Evidence Hub

Exploring the role of social supermarkets in addressing food insecurity and food waste

Quick-read summary

Food insecurity and food waste are two connected challenges that affect individuals, communities, and wider food systems. Many households struggle to afford enough nutritious food, while large amounts of edible surplus food from retailers are discarded. Social supermarkets (SSMs) have emerged as an innovative response to both issues by redistributing surplus food from mainstream supermarkets and selling it at reduced prices to local communities.

This scoping review examined international peer-reviewed research on social supermarkets to understand how they influence food insecurity and reduce food waste. The review explored who uses SSMs, how they are experienced by customers, and their wider role in addressing food insecurity and food waste.

The findings showed that SSMs are mainly used by low-income and food insecure households, although some customers use them because they want to reduce food waste and support more sustainable food systems.

Attitudes towards SSMs were largely positive, especially compared to food banks, because customers could choose their own food and were treated as shoppers rather than recipients of charity. This helped reduce stigma and improved dignity and independence.

However, while SSMs provide valuable short-term support and help prevent surplus food from becoming waste, they do not solve the root causes of either problem. Food insecurity remains strongly linked to income inequality, and food waste continues because of overproduction across the food supply chain.

This means that wider policy action is needed to address poverty, fair income, and food system reform, rather than relying only on surplus redistribution models.

Who is this evidence useful for?

This evidence is useful for:

• Community food organisations and charities
• Public health professionals
• Local authorities and policy makers
• Social supermarket managers and staff
• Researchers in food systems, public health, and social policy
• Third sector organisations working in poverty reduction and food justice

It is particularly relevant for those designing policies and services that aim to reduce food insecurity while improving sustainability and reducing food waste.

What is the issue?

Food insecurity affects people who do not have reliable access to enough affordable, nutritious food. At the same time, large amounts of edible food are wasted across the food supply chain, particularly by supermarkets and food retailers. These two problems are often treated separately, despite being closely linked.

Social supermarkets aim to respond to both challenges by collecting surplus food that would otherwise go to waste and selling it at low cost to communities. They are often seen as a more dignified alternative to food banks because they allow customers to choose their own food and participate in a retail-style environment. However, there is ongoing debate about whether they offer a long-term solution or simply manage the symptoms of deeper social and economic inequalities.

Research summary

This study used a scoping review approach to map and summarise the existing international evidence on social supermarkets.

What was unique about this research?

This review focused specifically on how social supermarkets address both food insecurity and food waste together, rather than treating them as separate issues. It also explored customer experiences and perceptions of dignity, choice, and stigma within these models.

What did the research find?

Key findings

• Social supermarkets were primarily used by low-income and food insecure households
• Some customers were not food insecure but chose to shop there to help reduce food waste and support sustainability
• Customers reported more positive experiences compared to food banks, particularly because: they could choose their own food, they were treated as customers rather than charity recipients and shopping felt less stigmatising
• SSMs helped reduce surplus food waste by redistributing food from mainstream retailers
• Despite these benefits, SSMs did not address the structural causes of food insecurity, particularly: low income and poverty, income inequality, rising living costs and insecure employment
• They also did not address the systemic overproduction of food that creates surplus across the supply chain
• SSMs depend, to some extent, on the continuation of these wider inequalities and inefficiencies to remain operational

Why is this important?

These findings show that while social supermarkets can improve access to affordable food and reduce waste in the short term, they should not be viewed as a complete solution to food insecurity.

The research highlights the importance of moving beyond emergency or surplus-based food aid towards policies that address poverty directly. Without action on wages, welfare, housing costs, and fair food systems, food insecurity will continue to grow. Similarly, reducing food waste requires structural changes in how food is produced, supplied, and sold, not simply redistributing surplus after it is created.

This helps improve understanding of how community food interventions can support people, while also recognising their limitations.

How were people involved in this work?

This study was a scoping review of existing published literature and did not involve direct participation from patients or community groups during the research process.

However, the included studies reflected the experiences and perspectives of social supermarket users, particularly around dignity, stigma, and access to affordable food. These customer experiences were central to understanding the value and limitations of SSM models.

Recommendations for policy and practice

• Social supermarkets should be recognised as a supportive community intervention, not a replacement for poverty reduction policy
• Policymakers should prioritise action on: income inequality, adequate wages welfare support, affordable housing, affordable and fairer food systems
• Food retailers and governments should work to reduce food surplus at source rather than relying on redistribution alone
• Community food support services should continue to prioritise dignity, autonomy, and choice for service users
• Future food policy should balance sustainability goals with social justice and long-term food security

What happens next?

Future research should explore the long-term impacts of social supermarket use on household food security, health, and wellbeing. More evidence is also needed on how different SSM models operate across countries and communities.

This work should be shared with policymakers, local authorities, food retailers, and third sector organisations to support more effective food system planning. Further research could also examine how SSMs fit within broader anti-poverty and sustainability strategies.

Find out more

Read the full research paper: Exploring the Role of Social Supermarkets in Addressing Food Insecurity and Food Waste: A Scoping Review – O’Malley – Nutrition Bulletin – Wiley Online Library

Contact lead researcher Dr Claire O’Malley at C.Omalley@tees.ac.uk

Acknowledgements

This work was led researchers from Teesside University and Newcastle University, and supported by partners from Middlesbrough Environment City and The Salvation Army.

It was funded by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration North East and North Cumbria.

It was also supported by Fuse, the Centre for Translational Research in Public Health.