The mayor’s office says it would be the first major U.S. city to enact such a plan.

  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ve seen three different definitions in the past 5 minutes. Two definitions were based on physical proximity to grocery stores. Another focused primarily on the poverty rates in census tracts, regardless of the presence of absence of supermarkets. I think the “6500” number comes from that third definition. Of the 84,414 census tracts in the US, fewer than 6500 (about 7.7%) are classified as “food deserts”.

    I would have to say that yes, 6500 of 84414 tracts is a fairly low number.

    I would also have to say that if they are using the third definition in these Chicago neighborhoods, they qualified as “food deserts” before Walmart (et al) decided to leave.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      7.7%? That’s HUGE for 21st century! What is it? Africa? Russia?

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        7.7% of census tracts, not of people. The overwhelming majority of those tracts have insufficient population to support a nearby supermarket. That doesn’t mean they don’t have access to food.

        Most of these tracts are farming communities. They provide all the food stocked in these urban and suburban supermarkets. They are literally surrounded by food, in their fields, pastures, gardens, pantries, etc. But because the definition of “food deserts” focuses on supermarkets and doesn’t include the 10 tons of grain in their bin, they are considered to be living in a “food desert”.