Fulfilling the Right to Adequate Food: Examining SNAP through a Qualitative Lens

Overview: This presentation utilizes a human rights approach to explore under participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Results indicate that SNAP does not meet the definition of the right to adequate food. Policy recommendations based on participant experiences are examined. Implications for social work educators and practitioners are explored.Proposal text: Background
The right to adequate food means that food is both available and physically and economically accessible to all people (UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, 1999). While Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is America’s largest anti-hunger program, effective at reducing food insecurity and poverty (Keith-Jennings et al., 2019), program participation is underutilized by food insecure populations. For example, only 43.2% of income eligible food-insecure households participated in SNAP in 2019 (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2020). The majority of SNAP participation research relies on national surveys and estimation methods (Nicoll, 2015). However, a human rights approach to research encourages direct engagement by all stakeholders, especially eligible program participants, also known as “rights-holders” (Maschi, 2016). This study seeks to examine the SNAP participation research from a qualitative lens by highlighting the voices of rights-holders. Social workers use SNAP in the classroom as a learning tool for social policy and in the field with clients, communities, and policies. Thus, practitioners and educators have a vested interest in ensuring program success or else advocating for policy alternatives to food security.

Methods
Using a human rights approach, this presentation examines under participation in SNAP by conducting a qualitative peer-reviewed literature review of research on SNAP participation. This presentation seeks to contribute to the scholarship regarding SNAP under participation by using human rights principles participation, accountability, nondiscrimination, and equality (Gatenio-Gabel, 2016).

Results
Research indicates three barriers that led to under participation in SNAP: (1) Existing regulations or policies were identified too stringent or not worth applying for benefits (Fricke et al., 2015; Gaines-Turner et al., 2019; Gosliner et al., 2020; Hughes, 2019; Kaye et al., 2013; Robbins et al., 2017); (2) State agencies were ineffective at communicating with participants, leading to high rates of frustration and low program transparency and government accountability (Fricke et al., 2015; Gosliner et al., 2020; Kaye et al., 2013; Pelto et al., 2019; Robbins et al., 2017); (3) participants reported feeling disrespected by caseworkers and a loss of dignity from interactions at the social service office, leading to reports of underutilization of SNAP characterized by violations of nondiscrimination and equality (Fricke et al., 2015; Gaines-Turner et al., 2019; Gosliner et al., 2020; Hughes, 2019; Robbins et al., 2017).

Conclusion
While SNAP outcomes are linked to reduced food insecurity, SNAP policy implementation violates human rights principles and results in lacking the realization to a right to adequate food in the United States. A universal basic income program serving low-income household’s minimum basic needs is identified as a preferred policy alternative. Other policy alternatives include expanding certification requirements, improving communications with participants and training caseworkers on the lived experience of poverty. Social welfare policy educators should be mindful of participation barriers when teaching with SNAP and when using experiential learning tools such as The SNAP Challenge (De Luca & Benden, 2019) respecting and identifying the multifaceted barriers that individuals in poverty face. Practitioners should understand policy implementation barriers to SNAP and how applying for benefits may have lasting implications.