Understanding Food Insecurity in Westminster, UK: A Community-Informed Systems Thinking Approach.

introductionFood insecurity is increasing in the United Kingdom and is a growing public health concern. In Westminster, a highly diverse London borough, rates continue to rise in the most deprived areas, such as the Church Street ward, despite increasing food support and local policies.

methodsThis study used a community-informed systems thinking approach to understand the local dynamics. 26 stakeholders from 6 local services participated in group model-building (GMB) workshops and interviews to provide insight into how services and policies interact with the structural drivers of food insecurity.

resultsWe developed six causal loop diagrams (CLDs) to map interactions between support services, the food environment, local policies, and the drivers of food insecurity. Four system archetypes were identified: Fixes that Fail, Shifting the Burden, Limits to Success, and Success to the Successful, which explain how well-intentioned policies and interventions can produce unintended consequences that reinforce food insecurity. While identified in Church Street, these archetypes reflect recurring patterns of behaviour that may operate in other highly deprived and ethnically diverse urban settings. The CLDs show how charities, support services, and local communities work together to support residents, but are constrained by short-term fixes, limited funding, competing priorities, and the local food environment. This results in interventions that focus on addressing immediate needs, rather than the structural drivers such as poverty. Through our evaluation of the GMB approach, participants reported that the workshops were an effective way to share experiences and improve their understanding of food insecurity.

conclusionBy addressing the feedback mechanisms driving food insecurity and using systems archetypes to identify appropriate solutions, this research provides insights and policy recommendations to create more effective policies across the UK. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This article is part of a wider PhD project which involves close engagement and collaboration with public partners. For this article, public partner Jessica Ellis contributed extensively to the design and delivery of the workshops used in this research. She provided support in planning the workshop, designing the evaluation survey, developing workshop materials, co-facilitating a workshop, interpreting the results, and making contributions to the final manuscript.