consumer Price Index Summary,” Press release, July 13, 2022, available at
  50. Jennifer Ludden, “Demand at food banks is way up again. But inflation makes it harder to meet need,” NPR, June 2, 2022, available at
  51. Daniel Chapple, “Grocery Store Development in Recognized Food Deserts,” Sustainable Development Code, available at (last accessed August 2022).
  52. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “Policy Basics: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)” (Washington: 2022), available at
  53. Deanna Branch, interview with author, June 30, 2022.
  54. Dottie Rosenbaum, Stacy Dean, and Zoë Neuberger, “The Case for Boosting SNAP Benefits in Next Major Economic Response Package” (Washington: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2020), available at
  55. Food and Nutrition Service, “USDA Supports Equity, Inclusion In Nutrition Assistance Programs.”
  56. Javona Brownlee, interview with author, June 24, 2022.
  57. Dottie Rosenbaum and Zoë Nueberger, “President’s 2021 Budget Would Cut Food Assistance for Millions and Radically Restructure SNAP” (Washington: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2020), available at
  58. Ross and others, “The ARP Grew the Economy, Reduced Poverty, and Eased Financial Hardship for Millions.”
  59. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “A Quick Guide to SNAP Eligibility and Benefits” (Washington: 2022), available at
  60. Berkeley Institute for Data Science, “SNAP Benefit Adequacy,” available at,country%20with%20the%20exception%20of%20Alaska%20and%20Hawaii(last accessed August 2022); Areeba Haider, “5 Details About the Largest Increase to SNAP Benefits in the Program’s History,” Center for American Progress, August 25, 2021, available at
  61. Ross and others, “The ARP Grew the Economy, Reduced Poverty, and Eased Financial Hardship for Millions.”
  62. Haider, “5 Details About the Largest Increase to SNAP Benefits in the Program’s History.”
  63. Ibid.
  64. Food Research & Action Center, “The Case for Making SNAP Benefits Adequate: Reflections from Interviews with Older Adults” (Washington: 2022), available at
  65. Jennifer Liu, “Pandemic Unemployment Benefits End in September—Here’s Who Loses Aid,” CNBC, August 10, 2021, available at; Irina Ivanova, “As Eviction Moratorium Expires, Here Are the States Where Renters Are At Most Risk,” CBS News, August 2, 2021, available at
  66. Ross and others, “The ARP Grew the Economy, Reduced Poverty, and Eased Financial Hardship for Millions.”
  67. The “no wrong door” approach or policy enables people seeking basic needs supports—such as housing, food, or health care coverage—to complete one application that determines eligibility for a range of social service programs that they or their family are eligible for.The White House, “Putting the Public First: Improving Customer Experience and Service Delivery for the American People,” Press release, December 13, 2021, available at
  68. Hispanic Federation, “Increase in Federal Food Stamp Program Is Overdue,” Press release, September 3, 2021, available at
  69. David Condos, “Western Kansas wheat crops are failing just when the world needs them the most,” NPR, June 9, 2022, available at
  70. Keith Good, “Food, Gas Prices Soar, While Fertilizer Prices Show Signs of Moderating,” Farm Policy News, June 12, 2022, available at
  71. The Economist, “The Coming Food Catastrophe,” May 19, 2022, available at
  72. Brian Deese, Sameera Fazili, and Bharat Ramamurti, “Recent Data Show Dominant Meat Processing Companies Are Taking Advantage of Market Power to Raise Prices and Grow Profit Margins,” The White House, December 10, 2021, available at
  73. Arohi Pathak and others, “The National Baby Formula Shortage and the Inequitable U.S. Food System” (Washington: Center for American Progress, 2022), available at
  74. Stella Nordhagen, “The Impact of Higher Input Prices for Farmers, Food Security, and the Planet,” FoodTank, June 2022, available at
  75. Pathak and others, “The National Baby Formula Shortage and the Inequitable U.S. Food System”; Pathak and Khattar, “Fighting Hunger.”
  76. James M. MacDonald, “Mergers in Seeds and Agricultural Chemicals: What Happened?”, Economic Research Service, February 15, 2019, available at
  77. Mohammad Torshizi and Jennifer Clapp, “Price Effects of Common Ownership in the Seed Sector,” The Antitrust Bulletin, 66 (1) (2021): 39–67, available at
  78. John Kingston, “The Loss of US refining capacity is helping drive record diesel prices—and it probably won’t improve anytime soon,” Freight Waves, June 14, 2022, available at
  79. Erik Stegman and Nicole Williams, “30 Years of Tackling Hunger on a Bipartisan Basis Is in Danger of Failing This Fall,” Center for American Progress, September 16, 2013, available at

The positions of American Progress, and our policy experts, are independent, and the findings and conclusions presented are those of American Progress alone. A full list of supporters is available here. American Progress would like to acknowledge the many generous supporters who make our work possible.


Arohi Pathak

Former Director, Policy

Ryan Richards

Former Senior Policy Analyst, Public Lands

Marc Jarsulic

Senior Fellow; Chief Economist


This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.