"When I go to bed hungry and sleep, I'm not hungry": children and parents' experiences of food insecurity

Evidence demonstrates food insecurity has a detrimental impact on a range of outcomes for children, but little research has been conducted in the UK, and children have rarely been asked to describe their experiences directly. We examined the experiences of food insecure families living in South London. Our mixed-methods approach comprised a survey of parents (n = 72) and one-to-one semi-structured interviews with children aged 5-11 years (n = 19). The majority of parents (86%) described their food security during the preceding year as very low. Most reported they had often or sometimes had insufficient food, and almost all had worried about running out of food. Two thirds of parents had gone hungry. Most parents reported they had been unable to afford a nutritionally balanced diet for their children, and just under half reported that their children had gone hungry. Four themes emerged from the interviews with children: sources of food; security of food, nutritional quality of food, and experiences of hunger. Children's descriptions of insufficient food being available indicate that parents are not always able to shield them from the impact of food insecurity. The lack of school-meals and after-school clubs serving food made weekends particularly problematic for some children. A notable consequence of food insecurity appears to be reliance on low-cost takeaway food, likely to be nutritionally poor.

Pension scheme redesign and wealth redistribution between the members and sponsor: the USS rule change in October 2011

The redesign of defined benefit pension schemes usually results in a substantial redistribution of wealth between age cohorts of members, pensioners, and the sponsor. This is the first study to quantify the redistributive effects of a rule change by a real world scheme (the Universities Superannuation Scheme, USS) where the sponsor underwrites the pension promise. In October 2011 USS closed its final salary scheme to new members, opened a career average revalued earnings (CARE) section, and moved to ‘cap and share’ contribution rates. We find that the pre-October 2011 scheme was not viable in the long run, while the post-October 2011 scheme is probably viable in the long run, but faces medium term problems. In October 2011 future members of USS lost 65% of their pension wealth (or roughly £100,000 per head), equivalent to a reduction of roughly 11% in their total compensation, while those aged over 57 years lost almost nothing. The riskiness of the pension wealth of future members increased by a third, while the riskiness of the present value of the sponsor’s future contributions reduced by 10%. Finally, the sponsor’s wealth increased by about £32.5 billion, equivalent to a reduction of 26% in their pension costs.