Getting Grub in Gippsland Understanding Food Security in Latrobe and Baw Baw Shires

Transcription

1 Getting Grub in Gippsland Understanding Food Security in Latrobe and Baw Baw Shires

2 Written by : Nicole Favre Central West Gippsland Primary Care Partnership, Food Security Project Worker Edited by : Claire Palermo and Deanna Pattieson Monash University, Nutrition and Dietetics Selena Gillham Central West Gippsland Primary Care Partnership, Health Promotion Coordinator Caitie Smith West Gippsland Healthcare Group, Community Dietitian With thanks to : Joelene Thompson and Nabil Salibi Latrobe City Council, GIS Support Officers Vinay Parankusham Department of Health, Public Health Officer

3 Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction to Food Security in Central West Gippsland 2 Methods Background Data Assessment 4 Victorian Healthy Food Basket Surveys 5 Mapping 6 Results and Discussion Background Data Assessment and current Community Activities 7 Victorian Healthy Food Basket Surveys 10 Mapping 13 Analysis of Results and Priority areas for action 15 Recommendations 16 References Appendices Current Community Activities 1.1 Latrobe 1.2 Baw Baw Food Outlet Maps 2.1 Baw Baw Large Scale 2.2 Warragul 2.3 Drouin 2.4 Longwarry 2.5 Neerim South 2.6 Yarragon 2.7 Trafalgar 2.8 Rawson 2.9 Latrobe City Large Scale 2.10 Moe/Newborough 2.11 Morwell 2.12 Traralgon 2.13 Churchill

4 Executive Summary Food insecurity is defined as having irregular access to safe, nutritionally adequate, culturally acceptable food from non-emergency sources. Having adequate food to eat is one of the basic elements of human rights. Without appropriate access to nutritious and affordable food, physical and mental wellbeing is affected and there is an increased risk of chronic disease. In 2008 the Department of Health Victorian Population Health Survey identified Gippsland as having a higher incidence of food insecurity amongst its residents (5.8%) than the Victorian state average (5.6%), with Latrobe being higher than both the Gippsland and Victorian averages. (6.0%) The Central West Gippsland Primary Care Partnership covers two municipalities in Gippsland; the Baw Baw Shire and Latrobe City Council. Combined, this area stretches from Longwarry to Toongabbie and includes the major townships of Drouin, Warragul, Moe, Morwell, Traralgon and Churchill. The aim of this project was to further assess, locate and understand the nature and reasons behind the high food insecurity ratings found in the population health survey data across both local government areas (LGAs). This research will help to identify the specific areas within the LGA s to determine those most at risk of food insecurity. This will help form priority areas for action within communities affected to help increase their access to healthy, affordable foods. The key methods used to measure physical and economic access to food were: Assessment of current statistical data to investigate barriers to food security. Identifying all food outlets across Baw Baw Shire and Latrobe City Council. Undertaking a Healthy Food Basket survey across each supermarket and general store to ascertain which stores could supply a family with a fortnight s worth of healthy foods and how much it would cost. Listing all methods of available public transport to help assess the accessibility of Healthy Food Basket stores. Collecting Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) data to see where there are pockets of economic disadvantage. A preliminary compilation of current Community initiatives to help with future program planning. With this data, maps were generated to provide a holistic representation of areas that may be at risk of food insecurity through low income, poor access and high food costs. These results showed that: Cost of fortnightly groceries increased in the more remote, outer towns. That many areas of disadvantage were not within the 500m radius of supermarkets. That public transport was less frequent and less regular in the outer areas which already had increased food prices and increased travel time to closest supermarkets. Large chain stores were significantly cheaper than their independent counterparts. There were no large chain supermarkets outside of the large towns. Through the introduction of a second large chain supermarket, it is possible to decrease the median price of groceries Results showed that smaller towns were more vulnerable to food insecurity due to poor public transport options, fewer appropriate supermarkets and a higher cost of groceries. Some of the smaller towns most at risk included Boolarra and Yinnar as well as Rawson and Erica. Some larger townships also showed signs of significant food insecurity, in particular Moe/Newborough and Morwell. These larger towns had high rates of low income earners and their median grocery prices were amongst the highest across both municipalities. 1

5 Introduction to Food Security in Central West Gippsland Food security can be defined as the ready availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods, and assured ability to acquire food in socially acceptable ways. Kendall and Kennedy [1] This means that not only should food be able to be accessed regularly but that the food be nutritionally adequate and safe to ensure that our physiological needs are met. The rate of preventable chronic diseases is on the rise with diseases such as Type 2 Diabetes and Heart Disease now affecting more and more Australians. [2] Major risk factors to these diseases include stress, unemployment, lack of education and poverty. These risk factors are consistent to factors that affect individuals who are food insecure. [3] Therefore if an individual is experiencing food insecurity they are more susceptible to chronic diseases as well as the Figure 1: Determinants of Food Security direct risk of overall poor nutritional status including both obesity and malnutrition. The Kendall and Kennedy definition of food security highlights the multi-factorial nature of food security and the importance of assessing all the social and environmental determinants of food insecurity. The model below illustrates this by showing that food security is not only reliant on an individual s ability to access food, but is also reliant on the nature of the food supply of that region. Assessing all of these factors will help to not only gain a global picture of food insecurity but also prevent missing any at risk groups that might not otherwise be considered as being food insecure. For example if only income is considered, residents that have a tolerable wage but that have to travel 1 hour or more to access Rychetnik, Webb, Story and Katz (2003) Food Security Options Paper, NSW Centre for Public Health Nutrition. (Adapted from a model by McComb, Webb and Marks 2000) 2

6 nutritious food will not be identified. In particular in regional or rural settings such as the Baw Baw and Latrobe LGAs, accessibility and affordability has a huge impact on a family s ability to eat nutritious food regularly. Food security however is not the same as emergency food relief. Emergency food relief systems such as soup kitchens and food vouchers, are targeted to only those who have run out of food completely and are unable to buy more. Food security on the other hand, encompassed not only these people but also those that are unable to buy the foods they want for the variety of reasons outlined in the diagram above. The Community Indicator Victoria data (CIV) and the Victorian Population Health Survey both showed that Gippsland and Latrobe both had higher than state averages for incidence of food insecurity. [4, 5, 6] Until now, not a lot of data was available in Central West Gippsland to further assess common determinants or specific areas of food insecurity. In addition, both CIV and population health data only asked if residents had run out of food and could not afford to buy any more. Therefore the data may have missed those residents that had experienced different kinds of food insecurity such as those that possibly could afford some sub-standard food but could not access their preferred nutritious food or were anxious about running out of food. A study by Anglicare showed that out of those that accessed emergency food relief the majority said that if they had more money they would buy more of the fruit and vegetables that were lacking from their diet.[7] This highlights two important points, firstly that those that are food insecure are more likely to skip nutritious fresh produce and secondly that if these nutritious foods were more accessible/affordable that they would be chosen. This might contribute to the statistic that 49% of Baw Baw adults and 52.2% Latrobe adults do not meet either their daily fruit nor vegetable requirements [4] These numbers are both higher than the Victorian average of 48.2% of people not meeting their requirements. 3

7 Methods Background Data Assessment Given the multi-factorial nature of food security, extensive background data collection was needed to assess the social determinants that may influence an individual s ability to access food. Numerous sources of data were used for both municipalities which investigated food access, food availability and food affordability. Additionally to this, data was collected on any current evidence of food insecurity and the forecast of the growth of food insecurity across the Central West Gippsland Region. As Baw Baw and Latrobe are both regional/rural areas a main barrier that needed to be investigated for this project was that of food accessibility. One of the major determinants in a household s ability to access food is whether or not they own a car. In conjunction to this, income and age were graphed as ability to drive and affordability of driving would also contribute to access. Car ownership data was obtained for each region within the municipalities. Although lack of car ownership could be overcome through use of public transport, some transport routes only run a once daily round trip, which is inadequate for many purposes. Another important factor of food security is food affordability. This was done by looking at household incomes, evidence on affordability and household expenditure. For example, if a family had a low income but owned a private vehicle, the cost of the vehicle in light of their finances may prompt the question into why they owned the vehicle. Is there insufficient public transport in the area? Are supermarkets too far away? onwards whereas Latrobe residents of 60 years and over were graphed. This will show what percentage of the population may have hindered driving/cooking/shopping ability and those who are retired that may be living off pension. Whilst these ages are quite young, the data was from 2008 and 2006 (Baw Baw and Latrobe respectively) so at present these residents would be 2-4 years older. Also by having a younger age graphed we can forecast some of the impact that an ageing population will have in terms of greater burden upon public transport, taxi services and community travel. Forecasting the population demographic and observing trends will help in program planning and preventing future at-risk areas from becoming food insecure. Latrobe City Council had this data presented in a map form whereas Baw Baws raw data was put into tables by the project worker. Data from previous years was also collated to observe any health and environmental trends across Central West Gippsland. Both the West Gippsland Healthcare Group and Latrobe Community Health Service had Victorian Healthy Food Basket data from 2008 to show the trend in the price and availability of groceries. In addition, current Community Actions across both Shires were collated into a preliminary directory to add to the upcoming Food Relief Directory. This was done to avoid putting together a program that was already existing as well as using current partners and initiatives that have worked in order to ensure a successful program. The two municipalities gave differing age data so Baw Baw measured residents from 65 years 4

8 Victorian Healthy Food Basket Survey The Victorian Healthy Food Basket Survey was used to determine which supermarkets provided a full range of nutritious foods and to quantify the cost of a fortnights worth of groceries. [10] The Victorian Healthy Food Basket (VHFB) includes a list of 44 food items needed to have a healthy balanced diet as well as 2 unhealthier options that are not included in the Basket but instead used as comparison to show price difference between essential and high fat high sugar low nutrient non essential foods. Any stores with less than 40 items from the VHFB list were not listed as supermarkets in the survey as they do not offer enough core foods to provide a complete diet. In addition, the VHFB only accepted non-generic brands as the generic brands are often lower in quality and are more susceptible to change or discontinuation in supermarkets and thus aren t always a reliable food source. However, because of the introduction of discount supermarkets such as Aldi and supermarket generic brands such as You ll Love Coles and Select, this report has included a rough average of a generic brand VHFB. This will not be used in the median data for each township but will give insight into the difference in price. The VHFB survey then breaks down the food costs and calculates how much a fortnights worth of groceries would cost depending on the household demographic and their nutritional requirements. The four household types that it calculates are: - Typical family. (44 year old male and female, 18 year old female and 8 year old male) - Single Parent family. (a 44 year old female, with an 18 year old female and 8 year old male) - Elderly Pensioner. (71 year old female) - Single Adult (an adult male older than 31 years old) Across the 2 shires a total of 22 stores were identified as meeting the VFHB criteria, out of a 65 possible supermarkets and general stores. (Latrobe City = 16, Baw Baw = 6, Chose not to be involved = 3) Data was collected by the same Project worker to ensure consistent data across the supermarkets. This was done during a 4 week period over the month of mid May to mid June

9 Mapping Mapping the food outlets across both municipalities was performed in order to analyse distance to essential food outlet and also to show any food deserts where food access is poor. Food desert is a term used to describe an area that has limited access to the nutritious foods needed for a healthy diet. [11] There has been a lot of literature of the prevalence of food deserts in urban areas particularly in Canada and the UK [12] but unfortunately there is little data for Australia and even less in terms of ideal methods of measuring food deserts in regional/rural Australia. Most of the literature stated that a food desert was either a radius of 1000m by foot, 500m by foot plus a 10 min bus ride or a strict 500m radius around the essential store. A list of all food outlets across the Baw Baw and Latrobe shires was constructed using the local Yellow Pages and through physical observation when collecting Healthy Food Basket Surveys. Routes of available public transport were obtained from the Latrobe Valley Bus Lines, VLine website, Baw Baw Shire Council Website and In addition the Project Worker travelled some of the bus routes in order to confirm routes as well as to determine whether the local buses were reliable and realistic methods of transporting groceries. Food outlets were then put into two broad categories of essential and non-essential stores. Essential food outlets were stores that sell a large variety of the staple nutritious food needed in our diet according to the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating. [13] These included supermarkets, discount supermarkets, greengrocers, butchers and bakeries. Nonessential stores sold either insufficient amounts of nutritious food or could not be relied upon to provide a balanced diet. These non-essential stores included cafes, restaurants, convenience stores, petrol stations, take away and fast food outlets. This differentiation between food outlets was done to highlight that food security isn t only about access to any food but the ready availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods. [1] Therefore the data was analyzed as the access to the essential stores only. This method is consistent to previous studies on a similar scale. [14] Unfortunately the nature of regional Victoria is that there are some towns that might have a butcher but no other essential store. According to literature a great portion of this town s residents would be able to access a full healthy diet because of that one butcher as it would be seen as an essential store. In addition, most of the public transport was infrequent and sparse especially as you ventured into the smaller towns of the municipalities. To account for the nature of the area, this report will show a 500m radius around HFB containing supermarkets only. The shorter radius will account for any residents with decreased mobility (elderly, disabled etc) and will assume that travel is done on foot due to poor public transport in some areas. In addition, food deserts will be commented on in conjunction with other data such as car ownership and socio-economical data, to bring a more global and representative set of results. The maps were developed with the assistance of Vinay Parankusham, Public Health Officer from the Department of Health and Joelene Thompson and Nabil Salibi, GIS Support Officers from Latrobe City Council. The maps included the bus routes, essential food outlets, areas of disadvantage (SEIFA) and food deserts as outlined above. 6

10 Results and Discussion Background Data Assessment and Current Community Activities The data available from both shires gave good insight into the current barriers to accessing nutritious food as well as showing some predictions for the future. Some of the main barriers to food security are access, ability and income. [Figure 1] To represent this car ownership (access) weekly income (finance) and age (mobility and ability) were graphed below. In the Baw Baw set of statistics, Rawson and Yarragon are the two townships with the highest percentage of households living on an income of $500/wk or less. Neerim South and Trafalgar have the largest percentage of residents over 65 years and Longwarry and Warragul have the biggest proportion of households with no private vehicle. In comparison to the overall Gippsland data all of the townships have a larger proportion of people living on a low wage. Graph 1 - Statistical Profile of Baw Baw [14] % 65+yrs %weekly income < $500 %households with 0 car ownership Similar data was graphed for the municipality of Latrobe City. Moe/Moe South and Morwell were listed as having the greatest percentage of low income earners. Again, all townships had more households living on less than $500 a week compared to the average for Gippsland. Car ownership was often lower in Baw Baw and Latrobe compared to the Gippsland average, with both Morwell and Moe/Moe South recording more than 10% of households with zero car ownership. In addition, data showed that Morwell and the Rural North area were trending towards more households with no cars. Unfortunately data was not identical to Baw Baw and an age of 60 + years was used. Morwell, Moe/Moe South and Newborough currently have the most ageing population but that they are not far from the Gippsland average. 7

11 Graph 2 - Statistical Profile of Latrobe [15] %60+ years % weekly income <$500 % households with 0 car ownership Part of successful program planning is to acknowledge any data possible to help predict any shift in demographic [19]. In this case the only universally known prediction data for the two municipalities was that of age demographic. In Baw Baw, the data was only grouped in the three regions shown in figure 2. The townships included in Part A are those of Trafalgar and Willow Grove. Part B East includes Yarragon, Erica and Rawson whereas Part B West includes the larger towns of Warragul, Drouin, Neerim South, Longwarry and Noojee. Figure 2 Regions of Baw Baw Part B West can expect the largest amount of residents aged over 65 in the next 25 years (Graph 3). However it is Part B East that can expect the largest population change. (Graph 4) This means that over the coming years Part B East will have a shift in demographic and unless infrastructure is established to allow for this, this boom in the older population could put people at risk of food insecurity. This ageing population has a large amount of widely reported effects on the community and health care system. [18] The older the individual the less likely they are to have personal transport and the more likely they are to have mobility or cognitive issues. Any food security programs that are developed needs to acknowledge this change in demographic and account for the expected strain on the healthcare system and build a selfsustainable system. Part B West Part B East Graph 4 - Percentage population change from 2006 to 2036 Part A Part A Part A Part B East Part B West Baw Baw Part B East Part B West Baw Baw 8

12 Graph 3 -Demographic Projection Baw Baw Part A Part B East Part B West Baw Baw Number of residents aged 65+, 2006 Number of residents aged 65+, 2036 The Latrobe statistics show a similar trend and by mapping the data it is evident that the Rural South West area can expect a big jump in percentage of residents over 65 years. In addition this could impact the townships of Churchill and Morwell as they are the closest major towns to this Rural South West area. Another town that can expect an increase in percentage residents aged over 65 is Moe/Moe South. In conjunction with the present population data previously discussed this area is already one with 35% low income earners as well over 10% of households not owning a car. Part of the data assessment was also to document current community actions targeting food security in order to reflect on their Figure 3 Current Population Distribution Latrobe effectiveness and to prevent doubling up on any strategies. VicRelief Food Bank is currently compiling a handbook looking at all the emergency relief systems currently available. (Anglicare Soup Kitchens, Food Parcel etc) To supplement this, this report includes a preliminary directory of those community directed strategies that will not be included in the VicRelief handbook. (e.g. Community Kitchens, Community Gardens, Farmers Markets etc) This preliminary directory will be further expanded upon in a successive report. A copy of this preliminary Community Food Security Programs is included in the appendices. Figure 4 Population Forecast Latrobe 9

13 Victorian Healthy Food Basket Results After visiting 65 possible supermarkets and general stores across the 2 shires a total of 22 stores were identified as meeting the VHFB criteria. (Latrobe City = 16, Baw Baw = 6) The surveys from these stores were then collected, analysed and are depicted below. In addition, data from the 2008 VHFB surveys was used to show comparative trends in price and store number across the two shires. At time of print there was no average Gippsland or Victorian data for price of Healthy Food Baskets to compare findings with. In both municipalities, the smaller outer towns had a much more expensive food basket than the median basket in the major towns. This may be due to there being only independent stores in the smaller towns, which don t always have the buying power to have prices as low as their large chain counterparts. For residents, this means that in order to get lower priced groceries they may need to drive further, or be on public transport for longer. Ironically, residents from outer towns have to spend more on transport in order to get cheaper food. The table below also shows that the median baskets across Latrobe and Baw Baw major townships and outer towns. Table 1 also shows that many of the areas with the highest amount of disadvantage also had the higher median grocery price. However, it is also important to note that there were no independent stores that met VHFB standards in Warragul or Drouin. In terms of direct comparison between the major supermarkets, Warragul and Drouin ended up being more expensive than many of the Latrobe major towns. Table 1 shows both the cost of groceries and the percentage of the household income for people on government benefits that is required to purchase of nutritious food. Both the single parent and typical family payments are cut by a third after having purchased a fortnight s worth of healthy groceries. In monetary terms, this mean that they are left with between $333 (single parent) to $427 (typical family) per fortnight to pay for housing, electricity, gas, water, car expenses and more. These statistics were based on the combination of all Centre link payments for each member of the family. If the youth allowance for a child was not included in the family food budget, these percentages could go up as high as 50% income having to be dedicated to groceries. Table 1 VHFB Survey Results per Township Typical Family Single parent family Elderly Woman Single Man Moe/Newborough Morwell Traralgon Churchill (34%) (29%) (16%) (29%) (32%) (28%) (15%) (27%) (33%) (29%) (16%) (29%) (33%) (29%) (16%) (28%) Outer Latrobe (36%) (31%) (17%) (32%) Warragul Drouin (31%) (27%) (15%) (27%) (32%) (28%) (15%) (27%) Outer Baw Baw (36%) (32%) (17%) (31%) Income rates taken from Centre link Payments assuming unemployment, [ 10

14 Graph 5 - Percentage Cost of Food vs Income Typical Family Single Parent Elderly Woman Single Man Current data that was collected was also compared to the VHFB statistics gathered in 2008 across both shires. From this any trends in the food system can be identified. Graph 7 below shows that the cost of groceries has increased across all of Latrobe City and most of Baw Baw Shire. In Latrobe the cost of groceries has increased across all regions and townships, with Moe recording one of the most drastic increases of 9% since Moe and Morwell both experienced the addition of one VHFB supermarket each whilst Traralgon decreased by one. The number of VHFB stores was unchanged in Churchill and the outer towns. (Graph 6) Graph 6 - Number of food outlets from 2008 to 2010 Number of stores '08 Number of stores '10 Graph 7 - Price difference in Latrobe Townships since 2008 Healthy Basket value 2008 Healthy Basket value $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Moe Traralgon Morwell Churchill Outer Town Moe Traralgon Morwell Churchill Outer 11

15 Similar data was also collected from the Baw Baw VHFB reports; the price trend is vastly different to that in Latrobe. Graph 9 shows that there was a price increase across all areas in Latrobe, whilst Baw Baw actually experienced a price decrease when a second large chain supermarket opened in Drouin. (Graph 8) This increase in competition meant that overall prices have decreased since The outer towns experienced the highest jump in prices across the Baw Baw region. From these results, the statement can be made that across both Shires, Baw Baws outer towns have to spend the most money for a fortnights worth of groceries. In addition to this data, a VHFB was collected from generic brands and discount supermarkets. For a household with a low income, the generic brands and discount supermarkets may be relied upon in order to obtain a diet that meets their needs (Table 4). Unfortunately, these generic brands are very susceptible to change or discontinuation and some may not have the same quality as the more common brand names. Additionally, all of the discount supermarkets that offer low cost fruit and vegetables, are only located in the larger towns. So although generic brands and discount supermarkets are the better choice financially, they are less reliable and harder to access for some people. Graph 8 - Number of food outlets from Number of stores '08 Number of stores ' Warragul Drouin Outer Graph 9 - Price difference in Baw Baw since 2008 Healthy Basket value 2008 Healthy Basket value 2010 $ $453.5 $ $ $ $ Warragul Drouin Outer Towns Table 4 Median Comparison between Shires and Generic Brands Latrobe Median Baw Baw Median Generic Brand Median Typical Family $ $ $ % Single Parent $ $ $ % Family Elderly Woman $ $ $ % Single Man $ $ $ % Average Percentage Difference 12

16 Food Outlet Mapping Maps were made with the help of both councils GIS system. These helped to identify not only where the cluster of shops were situated, but also to gain a global idea of some of the geographical barriers in terms of access to healthy affordable food. The maps in the appendices show the townships of Warragul, Drouin, Trafalgar, Yarragon, Neerim South, Longwarry, Moe, Morwell, Churchill and Traralgon as well as large scale maps of both municipalities. Appendix 2.9 shows the distribution of VHFB supermarkets, food outlets, public transport and SEIFA data for the Latrobe area. It is clear from appendix 2.9 that VHFB supermarkets are very sparse in the rural area and only Yallourn North and Glengarry have VHFB supermarkets. Some of the other towns have some form of essential food outlet such as a Bakery, Butcher or Green Grocer, but these stores on their own cannot provide an individual with all of their dietary needs. The areas of social advantage/disadvantage, (SEIFA) are represented in the background by different shading. The more red an area is, the higher the level of socioeconomic disadvantage. According to this SEIFA data the towns of Moe, Morwell, Newborough, Yallourn North, Boolarra, Churchill and Yinnar have a higher rate of disadvantage than the other eastern towns. Whilst Yinnar, Boolarra and Yallourn North all have bus routes to the major towns, they only run twice a day, Monday to Friday. So there is no public transport on weekends at all and if residents do take the bus they only have the option of one morning service and then have to wait in the major town until the afternoon service comes. Appendix 2.10 shows the Moe/Newborough township. All the stores are close together despite the large area of disadvantage. There is only one VHFB supermarket servicing the southeast of Moe. However all supermarkets are accessible by public transport with services running fairly regularly on all days except Sunday and all observed buses having room for prams and trolleys. Some confusion occurred during data collection though with public maps and timetables having significant errors in them. The Morwell map (Appendix 2.11) displays quite clearly that the disadvantaged areas are not in the 500m radius of any of the VHFB supermarkets. All essential stores except one were in two main hubs; Commercial Road and the shopping complex of MidValley. Whilst both have good public transport access, an expansion of the city (as expected from prediction data) may place great strain on the two bus services which may not be as effective and sustainable. Traralgon is another case where the most socially disadvantaged area is not within 500m of a supermarket. In fact, there is only one supermarket and one butcher south of the freeway in terms of essential food outlets. (Appendix 2.12) Once again, the town is reasonably well serviced by numerous bus routes but faces the same issues as Morwell with one main essential food outlet area. This trend exists as well in Churchill where only two supermarkets had the full Healthy Food Basket and they were situated literally opposite each other in a large complex. (Appendix 2.13)The only other essential food outlet was a bakery that was once again next to a supermarket. Transport is existent, but does not reach far into the eastern area that has the greatest level of disadvantage of the town. In Baw Baw, although the overall SEIFA data showed less severity of disadvantage, the issue of access and availability of public transport proved to be an area of concern. (Appendix 2.1) In fact, four out of the six towns mapped did not have intra-city transport, only the one train or bus stop that ran through the town going onto a further destination. Furthermore, the townships of Erica, Rawson and Willow Grove, amongst others, had no VHFB supermarket as well as no access to public transport. In appendix 2.1, the large scale Baw Baw map, 13

17 that apart from those towns on the Monash highway, only Neerim South has a VHFB. Couple this with the public transport routes and it is clear that only highway towns and Neerim South have access to public transport and VHFB supermarkets. The major centres of Warragul and Drouin, despite having adequate bus routes both had areas of disadvantage that were not within a 500m radius of a VHFB supermarket. (Appendices 2.2, 2.3) In addition, the bus routes available tended to be less frequent in the areas of disadvantage, and out of the Baw Baw towns it was these two major ones that had the lowest SEIFA rating and thus the higher amount of disadvantage. Trafalgar and Longwarry also registered areas of disadvantage with both also having one VHFB supermarket, one bus stop and an additional train service. (Appendices 2.4, 2.7) Overall, across both shires there is a similar tendency where VHFB supermarkets and other essential food outlets are geographically scarce and often bunched together in proximity. These outlets are often outside of socially disadvantaged areas or the outlets in those areas are more expensive. Finally to compact this, public transport across both municipalities is inconsistent, and does not offer realistic reliable services to outer towns if at all. 14

18 Analysis of Results and Priority areas for action This report has aimed to identify 4 major townships/areas at risk of food insecurity by assessing, locating and analysing the level of food insecurity across both the Baw Baw and Latrobe City Shires. By doing so, this report has helped to identify many of the common barriers to food security for local residents. Background data assessment helped to show townships that had differing levels of income, car ownership, demographics and population projection data, all of which are important factors to consider when identifying food security in an area. [Figure 1] From this background data assessment we could identify that: Moe/Moe South, Rawson, Morwell and Yarragon have the highest percentage of low income earners. Longwarry, Moe/Moe South, Morwell and Warragul have the highest number of households not owning a car. Neerim South, Trafalgar, Newborough, Morwell have the highest percentage population over 65 years. Moe/Moe South, Part B East Baw Baw, Rural South West Latrobe and Part B West Baw Baw can expect the highest increase in the number of residents aged over 65 years. Moe/Moe South experienced the largest price increase since 2008 of 9%. Independent stores and stores situated in low socioeconomic areas often provided the more expensive Healthy Food Baskets. Typical families and families with a single parent are forced to spend most of their money on groceries, with it taking about 35% of their Centre link income (assuming unemployment) and only leaving $333- $427 per fortnight for rent, bills and other expenses. Detailed area mapping allowed a visual representation of the municipalities and individual townships to observe the combination of available transport, areas of disadvantage and essential food outlets. (VHFB supermarkets, green grocers, butchers, bakers) From these; Across both municipalities VHFB supermarkets and transport were mainly only available along the Monash highway townships. (Appendices 2.1, 2.9) Within townships often essential food outlets were grouped together and not within a 500m radius of disadvantaged areas. Warragul, Drouin, Moe/Newborough, Morwell, Traralgon all had some internal public transport. All other townships and rural areas had scarce, if any, public transport. In the smaller towns, often there was only one bus/train stop which was part of an inter-city route. Such townships included Longwarry, Yarragon, Trafalgar, Nilma, Darnum, Rokeby, Neerim, Noojee, Neerim Junction, Boolarra, Yallourn North and Yinnar. These isolated stops were often in the centre of town near essential stores, if they had any, and away from any of the disadvantaged areas. Other townships had no public transport available at all. These included Erica, Willow Grove, Traralgon South, Hill End, Thorpdale and Jindivick. The Victorian Healthy Food Basket Survey was performed across both municipalities and helped to show how much a fortnights worth of groceries would cost for differing households. Results from these surveys showed that; The price of groceries has increased since 2008 in almost all townships. (with the only exception being Drouin due to the introduction of an additional large chain supermarket. Groceries in rural areas in both municipalities were vastly more expensive compared to the major townships. On average Outer Baw Baw (Yarragon, Longwarry, Neerim South, Trafalgar) Outer Latrobe (Glengarry, Yallourn North) Moe/Moe South and Traralgon had the most expensive Baskets. 15

19 All the above townships without public transport also had no VHFB supermarket or essential stores. (with the exception of Toongabbie which had a bakery) Keeping all of this data in mind, there are a few common trends and re-occurring issues across the different results. Moe/Moe South, Morwell tended to have some of the most expensive groceries, the highest amount of residents living on a low income, higher amounts of residents aged over 65 and the highest number of households without a private vehicle. However, public transport and access is also a very large problem, particularly in the rural areas of both municipalities. (Latrobe only had 2 rural supermarkets that had the VHFB and Baw Baw only had one that wasn t on the highway.) The decrease in grocery price in Drouin shows that the inclusion of competitive supermarkets can indeed lower the price of groceries despite them rising in all other townships. Therefore in some of the rural towns where there is only one supermarket, this may be a contributing factor as to why the rural areas had the highest groceries of all. And in fact there is merit in continuing VHFB Surveys in order to monitor the food system and keep the agenda of affordable food as a priority. [19] If four townships/areas were to be singled out as being the most food insecure, data and results would show that Moe/Moe South, Morwell, Erica and Yinnar (or Boolarra) would be some of the most at need of intervention. The reasons for identifying these towns as being most food insure is that they all had high percentages of low income populations, had low car ownership, projections of an ageing population and, in the case of the rural towns, they have neither VHFB supermarkets nor have reliable or even access to public transport. In addition this the closest VHFB supermarket to Erica is Moe which has one of the highest average Healthy Food Baskets whilst Yinnar and Boolarra s closest VHFB supermarket is Churchill that was in the top three most expensive major townships for Healthy Food Baskets. Recommendations and Conclusive Findings In conclusions from the results documented in this report, the following recommendations, findings and priority areas can be outlined; 1. VHFB food outlets need to be made more accessible to rural towns and areas. This could be done by either increasing public transport and/or introducing more VHFB food outlets in rural areas. 2. Through the introduction of competitive supermarkets it is possible to decrease grocery prices making healthy foods more affordable to residents. 3. Townships of Moe/Newborough and Morwell have many areas of disadvantage that are not within a suitable proximity from VHFB supermarkets. 4. Rural areas of Yinnar/Boolarra and Erica/Rawson had neither a VHFB supermarket nor reliable, regular transport to major townships. 5. The four highlighted townships and areas listed above should undergo comprehensive needs assessment and community consultation. From this, a Community Action Plan can be constructed to help alleviate food insecurity and promote health in the communities. 16

20 References 1. Kendall, A & Kennedy, E. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Domestic Food and Nutrition Strategy American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vol 98, pages Gippsland Health Online [homepage on internet] Key Planning Indicators Gippsland Health Online, Available from: 3. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic disease: A report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation. World Health Organisation. Geneva : WHO, Department of Health. [homepage on internet] Victorian Population Health Survey, 2008 Available from : 5. Community Indicators [homepage on internet] Community Indicators Victoria; Latrobe Sourced 10 th June Available from: 6. Community Indicators [homepage on internet] Community Indicators Victoria; Baw Baw Sourced 10 th June Available from: 7. Babbington, S & Donato-Hunt, C. When There Isn t Enough to Eat. The Food Insecurity of ANGLICARE: Sydney s Emergency Relief Clients in Wollongong. Anglicare Gippsland Health Online [homepage on internet] Health Behaviours and Disease Prevalence Counts for Baw Baw. Gippsland Health Online Available from: data/assets/pdf_file/0008/384488/hbse107.pdf, 9. Gippsland Health Online [homepage on internet] Health Behaviours and Disease Prevalence Counts for Latrobe. Gippsland Health Online Available from: data/assets/pdf_file/0003/384510/hbse117.pdf 10. Palermo CE, Wilson A. Development of a healthy food basket for Victoria. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 2007; 31(4): Smoyer-Tomic KE, Spence JC, and Amrhein C. Food Deserts in the prairies? Supermarket accessibility and neighbourhood need in Edmonton Canada The Professional Geographer vol.58, issue 3, pages Betrand L, Therien F, Cloutier, MS. Measuring and Mapping Disparities in Access to Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in Montreal. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2008, vol 99 issue 1 pages Department of Health and Ageing [homepage on internet] Australian Guide to Healthy Eating. Department of Health and Ageing. Last updated 11 Aug Available from:

21 14. Johnson C, Lewis E, McDonald G et al. Outer East Community Food Access Research Project: Food Security Assessment and Plans for a Way Forward. Outer East Health and Community Support Alliance, Deakin University and Monash University Gippsland Research & Information Service, Monash University Churchill. Statistical Baw Baw Shire. December Available from : Latrobe City Council [homepage on internet] Latrobe City Council Community Profile. Latrobe City Council Available from : Lawrence M, Worsley T. Public Health Nutrition; From Principles to Practice Allen & Unwin. 18. Thomas B, Bishop J. Manual of Dietetic Practice 4 th Edition Blackwell Publishing. 19. Burns and Friel. It s time to determine the cost of a healthy diet in Australia Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health (4)

22