Settler-colonialism had, and continues to have, devastating consequences for Indigenous Peoples in the Americas. Colonization can be broadly defined as a “process by which a territory is settled by a group of people that has emigrated from another country or region and transformed the land” which “includes the displacement of people indigenous to that territory and treating them as second-class citizens ruled by the members of the foreign colonial group” (Sagaskie 102). Sagaskie expands upon this by adding that two significant facets of colonization are that, one, there is a conquered group who has lost their sovereignty to the invaders and that, two, there is an indigenous group that is considered to be inferior (102). However, while this definition includes the historically prevalent practice of colonization in pre-modern times, it does not truly encapsulate the experience of Indigenous populations as Western Europeans instituted a very specific form of colonization known as settler-colonialism. This type of colonization is distinct in that it “...functions through the replacement of indigenous populations with an invasive settler society that, over time, develops a distinctive identity and sovereignty.” Unlike classical colonization, settler-colonialism was unique in that “settlers' ' intended to stay through the elimination of Indigenous Peoples- additionally, this is not considered to be a singular event, but a perpetual process. Furthermore, settler-colonialism differs from other forms of colonization in that it is an inherently white supemacist act- the elimination of Indigenous Peoples is legitimated through racist logics that they are inferior and therefore brutality is not just justified, it is seen as necessary to protect the interests and identities of the settler state.
One feature of settler-colonialism in the Americas is its destruction of Indigenous Peoples’ food sources and traditional relationships to food. Prior to the arrival of Europeans, different nations, that span from what we now call Alaska to South America, had balanced food networks that involved intimate connections to their environment and cultures. It is virtually impossible to generalize the diets of Indigenous Peoples as they were as diverse as the regions they occupied (Sagaskie 103). Furthermore, their diets were dependent on the local resources that were readily available thus food staples were not necessarily fixed- however, there were foundational elements to Indigenous diets that are often referred to as the Three Sisters which consisted of corn, beans, and squash. The cultivation and consumption of these crops were integral to the diets of nations such as the Anishinaabe, Oneida, and Iroquois, though settler-colonialism increasingly made it difficult for Indigenous Peoples to harvest them; the United States actively attempted to undermine these practices through the forced removal of nations from their ancestral lands, destruction of crops, and severely limiting access to arable land (Sagaskie 103). These processes carried out by the settler government undermined the ability of Indigenous groups to access food; it is one such example of the US facilitating Indigenous genocide. The introduction of a new “meat” industry also contributed to the destruction of Indigenous food sources and, subsequently, their populations. The Spaniards, who were anxious to ensure their own survival, appropriated large amounts of land for grazing livestock; the vast numbers of livestock, many of which were new to the Americas, managed to destroy Indigenous croplands. The effects of this were severe: Indigenous Peoples became malnourished and not only starved to death, but also became more susceptible to European diseases as their immune systems were weakened. Ultimately, the settler-state’s ability to limit the food options of Indigenous Peoples, thus forcing them to consume European foods, and forcibly relocate them to remote reservations where they were expected to adapt to sedentary lifestyles, laid the foundation for high levels of food insecurity in the 21st century. Indigenous Peoples throughout North America are specifically subjected to food apartheid, thus affecting their ability to sufficiently access nutritional, quality, and culturally relevant food which further impacts their health and overall quality of life.
What is food insecurity versus food apartheid?
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines food insecurity “as a lack of consistent access to enough food for an active, healthy life.” In addition to this definition, the Interagency Working Group on Food Security and Food Security Advisory Committee have established that there are two types of food insecurity: Type I includes “individuals or groups of people who do not have enough food to eat,” while Type II includes “individuals or groups who do not have enough nutritional and culturally appropriate food.” The issue of food insecurity is compounded by various factors, however location is often perceived to be the largest barrier. The term “food desert” are geographical locations that lack affordable food of a good quality. However, the term is arguably inaccurate- it ignores the intentionality behind certain communities not having enough food that can be traced back to settler-colonialism and white supremacy. Many have argued that the term “food apartheid” is more valid as it examines the whole food system and the way it intersects with race, geography, and economic policy. Furthermore, while the term food desert hints at the geographic aspect of food insecurity, which is certainly important, it is not the only factor to consider. Since 2011, the federal government has spent approximately 500 million dollars to produce a higher amount of well-stocked grocery stores in low-income communities- however, food insecurity did not diminish with the presence of grocery stores alone. The USDA even reported that proximity to supermarkets “has limited impact on food choices” and “household and neighborhood resources, education, and taste preferences may be more important determinants of food choices than store proximity.” In other words, though mainstream discourse surrounding food insecurity has focused on the proximity to grocery stores, it is not the only factor to consider- one must consider the actual income of the neighborhood’s residents, access to cultural food staples, and transportation. For example, the presence of a Whole Foods in a low-income neighborhood does not necessarily matter when the residents cannot afford Whole Foods prices. To further highlight this issue, a 2014 study conducted in two Philadelphia neighborhoods found that while the presence of new grocery stores may have improved the perception of food accessibility, there was not an increased consumption of fruits and vegetables. It is also important to consider whether or not SNAP recipients can even shop at local grocery stores as they are both limited in options and price. While food apartheid is mainly discussed within the context of communities in urban areas, Indigenous nations in the United States, particularly those who live on reservations, are also subject to food apartheid which has not only severely impacted their access to healthy, affordable foods, but it has also affected their abilities to maintain relationships to traditional food systems.
Indigenous Food Access in the United States
Native reservations are subject to some of the highest rates of poverty that can be further characterized through a lack of access to food and healthcare. Indigenous Peoples in the US have one of the highest poverty rates of any marginalized group: 35 percent of children live in poverty. In terms of actual food access, 1 in 4 Indigenous Peoples are food insecure, while Indigenous households are 400 percent more likely than other US households to report not having enough to eat. This is largely due to a significant portion of Indigenous Peoples living in remote areas where supplies are scarce and incomes are inadequate due to a lack of job opportunities. When broadening the scope of the issue from individual households to reservations and/or counties, the uncompromising nature of food apartheid becomes even more apparent. At least 60 reservations experience food insecurity. Additionally, out of the 28 counties that are considered to have a majority Indigenous population, 18 of them have high rates of food insecurity. A-Dae Romeros-Briones, the Director of Programs of the Native Agriculture and Food Systems at the First Nations Development Institute, has argued that: “With the onslaught of settlements and later reservation and federal policies, Tribal Nations were forced into other areas of unfamiliarity through the reservation system. This forced relocation remains an underlying issue as Tribal Nations today are trying to cultivate their lands, learn their environments and adjust to the abrupt transitions. Imagine a thousand-year-old society moving suddenly and now forced to re-build.” The technologies of settler-colonialism have forced Indigenous Peoples to adopt sedentary lifestyles and access food through a system that is actively harming them. This continues to be apparent as the US government’s policies that are presented as “assistance” arguably generate even more harm. SNAP participation among Indigenous households is around 24 percent, which is nearly double that of the general population. The USDA’s Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations provides food commodities to Indigenous Peoples with low-income though the available foods have virtually no nutritional value and are high in fats and carbohydrates. As a result, Indigenous Peoples face higher rates of health issues alongside minimal accessibility to affordable and quality healthcare. Native communities have higher rates of Type II diabetes, which, due to inaccessible healthcare infrastructure, often leads to a higher rate of fatal cases. Although the Indian Health Service (IHS) is the main healthcare provider for reservations, it is still not equipped to sufficiently help local communities; the private sector is not an option for most as there is poverty and high uninsured rates. The COVID-19 pandemic has only served to exacerbate these issues as Indigenous populations experienced a higher rate of cases and COVID deaths than any other group. Prior to the pandemic, more than 35 million people, including a high number of children, were living under food apartheid; this data actually reflects the lowest food insecurity rates in more than 20 years, yet the economic impacts of the pandemic have increased vulnerabilities. The disparities that have been produced and exacerbated by the pandemic are further proof of settler-colonialism’s perpetuity: Indigenous Peoples have higher rates of pre-existing conditions such as respiratory diseases, reservations have limited access to water which limits preventative measures, such as hand-washing, and poor health, and social distancing is difficult to maintain due to crowded living situations that are a result of impoverishment.
The Navajo Nation is an extreme example of food insecurity as a result of food apartheid. Spanning 17 million acres across Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico, the Navajo Nation is the largest reservation in the US- it also only has 13 grocery stores. As a result, the average time for a resident to drive to a grocery store, assuming they have access to a vehicle, is three hours one-way. In a similar vein to other Indigenous nations pre-colonization, the Navajo people, otherwise known as the Dine, maintained an intimate relationship with the land and its various ecosystems as gardeners, hunters, and stewards- when the settler government of the US forcibly appropriated their land, subsequently displacing them, their livestock were killed and their fields were destroyed. Their way of life was permanently altered. Since the mid-1800s when the US forced the Dine on the Long Walk, where they were forced to travel to an internment camp at Fort Sumter, the Dine have had high rates of food insecurity with intentionally inadequate assistance from the federal government. Many Dine receive federal food benefits, such as SNAP, however, as previously mentioned, these are severely limited in their scope as Dine recipients are forced to buy unhealthy foods as they are the cheapest option. Artie Yazzie, a Dine, has said: “We have these big old thirst-busters that cost 60 cents, and three people can share it…So we’re going to go ahead and buy that instead of the $3 water or milk.” Artie has highlighted the crux of the issue: the nature of the food system accessible to Indigenous Peoples deliberately perpetuates insecurity and impoverishment. It exacerbates the conditions many Indigenous persons are subjected to which is having to purchase unhealthy food as it is both the cheapest, thus benefits last longer, and it sustains more family members than just one person. Another trend in the Navajo Nation that can be applied to other Indigenous communities is the disproportionate presence of convenience stores. A study conducted on 22 American Indian reservations in Washington State found 50 stores; when breaking that number down, these stores consisted of 25 convenience stores, 16 grocery stores, and nine supermarkets (O'Connell et al. 1). O’Connell et al. assert that “nutrition environments on American Indian Reservations are characterized by few supermarkets and many gas-station type stores, moderate availability of fresh produce, and a reliance on off-reservation stores for regular or bulk shopping” (2). This observation is further compounded by the fact that 17 reservations do not have a supermarket on their reservation and the nearest locations are typically 10 miles away from the tribe’s headquarters (O'Connell et al. 1). In terms of the stores’ content, only about 38 percent of items on the checklist were available, with supermarkets having the most, though they are the least accessible, and convenience stores, which are the most prevalent, having the fewest (O'Connell et al. 4). Furthermore, dairy and sugar products are available in abundance, while fresh fruits and vegetables are the most difficult to find (O'Connell et al. 1). More specifically, eggs, white bread, and whole milk were the “most consistently available items” among all visited stores; eggs are the most consistent product in convenience stores which typically dominate reservations (O'Connell et al. 4). Distance also played a significant role in food availability: the average distance from tribal headquarters to the nearest supermarket on reservations, when one was available, was 5.3 miles, while the nearest off-reservation supermarket was typically 11.1 miles (O'Connell et al. 6). Thus it was incredibly important that one have access to a vehicle, though, of course, the difficulties of procuring vehicles in impoverished areas are more pronounced.
Indigenous Food Access in Canada
The US is not the only country in North America where Indigenous People are subjected to food apartheid and have limited access to food. In Canada, Indigenous populations also face higher levels of poverty and food insecurity. The country’s Constitution recognizes three groups: First Nations, which is a collective term for over 600 communities, Inuit, and Métis; approximately 4.9 percent of the population, which is equivalent to 1.67 million people, identify as being Indigenous. Out of three formally recognized groups, the First Nations make up the majority with a population of 900,000 individuals. Prior to settler-colonialism, the First Nations occupied a large territory where they harvested animals and plants for sustenance, as well as social, political, economic, and cultural reasons. However, in 1876, the settler government of Canada passed the Indian Act which established the existence of reserves, otherwise known as the Canadian equivalent of reservations; the purpose was to allocate small parcels of land for use by First Nations people, though they were in remote areas that were selected without consultation. The law’s passage was, simply put, a way to steal more land and protect settler-colonial interests. In present-day, almost half of First Nations people live on reserves that are mainly located in British Columbia, Ontario, and Manitoba. The Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) reported that 28.2 percent of Indigenous Peoples living off of reserves are food insecure, compared to only 11.1 percent of white Canadians facing food insecurity. The First Nations Regional Health Study then reported that of the First Nations households that live on reserves, and in Northern communities especially, approximately half are moderately or severely food insecure; households with children are also disproportionately impacted. In a similar vein to Indigenous Peoples in the US, food insecurity compounds health disparities as well- only 37.8 percent of First Nations adults report that their health is excellent or very good, compared to 59 pecent of Canadians nationally. Furthermore, the disruption of traditional food practices, which historically entails the consumption of foods that prevent diseases, and reliance on unhealthy foods has led to an increase in diabetes. Despite the fact that healthcare is socialized in Canada, First Nation communities experience lower quality care compared to non-Indigenous populations.
One example of a First Nation experiencing food apartheid, is the Fort Albany First Nation in Mushkegowuk Territory along the Albany River in northern Ontario- although traditional food were still highly prevalent, the majority of food intake was derived from store-bought food (Skinner et al. 2). Traditional food practices and harvesting activities involve hunting, fishing, and gathering, though these activities are in decline due to an increase in barriers (Skinner et al. 2). The primary limitations for community members were the high cost of hunting and the proliferation of environmental issues thus their ability to hunt in specific areas were limited; the cost of fuel and hunting equipment has impacted the ability to hunt large land-based animals, game birds, and small game. As a result of decreased food access, food sharing amongst family and community members is common (Skinner et al. 7). While the Inuit are considered their own distinct Indigenous group, they experience similar problems, but due to their geographic location food insecurity is even worse. The Inuit occupy the Canadian Arctic and face food insecurity at three times the rate of First Nation and Métis populations. Furthermore, 69.9 percent of households with at least one preschooler are food insecure. When households have at least one hunter, food insecurity becomes less prevalent though, similar to the Fort Albany First Nation, hunting has become increadingly more difficult due to the cost of gear and gas; as a result, many have to turn to the local markets which have exceptionally high prices for food that is low in nutritional value (Skinner et al. 6). Fruits and vegetables are typically more expensive than highly processed foods in northern markets which partially has to do with transportation costs; additionally, sometimes food is spoiled by the time it reaches several communities. In a survey concerning northern First Nations, 82 percent of people stated their store often or sometimes sold expired food. It is easy to imagine that the Inuit, who are extremely remote, face similar challenges. However, one significant challenge for Indigenous communities in Canada, especially if they still maintain traditional food processes, is climate change. The rise of global temperatures has impacted the migration patterns of animals, such as birds and caribou, on First Nation territories. It is also affecting their ability to successfully harvest food as unpredictable weather patterns and climatic conditions have impacted the growth of certain plants and have made the physical act of harvesting extremely more difficult. Climate change is also increasing the cost of certain store-bought foods as transportation becomes more difficult. While there are many converging forces that contribute to the Indigenous population’s food insecurity, the devaluing of Indigenous life by the settler government has paved the way for food inaccessibility and poor quality to be considered acceptable, despite the harm it causes.
How can we protect food access for Indigenous Peoples?
Within the context of international law, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, North American countries are in violation of a few key articles when considering food insecurity. Article II specifies that: “Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples and individuals and have the right be free from any kind of discrimination, in the exercise of their rights, in particular that based on their indigenous origin or identity.” The disparities between non-Indigenous and Indigenous populations highlights the unequal treatment when it comes to food access- such disparities are arguably intentional on the part of settler-colonial governments whose entire existence is rooted in the devaluation of Indigenous People. Furthermore, when it comes to exercising their rights, such rights must also include maintaining their traditional and cultural ways of life, which includes sustainable food systems. This is further enshrined in Article 11, which states that: “Indigenous peoples have the right to practice and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs…” Article 11 should also be applied to food- this means that Indigenous Peoples need access to land, tools, and nutritional food. This also means that not only should there be more well-stocked stores within an accessible distance to Indigenous Peoples, it also means that their low-income status must also be addressed. However, while solutions need to undercut systemic issues that are economic and political in nature, one localized solution is to support food sovereignty. This concept was founded by the organization Via Campesina which is composed of Indigenous Peoples in Central and South America fighting for land ownership. The term encompasses the needs of Indigenous Peoples to eat “healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems.” The concept of food sovereignty would allow Indigenous Peoples to control their own lands and food systems, which would not only help them access food, but it would be high in nutritional value thus diminishing reliance on settler food systems that produce and reinforce endemic health problems such as diabetes. While food apartheid is an intentional tool used by settler governments such as the US and Canada, Indigenous Peoples can find ways to subvert such harmful systems and not only survive, as they have been doing for generations, but to also thrive in a healthy, sustainable manner.
References
O'Connell, Meghan, et al. “Food Access and Cost in American Indian Communities in Washington State.” NIH Public Access, 2011, pp. 1–10.
Sagaskie, Hunter Frederick. “The Impact of Colonization.” Michigan Sociological Review, vol. 33, 2019, pp. 101–114.
Skinner, Kelly, et al. “Giving Voice to Food Insecurity in a Remote Indigenous Community in Subarctic Ontario, Canada: Traditional Ways, Ways to Cope, Ways Forward.” BMC Public Health, 2013, pp. 1–13.