Eating, shopping, and cooking while living with hardship during COVID-19

Abstract

In March 2020, New Zealand entered a strict Level 4 lockdown to curb the spread of the SARS-COV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19). The virus had emerged in China late in 2019, sparking the global COVID-19 pandemic. Border closures and orders to stay at home impacted employment, freedom of movement, and access to food. While these impacts were widespread, we wanted to study how the COVID-19 lockdown impacted the diets, shopping, and cooking habits of those living with hardship and those who lost income during the lockdown. This thesis aimed to identify grocery shopping, cooking, and diet changes among participants who experienced financial difficulty before and during the lockdown compared to financially secure respondents. The Covid Kai Survey was disseminated online through convenience and snowball sampling between 24 April and 13 May 2020 as part of the international Corona Cooking Survey project. This quantitative survey was available to those residing in New Zealand during the first COVID-19 Level 3 and 4 lockdowns in New Zealand. The survey asked participants 100 questions about how they cooked, shopped, and ate before and during the COVID-19 lockdown. Financial hardship variables were defined based on self-reported ability to make money last until payday (financial security) and ability to afford food (food security). These were derived from two Likert 7-point scales. A third binary hardship variable (loss of income) was derived from a Yes/No question asking if participants lost any income due to the lockdown. Welch 2-sample t tests were used to compare the difference in changes to cooking, shopping, and diet habits due to the lockdown between the high- /low-financial-security groups, between those who could usually afford food/those who frequently could not afford food, and between those who lost income /did not lose income due to the lockdown. Data from 3,004 adults who completed the Covid Kai Survey were used in analyses, categorised as: high (n=1,812) or low financial security (n=298); high food security (n=2,287), very low food security (n=96), lost income (n=775) or did not lose income (n=2,229) due to the lockdown. Overall, financially insecure participants reported worse diets than the financially secure before the lockdown, such as lower fruit and vegetable consumption. Although changes in diets were similar and dietary disparities were largely maintained during the lockdown, a disproportionately larger increase in the consumption of white bread (p=0.011) and sugary drinks (p<0.001) was identified among the low financial security group. The financially insecure increased their cooking from scratch by 9.8%, more than the 6.7% increase reported by the financially secure (p for the difference=0.040). Financial barriers (p=0.003) to cooking also improved more for the financially insecure. Stockpiling behaviours also differed between financial groups. For example, fruit (p=0.002), legumes (p<0.001), and flour (p=0.029) were stockpiled more by the financially secure participants than by the financially insecure. The already food-insecure did not stockpile several of the items which were stockpiled by the food secure, such as legumes (P<0.001) and salty snacks (p=0.014). Those who lost income during the lockdown increased their breadmaking more than those who did not lose income (p=0.048). Those who reported frequently struggling to afford food reported a significantly higher increase in their nonbread- baking ability, compared to those who could usually afford food (p=0.35). Changes to shopping and cooking were largely universal, except stockpiling behaviours which were more pronounced among the financially secure. All groups had more time to cook and felt increasingly confident about cooking healthy meals. Diet disparities between those with and without hardship widened, with disproportionate increases in white bread and sugary drink consumption among those with prior hardship. Equitable support targeting those with the greatest disadvantage is required to overcome existing disparities, and the government should consider further financial support for those with existing hardship during any prolonged lockdown period, as although financial barriers did not increase overall for this group, they were less equipped to stock up on food than the financially secure, should they have needed to isolate.