Food Distribution - an overview (2023)

In food distribution channels, chilling is normally used to preserve the meat to keep the meat qualities in a fresh-like state, while freezing is an alternative for longer storage or distribution time.

From: Antimicrobial Food Packaging, 2016

Food safety during disasters

R.K. Gupta, in Food Safety in the 21st Century, 2017

34.3 Principles of Feeding Programs During Disasters (UNHCR,1999)

It is worthwhile to outline the principles involved in feeding and food distribution during disasters. The various feeding strategies are outlined as follows:

Food Distribution - an overview (1)

During disasters, the feeding programs may be of two types, namely general and selective food distribution.

General food distribution: Aim of general food distribution is to provide food to all for a basic level of survival. It is done as one of the three modes:

1.

As “emergency” energy-dense-food distribution immediately in the aftermath of disaster;

2.

As mass cooked food distribution through community kitchens; or

3.

As “dry” ration distribution for self-cooking by the affected community, a little later when situation stabilizes.

Selective food distribution: It is meant for specific purposes, commonly with one of the following aims:

1.

Supplementary nutrition: It caters for deficiency in basic diet, for example, for malnourished children, pregnant and lactating women.

2.

Therapeutic feeding is meant for medical/therapeutic feeding for severely malnourished.

Taking the recent real-life example of Chennai floods in India, even though Chennai is a major Indian (metro) city, there was food shortage, for few days. Besides the National Disaster Relief Force, Armed Forces and local government agencies, many religious (temples/mosques/gurudwaras) and nongovernmental organizations helped in preparation and distribution of cooked food, water, snacks, baby foods, milk, etc. The distribution hubs were railway and bus stations, relief camps, hospitals, slum areas, and poor localities.

In remote areas, food aid is provided through road transport and airdrops. These mechanisms have their own limitations. So far as road transport is concerned, it may be disrupted later due to progressive disaster (e.g., roads destroyed due to aftershocks/effects of earthquakes, landslides, worsening rains, or floods). Major limitation of airdrop of foods is that the relief may not always reach the most needy and it may be “lost.” Moreover, logistics and cost may limit indefinite number of such relief sorties. Even though, during the Uttarakhand floods and Nepal earthquake, Indian Air Force did hundreds of helicopter relief sorties, carrying food/relief material in the onward sortie and evacuating stranded people on return.

Although it might sound paradoxical, but many a times so much food relief pours in from various quarters—international, national, regional, governmental, and nongovernmental that it languishes in stores and godowns with no mechanism for its efficient distribution. There is a case, when trains full of grain came as “food aid” from Punjab to Rajasthan, to tide over the drought situation in year 2000, but there was no authority to take over the grain at Bikaner railway station. The food supplies were unloaded in a rail yard, where it rotted, while many suffered from hunger. Such waste of resources has to be managed through astute administrative coordination between various agencies, since lack of foodstuff in affected areas is an important determinant of food safety.

Another function of the technical/administrative authorities dealing with receiving, distributing, and cocoordinating food aid is to ensure the quality of food received as donations/aid. Substandard quality food distributed to needy people may create havoc in the form of bacteriological or chemical food poisoning. Hence it is vital to ensure this aspect of food distribution/monitoring as well.

View chapterPurchase book

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128017739000340

(Video) Food Distribution Campaign Overview

Fish Growth

K. Enberg, ... C. Jørgensen, in Encyclopedia of Ecology, 2008

Compensatory Growth

Food distribution in the wild is not only spatially but is also temporally patchy. As a consequence, fish might experience periods of low food availability and even starvation. When food availability reverts to normal levels, fish can exhibit faster growth rates than they would during steady resource conditions. In this way, individual fish are capable of restoring their original growth trajectories. This phenomenon is termed compensatory growth (note that density-dependent growth introduced in the previous paragraph has also been called compensatory growth by some authors). The advantages for such compensatory growth are speculated to be related to size-dependent mortality and fecundity, size-specific feeding competition, and food availability.

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780080454054002056

Using logistic models to optimize the food supply chain

R. García-Flores, ... P. Juliano, in Modeling Food Processing Operations, 2015

Abstract

Food distribution is just as important as its production and processing and is becoming more important by the day. The driving factors are a growing population, scarcer resources, increasing attention to food security, and changing dietary habits. To address these challenges, food logistics has evolved from applying general supply chain management methodologies to addressing specific problems of the food industry, such as sustainability, safety, and perishability, to considering the impact of food supply systems on the triple bottom line of economic, environmental, and social indicators. This chapter reports on the aspects of food logistics that have been of concern to managers, giving priority to quantitative optimization approaches. It also presents a case study of the logistics of a Brazilian dairy supply chain.

View chapterPurchase book

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9781782422846000118

Electronic Tongue Principles and Applications in the Food Industry

Larisa Lvova, in Electronic Noses and Tongues in Food Science, 2016

15.1 Introduction

Food distribution and its safety are very actual problems of the modern society. While in advanced nations overconsumption is continuously growing, and it is especially pronounced in the food industry sector, in the other part of the globe, the famine is still a horrifying reality even nowadays. The security in food sector is required to ensure the availability of food, uniform distribution, quality, and safety. The latter depend on product chemical composition, physical properties, the level of microbiological and toxic contamination, and storage conditions; these are regulated by ISO 22000 standards (www.iso.org) and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) (http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/HACCP/).

Nowadays consumers have become more and more selective and demanding in regards of their diet. The taste and the quality of food are the primary tools for the consumer to express his or her preferences. The increased consumer requirements of food quality and safety issues have resulted to the development of new techniques for food authentication. However, most of these techniques are time consuming and require sophisticated apparatuses and skilled personnel (Pico,2012). Due to these limitations, alternative analytical methods should be provided. A brilliant example of such an alternative approach for food assessment is an application of electronic tongue multisensory systems mimicking the human gustatory system functioning. The e-tongue is capable of determining food quantitative composition and recognizing (identifying, classifying, discriminating) different food tastes. Moreover, the artificial sensorial assessment of analyzed food products can be easily correlated to human perception. The modern electronic tongues permit to perform a fast and nondestructive evaluation of food quality both in the laboratory environment, and in online analyses during the industrial food manufacturing process. Several comprehensive reviews on e-tongue applications for foodstuff analysis have been previously published (Sĺiwinśka etal.,2014; Escuder-Gilabert and Peris,2010). There are several commercially available systems on the market, such as, α-Astree from AlphaMOS (France), the Insent® electronic taste sensing system from Anritsu Corp. (Japan), multiarray chemical sensor from McScience (Korea), and the E-tongue from Sensor Systems (St. Petersburg, Russia). These artificial taste systems, as well as home-made devices developed by different research groups, were intensively utilized and continue to meet a growing interest for various food assessment tasks.

In this chapter the principles and implementation of artificial taste systems for foodstuff analysis performed in the last 5 years are reviewed. The main attention is given to the analysis of solid foodstuffs, and such important fluids as milk and edible vegetable oils, whereas the beverages’ assessment will be discussed in other chapters of this book.

View chapterPurchase book

(Video) Business Central Overview for Food Distribution

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128002438000159

Chemical Deterioration and Physical Instability of Foods and Beverages

F. Kong, R.P. Singh, in The Stability and Shelf Life of Food (Second Edition), 2016

2.5.2 Time–Temperature History

The food distribution chain includes several stages involving storage, transport, and handling, where food is often exposed to varying temperatures. Since temperature is one of the most important environmental factors that influences quality attributes in foods, it is critical to know the temperature exposure of a food consignment during storage and distribution. TTI is a device that can be attached to foods to record the time–temperature history of the food. It is a reliable tool for continuous temperature monitoring and shelf life prediction, and has been selectively used as a food quality monitor for various perishable and semiperishable foods, particularly chilled and frozen foods which are sensitive to temperature fluctuations, such as fresh milk, frozen fish, meat, and seafood (Wells and Singh, 1998; Taoukis and Giannakourou, 2004). The principle of a TTI operation involves irreversible biological, chemical, or physical reactions that are accelerated at elevated temperatures, resembling the temperature dependence of most quality loss reactions of foods (Yan etal., 2008). TTI reflects the cumulative time–temperature history of foods by different means, including development of a specific color or movement of a dye (of known color) along a scale. TTI can be full history, partial history, or critical temperature indicators. It is important to know that TTI can reflect the quality status of the food only if the activation energy of quality loss reaction is close to that of the TTI response; ie, successful simulation of the food quality loss kinetics is critical for TTI to be used for effectively monitoring quality deterioration (Taoukis and Labuza, 1989; Taoukis and Giannakourou, 2004). More details on TTI devices can be obtained from many books and papers (Taoukis and Labuza, 1989; Yan etal., 2008).

With TTI, the time–temperature history of the product can be continuously monitored. This information, plus modeling, primarily kinetic modeling of different deteriorative reactions that occur in food systems, allows us to assess the extent of quality loss of a product, and estimate the remaining shelf life at any point of the distribution chain of products (Taoukis and Giannakourou, 2004). An approach presented by Wells and Singh (1998) involves using the response of a TTI at a constant reference temperature. This information is used along with the activation energy of the indicator to calculate a constant temperature equivalent to the change inthe indicator response during the inspection interval. The amount of food quality attribute remaining at the end of the interval is then predicted using the calculated temperature equivalent.

View chapterPurchase book

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780081004357000022

Feedwater requirements in the food industry

Peter Glavic, Marjana Simonič, in Handbook of Water and Energy Management in Food Processing, 2008

22.4.7 Water storage and distribution

Water and food distribution and storage (packaging) are sources of contamination that are often underestimated. The migration of organic compounds from contact materials into the water and food is estimated at concentrations of up to 50 mg/L of organic contaminants (Grob, 2006). Most organics are not even identified. One of the latest examples is increased concentration of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in oils bottled in polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (Simko et al., 2006). Some coatings, e.g. grease, can provide a good food source for bacteria, resulting in objectionable tastes and odours in the water. Better water quality is preserved in tanks using epoxy coating.

Plastic tanks are also widely used for their lightweight, chemical resistance and non-corrosive properties. Plastic materials include PVC, polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), high-density polyethylene (HDPE) or glass fibre reinforced polyester (GRP). More information on plastic coating materials is available from Oasis Design (2005). Water tanks may also be made of concrete or clay, but these materials are usually used for low-pressure applications such as food immersion.

Process water is mostly stored in reservoirs made of ceramic or polymeric materials. Ceramic materials are almost entirely immune to corrosion, a common example of their corrosion protection is the lime added to soda-lime glass to reduce its solubility in water. Although it is not nearly as soluble as pure sodium silicate, normal glass does form sub-microscopic flaws when exposed to moisture. When food thermal treatment with vapour is needed, stainless steel pipes or housing must be used.

View chapterPurchase book

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9781845691950500223

Foraging

Michael D. Breed, Janice Moore, in Animal Behavior (Third Edition), 2022

9.7 Foraging and Optimality Theory

How does food distribution affect food discovery? In 1966, two independent papers published in The American Naturalist set the stage for optimal foraging theory (OFT). Written by R. H. MacArthur and E. R. Pianka and by J. M. Emlen, they asked how animals made decisions about food preferences and places to seek food.51,52 In general, the expectation of OFT is that by making adaptive foraging decisions, an animal will seek to maximize its inclusive fitness. (Optimal comes from a Latin word meaning “best.”) Before continuing this consideration of feeding, however, a longer visit with optimality theory is in order. This theory can be applied to any one of a number of behaviors, but it is covered here because historically it has been most closely associated with foraging.53

Key Term

In OFT, the currencies of time or energy usually are the parameters being optimized.

The application of optimality theory to foraging or any other behavior does not mean that all scientists expect animals to optimize fitness outcomes. There are many constraints that can prevent an animal from achieving an optimal state. These are typically the constraints that prevent natural selection from producing perfectly adapted organisms, but they bear special consideration in a discussion of optimality because they limit what can be expected as optimal behavior. For instance, because of heterogeneity in time and space, what is optimal in one location or at one time may not be optimal under different circumstances. The environment may change too rapidly, evolution may proceed too slowly, or genetic variation may be insufficient. There may be conflicting selective forces that exclude optimal adaptations. The animal itself may simply be unable to gather the information that is required to make optimal decisions. In other words, the use of optimality theory to predict what animals should do if natural selection optimized their behavior is not the same as testing for natural selection, nor is it the same as expecting a perfect outcome.54

Key Term

A constraint is a limitation imposed by existing behavioral, morphological, or physiological adaptations. For example, an animal that is unable to learn how to efficiently open a certain kind of seed cannot be a completely optimal forager on those seeds. If a manatee does not tolerate cold water, then it cannot travel as far for food, or forage as long as it might do in warmer water, even though everything else is equal.55

Instead, optimality theory provides a way to test hypotheses about what is important in an animal’s behavioral decisions. This involves identifying the currency used to investigate behavior. For instance, if animals are assumed to maximize energy intake (and this assumption is a common approach when investigating foraging), then energy acquisition is also assumed to be crucial to the animal’s fitness and its foraging decisions should reflect that.

Discussion Point: “It’s just a model”

What if the predictions generated by the theory are not met by the data? This is a crucial question, and the answer reveals the true value of theories and the models and hypotheses that they generate. Many models seek to deliver an estimate of an expected outcome, or perhaps the boundaries within which that outcome is expected to occur. What if they “fail” to do this? Are they then worthless, “just” a model? If the test of the model is well designed and the resulting data are nonetheless inconsistent with predictions that the model generates, then a return to the assumptions on which the predictions were based is in order. How can they be changed or refined to better reflect reality? Viewed through this lens, are models often failures?

Of course, this general approach of revisiting and refining assumptions is true of most hypothesis testing, but the added advantage of bringing optimality theory to one’s investigation is that it provides a fairly clear road map for generating predictions. There are usually a limited number of ways in which an animal can reach an optimal outcome and an infinite number of ways to achieve suboptimal ones.

Optimality theory—and modeling in general—has benefits beyond those of generating predictions and testing assumptions. It demands clear thinking about the ideas involved in investigating a behavior. For instance, an animal may be expected to feed its young high-energy prey that are easy to digest, but as those prey are depleted, at what point should that animal switch to a different prey? How long should the forager keep looking in one area for a diminishing number of food items? Under what conditions should it begin to look elsewhere? (Please note that for these purposes, prey can be any food item, not only a prey animal.) These and other refinements are core concepts in the optimal foraging literature and introduce more precision into thinking and investigation than a vague notion about yummy caterpillars.

OFT concerns itself primarily with where an animal eats (patch choice) and what it eats when it gets there (prey choice). These appear to be separate considerations, and they frequently are. However, keep in mind that in some cases (e.g., a relatively large prey that takes a long time to eat), prey item and patch can become the same thing. For practical purposes, prey and patch will be considered separately here. Within these two seemingly simple decisions lies a wealth of discovery about how animals sustain themselves.

Classics in Animal Behavior

Studies of both prey choice and patch choice emerge from a surprisingly simple experiment conducted by C. S. Holling in 1959.56 In this experiment, he asked how predators respond to changes in prey density, and this gave rise to Holling’s Disc Equation, a model of the relationship between predation rates and prey density. After all, such changes are inevitable if the predator is successful at finding and consuming prey.

To investigate this question, Holling tacked 4cm (diameter) sandpaper discs to a 3 × 3ft table. A blindfolded assistant (the “predator”) was given 1min to locate the discs by tapping her finger across the table; as each disc was encountered, it was removed and the search continued. The initial density of discs varied from 4 to 256, and the experiment was replicated eight times for each density.

Holling found that as the food supply increases, an animal increases the rate at which it feeds, but this eventually levels off (Figure 9.20). The relationship between the amount of food and the rate at which it is consumed is called a functional response. The most common type of functional response—and one that was demonstrated by Holling’s “predator”—results in a reduction in the rate of feeding as the discs are collected. Ecologists have investigated perhaps thousands of exploiter–prey relationships, and most fall into this category.

Food Distribution - an overview (2)

(Video) Feeding Nine Billion Video 4: The Need for More Equitable Food Distribution by Evan Fraser

Figure 9.20. The functional response is the relationship between the amount of food and the consumption rate of that food. This curve shows the rate at which Dr. Holling’s “predatory” (and blindfolded) assistant located and removed sandpaper discs spread across a table. When more discs are available, the rate at which they are located increases; eventually, this levels off.

Adapted from Holling, C.S., 1959. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Can. Entomol. 91, 385–398,56 p. 386.
(Video) The Incredible Logistics of Grocery Stores

View chapterPurchase book

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128195581000099

Modelling microbial food spoilage

Peggy G. Braun, Jane P. Sutherland, in Food Spoilage Microorganisms, 2006

Influence of environmental factors within the food chain

In realistic conditions of food distribution, retailing and up to storage by the consumer, temperature may vary and there is concern that predictive models obtained from data produced under consistent growth conditions may not provide realistic responses. Furthermore, pH value and/or water activity of a product can change during manufacture and storage, e.g. in fermented sausage pH decreases owing to metabolic activities of the starter organisms and water activity declines as the sausage dries. Moreover, the fermentation and drying processes are carried out at different temperatures. Products of this complexity present a considerable challenge in predictive microbiology.

Some attempts have been made to model the effects of temperature fluctuations on growth rates of microorganisms, e.g. Koutsoumanis (2001) in raw fish, Jones et al. (2004) for E. coli, and Baranyi et al. (1995) for Br. thermosphacta. Baranyi et al. (1995) introduced the factor (α0) which is a measure of the physiological condition or ‘readiness to grow’ of a cell (Baranyi and Roberts, 1994). Specifically, the lower the α0 value, the longer the cells take to adjust to a new environment. Predictions of growth rate were well represented by observed data when temperature was decreased stepwise from 25 to 5°C, but not when the decrease was from 25 to 3°C (Baranyi et al. 1995) and it was hypothesised that at the lower temperature the physiological state of the cells was altered, possibly introducing additional lag. A new approach was also introduced by Lebert et al. (2003) to predict microbial growth in dynamic water activity conditions.

View chapterPurchase book

Read full chapter

URL:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9781855739666500043

Designing meal environments for ‘mindful eating’

J.L. Le Bel, R. Richman Kenneally, in Meals in Science and Practice, 2009

26.2 Today's domestic foodscapes

The word ‘foodscape’ has thus far been reserved for macro-level examination of the food supply system (e.g., Winson, 2004) or of the variability and availability of food in specific rural and urban area (e.g., Cummins and Mcintyre, 2002). At the micro level, the immediate built environment has a more direct impact on the choices and eating behavior of individuals within a household. The physical space where food is eaten is one of the basic dimensions underlying memories and conceptualizations of everyday eating and drinking episodes and includes (1) the general location (e.g., home, work, car) and a specific place (e.g., in front of the television), (2) access to food storage and preparation facilities (e.g., shared kitchen in a dorm), and (3) condition of the physical environment (e.g., temperature) (Bisogni et al., 2007). To date, micro-level analyses have examined specific areas within the home and focused on issues such as pantry management (Baranowski et al., 2007) and food availability and visibility within the kitchen, table, and plate (Sobal and Wansink, 2007). We use the word ‘foodscapes’ to denote those areas where food is prepared and consumed, and the objects therein. By ‘domestic’ we mean those foodscapes inside the home (this important distinction between the domestic sphere and the commercial marketplace is also explored is this book in the context of home food testing versus commercial food testing by Boutrolle).

26.2.1 The battle for your food dollar

Changes taking place in food distribution and retailing are infiltrating the household and having profound consequences for domestic foodscapes and the food preparation activities and consumption experiences taking place there. Perhaps most significant is the impact of new foods and food delivery and distribution practices. In 2008, the American restaurant industry is expected to generate 558 billion dollars in sales and serve over 133 million meals per day (NRA 2008). This represents roughly 49% of a household's food dollar going to ‘food-away-from-home’ (FAFH) and 15% of meals. Equally significant for our modern consumption modes is the fact that the majority of restaurant meals are no longer consumed in restaurants: 58% of restaurant meals are eaten off-premises and the home is the most popular location where ‘take out’ restaurant meals are consumed (followed by the car and the workplace). For instance, fully 54% of all fast-food takeout food is eaten at home (Mintel, 2007).

At the moment, it is nothing less than a war that is being waged for the consumer's food dollar. On one side are the ‘food-away-from-home’ preparers (i.e., foodservice providers) and on the other side are the ‘food-at-home’ providers (i.e., grocery stores and food manufacturers) and each is increasingly crossing over the other's territory by developing new foods, new cooking techniques and new delivery modes. For instance, food manufacturers are now offering a variety of alternative preparation methods like ready-to-heat (e.g., pre-cooked frozen vegetables now packaged in microwavable bags), ready-to-cook (e.g., marinated chicken breasts), and ‘speed scratch’ (e.g., sauces, two-step cake mixes, ingredients like chopped garlic) all designed to save precious food preparation time. Restaurants, such as Applebee's and Outback Steakhouse, are now offering ‘curbside delivery’ where customers need only to drive into specially marked parking bays (after phoning in their order) and a staff member delivers the food to their car.

Whether these tactics by food and foodservice marketers are in response to consumer demand or proactively shaping it, they are nonetheless changing our eating behavior and the very definition of what constitutes a meal. While some niche segments care about taste and health-value and are willing to pay the related premium for these benefits, the vast majority of consumers put convenience and ease of cooking as their top concerns when deciding what to cook and eat at home, according to market analysts at the NPD Group (NPD, 2006). As a result of the many enticements to spend our food dollar, today's food environment, both at home and outside of it, often results in eating behavior that has been characterized as ‘mindless’ (Wansink, 2007) with negative health outcomes, such as higher rates of obesity.

View chapterPurchase book

FAQs

What are the factors that affect distribution of food? ›

Prominent risk factors that can affect the food distribution within a society include war, economic failure, political instability, and weather conditions.

How can food distribution be improved? ›

World Food Day: Time To Start Food Distribution Improvements
  1. Reduce Food Waste. Reducing food waste can save you money and reduce the burden that food production places on the environment. ...
  2. Increase Food System Efficiency. ...
  3. Healthy Diet. ...
  4. Advocate.
Oct 5, 2018

How can we solve the problem of food distribution in some parts of the world? ›

One way of solving the growing issue of food distribution is through the utilization of new technologies. A combination of developing technologies, new economic models and support from global leaders could lead to curbing the problems behind food distribution for both the developing and underdeveloped world.

What are the problems with food distribution? ›

Therefore, the main problems with the current distribution system are the lack of markets, the inadequacy of transportation to markets, and the inability to afford the costs of production and consumption. In our current system of food distribution, the number of markets and ways to access those markets is inadequate.

What is the purpose of food distribution? ›

General food distribution: Aim of general food distribution is to provide food to all for a basic level of survival.

What is the process of food distribution? ›

In general, food distribution is composed of a variety of companies, organizations and programs that collect food from producers, store it in warehouses, and then distribute the food to manufacturers, grocery stores, restaurants, cafeterias, government aid programs and more.

How can we have a sustainable food system? ›

“Try to understand and reduce your environmental impact in the way that you eat, to the extent that it makes personal and financial sense for you, whether this is through changing your consumer habits or minimizing waste (or both) ” Reynolds says, adding that if it is affordable, try purchasing from smaller, locally ...

How would you help promote a sustainable local food system? ›

Choose sustainable food.

Shop at your local farmers' market, join a regional CSA (community supported agriculture), or ask the produce manager at your local grocery store which fruits and vegetables are purchased from farms using sustainable practices.

Why is food not evenly distributed around the world? ›

This is because people in developed countries spend only a relatively small amount of their income on food. However, many families in poor countries spend up to 80 % of their income on food. If prices of certain foods double, these families will not be able to buy food anymore.

What can we do to solve the problem of food shortage? ›

Here are some of the possible solutions to food insecurity.
  1. Reduce Food Waste. ...
  2. Reduce the Risk of Commercialising. ...
  3. Improve Existing Infrastructural Programs. ...
  4. Improve Trade Policies. ...
  5. Promote Diversification. ...
  6. Close the Yield Gap. ...
  7. Work Towards Defeating Climate Change.

How does population affect food supply? ›

Food production depends on croplands and water supply, which are under strain as human populations increase. Pressure on limited land resources, driven in part by population growth, can mean expansion of cropland. This often involves destruction of vital forest resources or overexploitation of arable land.

Why is it important to balance the supply of food to feed the population? ›

Why is a sustainable food supply important? Today, more than three billion people are malnourished and many of our planet's 7 billion inhabitants eat diets low in quality. At the same time, the world's population is rapidly expanding, and it is estimated there will be close to 10 billion people on our planet by 2050.

What are the causes of food shortage? ›

The political violence and discrimination that precede conflict, the destructiveness of active conflict, and the difficulty of restoring communities and reconstructing food systems following conflict, are probably the most significant causes of food shortage and related poverty and deprivation.

What are the advantages of food distribution? ›

Whilst poverty decreases and hunger is becoming less common in the world, subsidised food distribution remains a key social security measure to reduce food deprivation, especially in emergency situations such as drought or conflict.

What is food distribution system called? ›

The Public Distribution System (PDS) evolved as a system of management of scarcity through distribution of foodgrains at affordable prices. Over the years, PDS has become an important part of Government's policy for management of food economy in the country.

What are the different types of food distribution? ›

There are several types of distributors when it comes to foodservice.
  • Cash-And-Carry Distributors.
  • Redistributors.
  • Specialty Distributors.
  • Broadline Distributors.
Aug 17, 2021

How do you distribute food products? ›

Strategy: how to sell a new food item or product in stores or online

What are the components of food distribution? ›

Food distribution involves a series of post-harvest activities including the processing, transportation, storage, packaging and marketing of food as well as activities related to household purchasing power, traditions of food use (including child feeding practices), food exchanges and gift giving and public food ...

What is the best solution to increase our food production? ›

Planting and harvesting existing croplands more frequently, either by reducing fallow land or by increasing “double cropping” (planting two crops in a field in the same year), can boost food production without requiring new land.

How does a food system contribute to strong communities? ›

Local food systems play a critical role in building community wealth for several key reasons: Growing, processing, and distributing food locally creates and sustains community-based jobs. Direct marketing channels between farmers and consumers (e.g., through farmers markets) boosts local farmers' incomes.

Why is sustainable food system important? ›

As described by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2014), “a sustainable food system delivers food security and nutrition for all in such a way that the economic, social, and environmental bases to generate food security and nutrition for future generations are not compromised”.

What are the effects of unequal distribution of population? ›

Depletion of resources and pollution: large populations need equally large amounts of natural resources (water, energy and food). This depletes natural resources, increases pollution and damages the environment.

What are the social impacts of food insecurity? ›

Food insecure adults are more likely to have lower self-assessed health status, higher prevalence of chronic disease such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease and depression, and lower rates of social and economic participation [13].

How does food insecurity affect the economy? ›

Using the framework of human capital theory, the report presents evidence that food insecurity can negatively affect the U.S. economy through increased health costs that, paradoxically, include obesity and overweight. Child hunger is also shown to negatively impact educational and lifetime earning potential.

What are five factors that affect the food supply? ›

Biological determinants such as hunger, appetite, and taste. Economic determinants such as cost, income, availability. Physical determinants such as access, education, skills (e.g. cooking) and time. Social determinants such as culture, family, peers and meal patterns.

What are the factors affecting the amount of food we have? ›

What affects the amount of food we have?
  • Climate. Drought is the main cause of food shortage. ...
  • Pests and diseases. Food insecurity is worsened by diseases such as malaria and AIDS. ...
  • Technology. ...
  • Water supply. ...
  • Conflict. ...
  • Poverty.

What factors affect the prices of food? ›

There is growing consensus that food prices have increased due to fundamental shifts in global supply and demand. A variety of forces contribute to rising food prices: high energy prices, increased income, climate change and the increased production of biofuel.

Videos

1. Introduction to teacher and discussion about food distribution
(Diane Paul)
2. Food Service and Distribution - HACCP Overview US Course Preview
(BIStrainer)
3. CDE Food Distribution Program: Avenues of Participation
(CDE Nutrition Programs)
4. Urban Food Hubs Overview
(UDC-TV)
5. Food Distribution Warehouse
(Ziglift Material Handling)
6. Food Distribution
(Africa Relief & Community Development)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Lidia Grady

Last Updated: 02/08/2023

Views: 6716

Rating: 4.4 / 5 (45 voted)

Reviews: 92% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Lidia Grady

Birthday: 1992-01-22

Address: Suite 493 356 Dale Fall, New Wanda, RI 52485

Phone: +29914464387516

Job: Customer Engineer

Hobby: Cryptography, Writing, Dowsing, Stand-up comedy, Calligraphy, Web surfing, Ghost hunting

Introduction: My name is Lidia Grady, I am a thankful, fine, glamorous, lucky, lively, pleasant, shiny person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.