Introduction
Interpreting the Report
This report aims to provide the people of Hartford with inspiration and tools for combating food insecurity. Acknowledging the historical contexts of the city and the systemic injustices facing its communities, this report proposes recommendations to the residents themselves. The knowledge within is not informed by personal experience living in Hartford, nor has the author been subjected to the racial and socioeconomic injustice present in the city. However, the report comes from a position of lifelong proximity to food insecurity in rural Connecticut. Written from this perspective, the aim is to present additional options and empower through community-based approaches rather than demand, instruct, or condescend. On this note, the report recognizes that no solution is perfect and asks that community members apply their knowledge and experience to improve the suggestions within. Furthermore, expecting community members to take on the extra burden of solving food insecurity themselves is not appropriate in some contexts. Therefore, the hope is that this report will be approached with an open-minded understanding that community-based solutions have the power to transform systems of injustice which are largely neglected by state or federal governments.
Brief Overview
Hartford has been described as one of New England’s ‘forgotten cities’ (Walsh, 2013). This sentiment may be relatable to many of its communities experiencing neglect. Once a bustling hub of industry and manufacturing in the 19th and 20th century, Hartford now faces the post-industrial legacies of unemployment and population decline (Heidenkamp, Russell & Sloan, 2016). Amongst other systemic challenges, the isolation of low-income residents and racial segregation have contributed greatly to food insecurity in the area.
Background
Hartford
It is important to outline two elements of contextual importance to this report: the history of the city and of its communities. The following sections serve as an acknowledgement of the deep historical context of life in Hartford. This overview is by no means exhaustive. However, it is impossible to address the issues of food insecurity in Hartford without full knowledge of how the development of the city has shaped its communities. Furthermore, the author wishes to acknowledge the extremely detrimental effects of systemic racism and socioeconomic injustice and respects that it is impossible to comprehend these realities from an external perspective.
Hartford Then and Now
Hartford is a post-industrial city. Manufacturing firms began to arrive in Hartford in the late 19th century contributing to the development of working-class factory districts (Walsh, 2013). These events triggered an influx of employment opportunities, infrastructure, and investment that helped the city flourish in the following decades. However, this growth began to slow and was eventually extinguished in the 1980s. It is recognized that the death of industry in Hartford has come to define the challenges, strengths, and even the compositions of the city’s communities (Heidenkamp, Russell & Sloan, 2016; Barber, 2013).
Investment in the city dried up following the halt of manufacturing. Not only did economic and government attention turn elsewhere, but entire fields of skill, expertise, and generational knowledge were deemed irrelevant. Today, Hartford is dealing with the legacies of this loss. Most of the city is made up of low-income communities (Martin et al., 2014). Furthermore, Hartford has a poverty rate of 28%, more than doubling rates state and nationwide (Seaberry, Davila & Abraham, 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021). Job and housing insecurity in the city–both worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic– have contributed to a rise in unemployment and crime (Ennis, 2023; Seaberry, Davila & Abraham, 2021). Furthermore, urban decay and lack of funding puts Hartford residents at risk of chronic disease and exposure to toxins (Seaberry, Davila & Abraham, 2021).
Hartford’s Communities
Hartford’s population has undergone several demographic shifts since the late 1800s. The industry boom saw the introduction of a large number of European immigrants. Wealthier Yankee populations began to consolidate to the north, west, and south of downtown, and for the first time Hartford’s neighborhoods were distinctly divided socioeconomic class (Walsh, 2013). This distinction impacted the ability of immigrant workers to rise into white collar, skilled labor jobs. Here lie some of the first indications of the uneven distribution of resources typical of Hartford and its surrounding suburbs (Barber, 2013).
This trend was mirrored in the 1920’s when the American South and Caribbean replaced Europe as the main source of migration into Hartford. At the time the African American population in the city grew sharply with the promise of higher wages. This population faced severe racial segregation and were afforded essentially no opportunities for social or economic mobility (Schlichting, Tuckel & Maisel, 2006, 2013; Walsh, 2013). A further migration surge in the late 1900s consisted of Latino immigrants from Puerto Rico and Jamaica (Bauer, 2013). Wealthier white populations consolidated and began to move out of urban Hartford. By the 1970s, Hartford was minority white, and migrants continued to arrive in the city despite the decline in manufacturing jobs.
Hartford Equity Profile 2021 (Seaberry, Davila & Abraham, 2021)
- 121,024 residents in 2021
- 87% BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color)
- 36% Black and 17% Latino
- 18% of resident speak English less than very well
- 22% of residents are foreign born
- Median household income is $36k
- 28% poverty rate
- 24% of Black and 35% of Latino households are below the poverty line
- 51% of households spend at least ⅓ of income on housing
- 20% of adults without health insurance
Food Insecurity
“Food security means access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life.”- USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS)
More than just hunger, food insecurity is related to a lack of access to healthy food. It is not just a rural problem; it can occur anywhere that healthy food is made inaccessible to certain populations (Lyonnais et al., 2020). Thus, food insecurity is surprisingly common in many cities in the US. It is important to understand that accessibility of food can be determined by different factors; therefore, there are different ways of defining which communities are food insecure (Sullivan, 2021).
Types of Food Insecurity
Food Deserts: Food deserts occur where there is an overlap of low-income and low proximity to healthy food (Martin et al., 2014). Here, accessibility is related to money and distance. In these locations populations have low-incomes and live unreasonably far from affordable healthy food options. Food deserts are the primary qualification of food insecurity used by the USDA (Sullivan, 2021) and are fairly common in cities. However, this economic approach may overlook additional areas of insecurity.
Food Swamps: Food swamps are locations that have some healthy food retail options but are over saturated with less healthy food. In these locations, the healthy options are often outnumbered by cheaper, unhealthy options. Healthy food is made inaccessible due to the over accessibility of processed food, junk food, or fast-food locations (Fielding & Simon, 2011). Issues of class, racism, and ability bias all play a role in this qualification of food insecurity.
Food Mirages: Food mirages appear to have lots of healthy food options, but many residents lack the funds or resources to purchase them (Breyer & Voss-Andreae, 2013). In food mirages accessibility is not just related to money or distance. Many factors can create obstacles to accessing nearby healthy food. These include, race, disability, education, immigration status, or parental status. Food mirages are common in inner cities (Sullivan, 2014; Wiebe & Distasio, 2016).
These classification provide a fuller understanding of the many elements that contribute to food inaccessibility and insecurity. Although food deserts are convenient to diagnose, the role of systemic racial injustice as well as income, ability, and mobility bias must be recognized as powerful forces that isolate certain communities (Price & Jeffery, 2023). Furthermore, approaches to food security must have an emphasis on access to healthy food. There are links between food insecurity and declining mental or physical health. In particular, the relationship between chronic disease and food insecurity has been described as a dangerous cycle with inter-generational effects (Seligman & Schillinger, 2010).
Food Insecurity in Hartford
Firstly, it must be acknowledged that as a minority white city, food insecurity in Hartford disproportionately impacts its Black and Latino communities. Secondly, many of the census tracts in Hartford are classified as low-income. Acknowledging these facts and their historical context provided above is vital for interpreting food insecurity in the city.
Food Insecurity in Hartford (Seaberry, Davila & Abraham, 2021; Ennis, 2023)
- 29% of residents see food insecurity as a personal health risk
- 20% of city classified as food desert
- 34% identify obesity as a health risk
- 30% of households have no access to a vehicle
- Higher density of chronic disease and mental strife than statewide
- All above values are higher than CT values
- All above values higher in Black and Latino residents and lower in white residents
Solutions
Existing Solutions
Policy Based Solutions
There are several policies that attempt to combat food insecurity in Hartford. The following programs run by federal and state governments:
- Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): Low-income individuals can purchase food using an Electronic Benefits Transfer card provided by SNAP, USDA. In 2021, 56% of Latino and 34% of Black Hartford residents received SNAP benefits (Seaberry, Davila & Abraham, 2021). The expiration of pandemic era expansions mean that benefits are not accepted everywhere and remain unavailable to food insecure residents with slightly higher incomes (Ennis, 2023).
- Women, Infants, and Children (WIC): Supplemental health care and food are provided to qualifying mothers through federal funding (USDA). Policy makers are considering a permanent expansion of services. Despite increased engagement with this program in Hartford, it has similar challenges to SNAP (Ennis, 2023).
- Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP): GusNIP incentivizes nutritious eating and the accessibility of healthy food using government grants to state and local governments. However, GusNIP struggles with equity as the grants are competitive (Krieger, 2022).
Community Based Approaches
Building supermarkets or providing benefits does not fix the problem fully. Government and policy solutions struggle to evenly provide support and often highlight existing inequalities (Price & Jeffery, 2023; Sullivan, 2021). The following are some current community-based programs in Hartford (Ennis, 2023):
- Hands on Hartford (HOH): This non-profit provides community services from within including a food pantry supporting 800 Hartford families per month. The style of this pantry allows for flexibility according to taste, diet, culture, or religion. There is also an emphasis on produce and fresh food beyond the food pantry staples. HOH also brings community members together to access additional resources.
- KNOX: This non-profit is involved in greening-up Hartford. One of their initiates is a gardening scheme consisting of 21 gardens and engaging 300 community members. The project repurposes decaying properties into flourishing gardens all over the city. The gardens have put 8 tons of food back into local systems and provide resources and support for all interested residents.
- Forge City Works: This farmers market in Frog Hollow allows local growers to sell their produce directly to Hartford residents. Like many of the farmers markets in the city, Forge City Works accepts and even doubles SNAP benefits. Effort is being put into making the market more accessible through the installation of a small neighborhood market.
Recommendations
The following section consists of recommendations for action to combat food insecurity and enhance existing programs in Hartford. The community-based approach to food insecurity tends to address the problem more effectively. Although there are benefits to the government programs, they can be impacted by political pressures. Furthermore, federal and state level nutritional programs are temporary solutions that fail to address the context of food insecurity in Hartford. Therefore, these recommendations are rooted in a community-based approach to inspire and support the people of Hartford as they tackle food insecurity and its larger context. The hope is to aid Hartford’s communities as they reclaim the rights to food, security, and health so often denied in their city.
Expanding Mobile Markets
Inability to access food in Hartford is more than just an issue of distance. It is an issue of uneven distribution of food and of overburdened residents. Many Hartford residents have low access to vehicles or public transport, limited time, and caring duties. Factors such as single parenthood, immigration status, and language isolation can contribute to a Hartford resident’s ability to access food. Residents with disabilities and chronic disease face extra challenges especially with the risk of COVID. Considering these difficulties, one suggestion is to bring food directly to residents.
Hartford Food System runs the Hartford Mobile Market. This market runs year-round and provides access to produce for low-income residents. However, this is the only mobile market running in Hartford, and currently it only advertises stops twice a week. If mobile markets could be scaled up in Hartford and advertised more effectively, it could be a valuable resource for more residents.
- What: Mobile markets bring fresh food and produce to low-income residents at home. This style of market can simultaneously address issues of healthy food access and distribution in Hartford. Furthermore, mobile markets can boost small farms and food businesses closer to home (Spencer, 2013).
- Who: Mobile markets would serve the low income and more isolated communities of Hartford. Many of these residents, such as elderly, infirmed, and non-English speaking Hartfordians struggle to access food or support services. Mobile markets are proven to alleviate food insecurity in these communities and can be designed to accept SNAP or WIC benefits (Robinson et al., 2016).
- How: Acting as a supplement to traditional farmers markets like Forge City Works or community gardens, mobile markets typically run out of repurposed buses or trucks. Often hailed as a relatively low budget project, mobile markets can take several forms including mobile gardens, pop up markets, and delivery services for fresh weekly essentials (Sullivan, 2021). There are also opportunities for partnerships with pantries, markets, and gardens, making this an ideal solution for expanding the services of successful, but oversaturated programs in Hartford. Markets are often run by non-profits receiving funding from various supporters and foundations.
- Resources/Examples:
Arcadia Mobile Market, Washington D.C.: This market runs out of a bus and brings fresh produce to various food insecure neighborhoods weekly. The Mobile Market accepts all food assistance benefits and sources its food from within a 125-mile radius.
About Fresh, Fresh Truck, Boston, MA: This mobile market has a weekly markets schedule and a grocery delivery service. The Fresh Truck aims to provide impacted communities with year-round food security in a city with few supermarkets. This program has a distinct focus on health and sustainability and partners with Boston Medical Center.
myveggievan.org: This website contains resources on building, understanding, and sustaining a mobile market system. The website has information and support for those interested in setting up a mobile market. This includes a toolkit that can also be accessed on the USDA SNAP-Ed page.
Local Currencies and Benefits
“Introducing complementary currencies links underutilized resources with unmet needs” – Hallsmith & Lietar (2011, 66)
Healthy food and produce are often not feasible options for low-income individuals. Given that many Hartford communities are low-income, food affordability massively contributes to food insecurity. Local level economic solutions can help lift neglected communities out of deep food insecurity and provide more long-term solutions in Hartford.
- What: Local currencies run alongside official currencies. They circulate only in local settings and are accepted by local businesses that choose to participate. They can address issues of food affordability by creating a local economy not tied to nationwide systems of inequality (Brown, 2021). Similarly local benefits systems mimic nationwide nutritional programs like SNAP on a more personal level. Both local currencies and local benefits programs can improve the food security of communities that are excluded or targeted in national economic systems (Hallsmith & Lietaer, 2011).
- Who: Local currencies can promote the livelihoods of a community with ‘unmet needs’ (Hallsmith & Lietar, 2011). Even when a community is low-income or lacks investment, local currencies engage with local businesses. This system could be beneficial for Hartford residents struggling to afford healthy food (Dunne, 2011). Furthermore, local benefits programs can be used to support food insecure individuals who may not typically qualify for SNAP. Local benefits programs can also provide more flexibility for residents in Hartford. These solutions benefit food insecure community members, local businesses, and the community at large.
- How: Local currencies develop in partnership with research foundations, local banks, and local businesses in the interest of keeping money in a community (Hallsmith & Lietar, 2011). These currencies take off through incentivizing community engagement. Some currencies provide discounts at certain shops and can be converted into national currency (Brown, 2021). They function best when they meet unfulfilled needs of community members (Hallsmith & Lietar, 2011). In Hartford, complementary currency could help to unburden community members by either directly alleviating food insecurities or freeing up income for food expenses.
Locally based benefits programs are developed through partnerships with institutions such as hospitals, homeless shelters, or immigrant support programs to identify eligible residents. These programs provide community members with benefits or money for purchasing food (Bigora, 2023). Engagement with this sort of program in Hartford can help to fill gaps left by federal programs.
Resources/Examples
The Bristol Pound, Bristol, UK: Instituted in September of 2012, the £B was developed through a feasibility study and a partnership with the Bristol Credit Union. By January 2015 1,500 people had opened accounts in £B, £B750,000 had been issued, and 794 local businesses accepted £B. This system has helped build resilience in the community.
The Bristol Method: This report generated by Bristol Green Capital in 2015 provides an overview of the benefits and creation of complementary currency.
Schumacher Center for New Economic – Local Currency Program: This center is responsible for the creation of a local currency in Berkshire County, MA. BerkShares were created in partnership with local banks and 350 businesses to circulate currency within the community. The center’s website is also home to vast archives and resources detailing examples and methods for creating local currencies.
About Fresh – Fresh Connect, Boston, MA: This benefits program is run by a local non-profit in partnership with healthcare organizations. This program works with healthcare teams to enroll at risk patients in Fresh Connect. Patients receive prepaid cards for purchasing produce funded by the non-profit’s supporters. Fresh Connect is now available in locations across the US.
Youth Empowerment
Food insecurity is extremely detrimental to the development and health of youth. In Hartford roughly ½ of children live in poverty; furthermore, there is a high rate of obesity in children, and younger residents are more susceptible to diet-related disease (Martin et al., 2014). Encouraging the involvement of youth in Hartford’s existing programs and giving young people the tools to understand nutrition can break intergenerational cycles of food insecurity. Empowering youth in Hartford can also strengthen community cohesion and existing programs (Glover & Sumberg, 2020).
- What: Engaging and educating youth simply means specifically targeting and supporting younger community members in the already existing gardening schemes or nutrition education programs (Sullivan, 2021).
- Who: In Hartford only 49% of adult residents believe youth have positive role models, and only 38% think it is a good place to raise kids; these values are 77% and 74% statewide (Seaberry, Davila & Abraham, 2021). Creating youth-specific services and programs in Hartford will directly benefit young people, but it will also help deepen community cohesion and personal investment in the city (Glover & Sumberg, 2020). This solution aims to leave a positive impact on young people and by extension the large Hartford community.
- How: Youth empowerment and engagement can include the creation of services just for children or teens such as the addition of a youth garden to the KNOX gardening scheme. It may also involve the consultation and promotion of young people within program administrations and the advertisement of relevant nation and statewide youth conferences.
Resources/Examples:
Teens for Food Justice (TFFJ), New York, NY: This non-profit promotes teen leadership, advocacy, and health through a network of educational gardens. The program partners with 19 schools, 7,900 students, and 10 communities to distribute 45,000 pounds of student-grown produce per year to low-income communities through schools, markets, and pantries.
Rooted in Community National Network (RIC): This grassroots movement empowers youth to lead. It encourages health in cities through youth gardening, agriculture, and environmental or food justice work. RIC hosts national conferences, facilitates youth training, and mentors organizations. An Advisory Council of youth and adults runs RIC.
Conclusion
The content in this report is aimed to provide the people of Hartford with additional tools and knowledge to combat food insecurity in their city. The hope is that the context, history, and recommendations will help empower Hartford’s communities to challenge systems of racial and socioeconomic inequality from within. In this spirit, the report offers solutions that complement and expand on existing programs in the city. Rather than criticizing, the author hopes that these options will illuminate the capability of the city and the strength of its people. The author thanks the people of Hartford for their consideration and grace.
Reference
Barber, L. (2013) ‘“If We Would… Leave the City, This Would Be a Ghost Town”’, in X. Chen and N. Bacon (eds.) Confronting urban legacy: Rediscovering Hartford and New England’s forgotten cities. Lanham: Lexington Books, pp. 65–82.
Bauer, J. (2013) ‘A Metro Immigrant Gateway’, in X. Chen and N. Bacon (eds.) Confronting urban legacy: Rediscovering Hartford and New England’s forgotten cities. Lanham: Lexington Books, p. 145.
Bigora, P. (2023) Fresh connect’s prepaid food prescription network grows to 10k grocery stores nationwide, Grocery Dive. Available at: https://www.grocerydive.com/news/fresh-connects-prepaid-food-prescription-network-10000-grocery-stores/652901/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Breyer, B. and Voss-Andreae, A. (2013) ‘Food mirages: Geographic and economic barriers to healthful food access in Portland, Oregon’, Health & Place, 24, pp. 131–139. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2013.07.008.
Brown, J. (2021) The Power of Local Money for a Thriving Local Economy, YES! Magazine. Available at: https://www.yesmagazine.org/economy/2021/07/09/local-money-equity (Accessed: October 2023).
Dunne, J. (2011) ‘Complementary Currency Systems’, in P. Petit (ed.) Earth capitalism: Creating a new civilization through a responsible market economy. Routledge, p. 111.
Ennis, T. (2023) Full plate: Tackling food insecurity in Connecticut, Connecticut Inside Investigator. Available at: https://insideinvestigator.org/full-plate-tackling-food-insecurity-in-connecticut/#:~:text=In%20Hartford%2C%20the%20food%20insecurity,that%20rate%20is%20around%2016.5%25. (Accessed: October 2023).
Fielding, J.E. and Simon, P.A. (2011) ‘Food Deserts or food swamps?’, Archives of Internal Medicine, 171(13), p. 1171. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.279.
Glover, D. and Sumberg, J. (2020) ‘Youth and Food Systems Transformation’, Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 4. doi:10.3389/fsufs.2020.00101.
Hallsmith, G. and Lietaer, B.A. (2011) Creating wealth growing local economies with local currencies. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers.
Heidkamp, C.P., Russell, S.E. and Sloan , M. (2016) ‘Urban Food Production Limits and the Viability of Community Gardens: The Case of Hartford, Connecticut’, in N. Reid, J.D. Gatrell, and P.S. Ross (eds.) Local food systems in old industrial regions: Concepts, spatial context, and local practices. London: Routledge, pp. 169–190.
Krieger, J. (2022) Towards a more equitable Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program … Available at: https://www.cspinet.org/sites/default/files/2022-11/Towards%20a%20more%20equitable%20Gus%20Schumacher%20Nutrition%20Incentive%20Program%20%28GusNIP%29-%20Recommendations%20for%20program%20reauthorization%20and%20implementation.pdf (Accessed: October 2023).
Lyonnais, M.J. et al. (2020) ‘Examining shopping patterns, use of food-related resources, and proposed solutions to improve healthy food access among food insecure and Food Secure Eastern North Carolina residents’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(10), p. 3361. doi:10.3390/ijerph17103361.
Martin, K.S. et al. (2014) ‘What role do local grocery stores play in Urban Food Environments? A case study of hartford-connecticut’, PLoS ONE, 9(4). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094033.
Price, M. and Jeffery, T. (2023) ‘An analysis of socioeconomic determinants of the black–white disparity in food insecurity rates in the US’, Foods, 12(11), p. 2228. doi:10.3390/foods12112228.
Robinson, J.A. et al. (2016) ‘An oasis in the Desert? the benefits and constraints of mobile markets operating in Syracuse, New York Food Deserts’, Agriculture and Human Values, 33(4), pp. 877–893. doi:10.1007/s10460-016-9680-9.
Schlichting, K., Tuckel, P. and Maisel, R. (2006) ‘Residential Segregation and the beginning of the Great Migration of African Americans to Hartford, Connecticut a GIS-based analysis’, Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, 39(3), pp. 132–144. doi:10.3200/hmts.39.3.132-144.
Schlichting, K., Tuckel, P. and Maisel, R. (2015) ‘Great migration of African Americans to Hartford, Connecticut, 1910–1930: A GIS analysis at the neighborhood and street level’, Social Science History, 39(2), pp. 287–310. doi:10.1017/ssh.2015.54.
Seaberry, C., Davila, K., Abraham, M. (2021). ‘Hartford Equity Profile.’ New Haven, CT: DataHaven. Published September 2021. More information at ctdatahaven.org
Seligman, H.K. and Schillinger, D. (2010) ‘Hunger and socioeconomic disparities in chronic disease’, New England Journal of Medicine, 363(1), pp. 6–9. doi:10.1056/nejmp1000072.
Spencer, H. (2013) Better Health for food deserts: Are Mobile Farmers Markets the answer?, GOOD. Available at: https://www.good.is/articles/mobile-farmers-markets-hit-the-road (Accessed: October 2023).
Sullivan, D. (2021) ‘A Comprehensive Analysis of Food Insecurity and Solutions in Worcester, Massachusetts’. School of Professional Studies. 84.
Sullivan, D.M. (2014) ‘From Food Desert to Food Mirage: Race, social class, and food shopping in a gentrifying neighborhood’, Advances in Applied Sociology, 04(01), pp. 30–35. doi:10.4236/aasoci.2014.41006.
United States Census Bureau (2020) Hartford City, Connecticut , Explore census data. Available at: https://data.census.gov/profile/Hartford_city,_Connecticut?g=160XX00US0937000 (Accessed: October 2023).
USDA Economic Research Service (2023) Food Security , USDA ERS – Food Security in the U.S. Available at: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-u-s/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Walsh, A. (2013) ‘Hartford: A global history ’, in X. Chen and N. Bacon (eds.) Confronting urban legacy: Rediscovering Hartford and New England’s forgotten cities. Lanham: Lexington Books, pp. 21–45.
Wiebe, K. and Distasio, J. (2016) Confronting the illusion: Developing a method to identify food mirages and food deserts in Winnipeg, WinnSpace Home. Available at: https://winnspace.uwinnipeg.ca/handle/10680/1205 (Accessed: 26 October 2023).
Resources
About Hands on Hartford (2023) Hands On Hartford. Available at: https://handsonhartford.org/about/about-2/ (Accessed: October 2023).
About Ric (2023) Rooted In Community. Available at: https://www.rootedincommunity.org/about#:~:text=The%20Rooted%20In%20Community%20National,leadership%20in%20their%20own%20communities. (Accessed: October 2023).
Arcadia Mobile Market: Pre-order online (2023) Mobile Market. Available at: https://www.arcadiamobilemarket.org/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Bristol Green Capital Partnership (2022) Bristol Green Capital. Available at: https://bristolgreencapital.org/ (Accessed: October 2023).
The Bristol Method (2015) Bristol Green Capital . Available at: https://bristolgreencapital.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/3_bristol_method_how_to_measure_the_sustainability_of_a_city.pdf (Accessed: October 2023).
Forge City Works (2023) Forge City Works. Available at: https://www.forgecityworks.org/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Fresh Connect (2023) About Fresh. Available at: https://www.aboutfresh.org/fresh-connect/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Fresh Truck (2023) About Fresh. Available at: https://www.aboutfresh.org/fresh-truck/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Hartford Food Systems (2023) Hartford Food System. Available at: https://hartfordfood.org/programs/hartford-mobile-market/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Local currencies program (2022) Schumacher Center for a New Economics. Available at: https://centerforneweconomics.org/apply/local-currencies-program/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Supporting the Hartford Community (2023) KNOX. Available at: https://knoxhartford.org/ (Accessed: 27 October 2023).
TFFJ (2020) Teens for Food Justice. Available at: https://teensforfoodjustice.org/ (Accessed: October 2023).
Toolkit (2020) THE VEGGIE VAN TRAINING CENTER. Available at: https://www.myveggievan.org/toolkit.html (Accessed: October 2023).
USDA (2023) Ed connection: Home, SNAP. Available at: https://snaped.fns.usda.gov/ (Accessed: October 2023).