New report on food poverty for the Heinrich Böll Foundation

How do high-income countries tackle food poverty?

The report compares three divergent institutional models (Italy, France, Germany) and assesses the transition from emergency aid to the universal right to food, in line with the integration of the FEAD (European Fund for Aid to the Most Deprived) into the ESF+ (European Social Fund Plus). The analysis highlights how European systems continue to focus primarily on food assistance, despite the formal objective of promoting social inclusion.

• Italy, a hybrid public-civil society approach: Italy adopts a hybrid model, centralised in coordination but decentralised in the identification of needs, with strong operational delegation to the third sector. The “solidarity chain”, based on a widespread network of around 10,000 Territorial Partner Organisations (OpT), ensures broad coverage. Although there has been a shift towards combining material assistance with social inclusion measures, the system has structural weaknesses, including the inadequate nutritional quality of aid (often based on surpluses) and a heavy reliance on volunteers. Innovations such as solidarity shops and Food Aid Hubs (such as the Hub Cuccagna in Milan) seek to overcome the welfare-based approach by promoting autonomy and dignity through a self-service model and integration with social and health services.
• France, a centralised, state-led model: the French system is highly institutionalised, characterised by strong state involvement and centralised logistics managed by public agencies such as FranceAgriMer. France has opted for Type I Operational Programmes (OPs), focused on material and food assistance. A distinctive feature is the Garot Law (2016), which requires large retailers to enter into agreements with charities for the recovery of food surpluses. Despite its effectiveness, the system suffers from bureaucratic rigidity, dependence on volunteers and limited nutritional quality of aid (70% consists of dry or long-life products). In response to these limitations, local experiments such as the Caisse Alimentaire de Montpellier (CAC) promote a social rights-based approach, providing conditional cash transfers (monnaie alimentaire) for the purchase of quality, sustainable food, restoring dignity and freedom of choice.
• Germany, a decentralised system led by civil society: Germany relies on a historically decentralised and civic-led system, with a low degree of institutionalisation in food assistance. Assistance is managed almost exclusively by third sector organisations, in particular the Tafel (food banks), which focus on the recovery and redistribution of food surpluses and are financed almost entirely by private donations. Germany has opted for Type II Operational Programmes (OPs), which focus on social inclusion measures rather than direct material assistance. While this model is an exceptional infrastructure of solidarity, it has significant limitations: demand exceeds supply, the quality of aid is limited (depending on surpluses), and access to food is not guaranteed as a universal right, creating regional disparities.

The report concludes that in order to overcome the problems of fragmentation, stigma and inadequate quality of aid, a paradigm shift is needed, from charity to justice. Common proposals at European level include improving monitoring to measure the real impact of inclusion measures (not just meals distributed), structural evaluation of monetary instruments (such as vouchers or food cards) and the adoption of coordinated national policies that guarantee access to decent, quality food. The Peruvian example of ollas comunes (communal kitchens), which combine assistance, self-sufficiency and political advocacy, offers a contrasting and critical model to the welfare approach prevalent in high-income countries.