Reframing food security by and for Native American communities: a case study among tribes in the Klamath River basin of Oregon and California

Abstract

Native Americans make up less than 2% of the population of the USA, but suffer from some of the highest rates of food insecurity, poverty, diet-related diseases, and other socioeconomic challenges. This study examined unique attributes of food security in Native American communities in the Klamath River Basin of southern Oregon and northern California to generate a more comprehensive and culturally relevant understanding of Native American food insecurity. Through an in-depth case study among the Karuk, Yurok, Hoopa and Klamath Tribes, in which access to native foods was a central focus, our study examined the experience of food insecurity among tribal members, as well as barriers to and opportunities for building a more healthy, affordable and culturally appropriate food system. We found extremely high rates of food insecurity in participant households, greater than that documented in previous studies of food insecurity in tribal and non-tribal communities in the USA. Additionally, we found that the majority of study participants lacked access to desired native foods, due to reduced availability from restrictive laws and habitat degradation under settler colonialism, and that limited access to native foods is a strong predictor of food insecurity. There is a strong demand for increased access to and consumption of native foods and Native communities are actively engaged in eco-cultural restoration activities to enhance their cultural foodways. To understand contributions and solutions to food insecurity in Native communities, we examined predictors of food security and native foods security and provide new insights into the relationship between these two categories. Results from our study suggest the need to expand the way in which food security is defined and measured in Native American communities, and in indigenous communities more broadly, incorporating more culturally relevant measures, while simultaneously calling for policy change to address the historical underpinnings of contemporary food insecurity among indigenous peoples. Our findings contribute to the growing literature on the value and importance of Native food systems in revitalizing culture and restoring community health and well-being among Native American communities, as well as sovereignty over their food systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    Native foods are those of historical and cultural significance to Native Americans that have provided sustenance for thousands of years and tend to be acquired through non-market mechanisms, the physical connection to the landscape, and/or a culturally appropriate social networks. Non-traditional or conventional foods refer to market-based or store-bought foods inclusive of agribusiness products designed for global consumption, and foods not traditionally consumed by Native American communities such as dairy products, refined sugars and flours and heavily processed foods that are often more affordable but of lesser nutritional quality and more readily available.

  2. 2.

    Throughout this paper, we use the terms Klamath River Basin and the Basin interchangeably to reference our study region.

  3. 3.

    While there are other widely cited definitions of food security, including the one established at the World Food Summit in 1996, we cite the USDA definition as we are engaging with USDA measurements and evaluation of food security that are used in the context of food security in the USA, the country of our study.

  4. 4.

    An abbreviated version of the core module consisting of a 6-questions was also developed (Bickel et al. 2000).

  5. 5.

    The initial measurement of food security and hunger in the USA started in 1995 with the first Food Security Supplement to the Current Population Survey implemented by the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act (NNMRR) (Public Law 101–445). This Act included a ten-year comprehensive plan for the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Program, directing the USDA and Health and Human Services to define and measure food security (Cohen 2002). The Federal Food Security Measurement Project, a collaboration among Federal agencies, academics, and commercial and non-profit organizations, developed the HFSSM and standardized food security measurement over several years of testing and developing measurement tools with annual food security surveys. Previously, there was minimal consensus on nationwide hunger and food (in)security trends with several varying estimates but no hard, reliable data to concur national trends of food (in)security and nutrition (National Research Council 2005, 2006).

  6. 6.

    The report does disaggregate data by race but only for Black and Hispanic populations. In a recent study, using the Current Population Survey Food Security Supplement, Jernigan et al. (2017) analyzed the food insecurity trends of Native Americans compared to other racial and ethnic groups in the USA from 2000 to 2010.

  7. 7.

    In their study evaluating food insecurity among California households at or below 200% of the federal poverty line, Jernigan et al. (2013) found that prevalence of food insecurity was similar among Native Americans and Whites (38.7% vs 39.3%).

  8. 8.

    The Klamath Tribes today consist of the Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin Tribes.

  9. 9.

    Oregon is consistently one of the most food insecure states in the nation with rates of food insecurity higher than the national average and the highest rates of hunger in the late twentieth century. In 2016, Native American rates of food insecurity in Oregon were about twice the state average (O’Donnell-King and Newell-Ching 2017).

  10. 10.

    The Karuk-UC Berkeley collaborative, established in 2007, seeks to support the Karuk Tribe in their eco-cultural restoration efforts, youth development, and sovereignty over their knowledge and cultural resources (https://nature.berkeley.edu/karuk-collaborative/).

  11. 11.

    Food system stakeholders and experts include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service, local NGOs, school lunch programs, Tribal TANF, Tribal environmental programs, Cultural Heritage Officers, local food vendors, local food distributors, food assistance programs, local community and school gardens, and local health clinics.

  12. 12.

    Based on delivered surveys, we had a 19.8% response rate.

  13. 13.

    Low food security households may report that they rarely have access to healthy foods, run out of money for groceries several times a year, depend on food assistance and/or buy less expensive foods.

  14. 14.

    About 21% of survey respondents said they use food assistance because native foods are not available.

  15. 15.

    Indian termination was a policy of the USA from the mid-1940s to the mid-1960s designed to assimilate Native Americans into mainstream U.S. society by ending U.S. recognition of sovereignty of tribes. The intention was to terminate specific “Indian nations” by granting Native Americans all the rights and privileges of citizenship, reduce their dependence on a bureaucracy whose mismanagement had been well documented, and remove government trust responsibility to provide services for Native people (Wunder 1999). Overall 109 tribes were terminated between 1953 and 1958 (Wunder 1999), including the Klamath Tribes (the latter reinstated as a tribe in 1985). The policy was overturned, yet the damage was done. Even as many tribes fought to reclaim their sovereign status, much of their land base had been sold to private parties, and hundreds of tribes are still petitioning for federal recognition status today.

  16. 16.

    For example, Mattz v. Arnett, 412 U.S. 481 (1973)- where the Supreme Court reaffirmed the continued existence of the Yurok land base and fishing rights and Kimball (tribal members) v. Callahan (Oregon State Game Commission members), 493 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1974) (Kimball I) and Kimball v. Callahan, 590 F.2d 768 (9th Cir. 1979) (Kimball II), where the Ninth Circuit held that the Klamath Tribe retained their treaty hunting, fishing, and trapping rights on the former Klamath Reservation as it existed at the time of termination (1954).

  17. 17.

    The new report (First Nations Development Institute 2018b), notes that since NAFSI began in 2002, First Nations has awarded 307 grants totaling more than US$7.58 million to Native organizations dedicated to increasing food access and improving the health and nutrition of Native children and families. This number, however, pales in comparison to the more than 1450 requests received totaling more than US$49.7 million over that time, illustrating that a huge unmet need for funding for these types of projects continues in Native communities.

References

  1. Ahn, S., Smith, M. L., Hendricks, M., & Ory, M. G. (2014). Associations of food insecurity with body mass index among baby boomers and older adults. Food Security, 6(3), 423–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alkon, A. H., & Norgaard, K. M. (2009). Breaking the food chains: An investigation of food justice activism. Sociological Inquiry, 79(3), 289–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson, K. M. (2005). Tending the wild: Native American knowledge and the management of California’s natural resources. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bauer, K. W., Widome, R., Himes, J. H., Smyth, M., Rock, B. H., Hannan, P. J., & Story, M. (2012). High food insecurity and its correlates among families living on a rural American Indian reservation. American Journal of Public Health, 102(7), 1346–1352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Beale, C. L. (1996). The ethnic dimension of persistent poverty in rural and small-town areas. In L. L. Swanson (Ed.), Racial/ethnic minorities in rural areas: Progress and stagnation, 1980–90 (pp. 26–32). Washington, D.C.: Rural Economy Division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bickel, G., Nord, M., Price, C., Hamilton, W. L., & Cook, J. T. (2000). Guide to measuring household food security. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bland, A. (2017). Klamath River tribes in crisis as salmon disappear. Tending the Wild KCETLink Media Group. https://www.kcet.org/shows/tending-the-wild/klamath-river-tribes-in-crisis-as-salmon-disappear. Accessed 19 April 2018.

  8. Brown, B., Noonan, C., & Nord, M. (2007). Prevalence of food insecurity and health-associated outcomes and food characteristics of Northern Plains Indian households. Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition, 1(4), 37–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Buckley, T. (1988). Kroeber’s theory of culture and the ethnology of northwestern California. Anthropological Quarterly, 62(1), 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bye, B. A. L. (2009). Native food systems organizations: strengthening sovereignty and (re)building community. Master’s thesis. Ames: Iowa State University.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Carter, K., & Kirk, S. (2008). Fish and fishery resources of the Klamath River basin. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.

  12. Castillo, E.D. (2018). Short overview of California Indian history. Native American Heritage Commission. http://nahc.ca.gov/resources/california-indian-history/. Accessed 23 July 2018.

  13. U.S. Census Bureau. (2014). American community finder. American Fact Finder. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Accessed 25 April 2018.

  14. U.S. Census Bureau. (2015). Facts for features: American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/facts-for-features/2015/cb15-ff22.html. Accessed 25 April 2018.

  15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). High blood pressure facts. https://www.cdc.gov/bloodpressure/facts.htm. Accessed 19 April 2018.

  16. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). National diabetes statistics report, 2017. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Chambers, R. (1994). Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Analysis of experience. World Development, 22(9), 1253–1268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chodur, G. M., Shen, Y., Kodish, S., Oddo, V. M., Antiporta, D. A., Jock, B., & Jones-Smith, J. C. (2016). Food environments around American Indian reservations: A mixed methods study. PLoS One, 11(8), e0161132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cidero, J., Adekunle, B., Peters, E., & Martens, T. (2015). Beyond food security: Understanding access to cultural food for urban indigenous people in Winnipeg as indigenous food sovereignty. Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 24(1), 24–43.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Coates, J., Frongillo, E. A., Rogers, B. L., Webb, P., Wilde, P. E., & Houser, R. (2006). Commonalities in the experiences of household food insecurity cultures: What are measures missing. The Journal of Nutrition, 136(5), 1438S–1448S.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cohen, B. (2002). Community food security assessment toolkit. Electronic publications from the food assistance and nutrition research program, E-FAN-02-013. Economic Research Service.

  22. Coleman-Jensen, A., Rabbitt, M.P., Gregory, C.A., & Singh, A. (2017). Household food security in the United States in 2016, ERR-237. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

  23. Collings, P., Marten, M. G., Pearce, T., & Young, A. G. (2016). Country food sharing networks, household structure, and implications for understanding food insecurity in Arctic Canada. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 55(1), 30–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Colville, F.V. (1897). Notes on the plants used by the Klamath Indians of Oregon. USDA Division of Botany. Contributions from the U.S. National Herbarium. Vol. V. No. 2.

  25. Derrickson, J. P., & Brown, A. M. (2002). Food security stakeholders in Hawai’i: Perceptions of food security monitoring. Journal of Nutrition Education, 34(2), 72–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Derrickson, J. P., Fisher, A. G., & Anderson, J. E. L. (2000). The core food security module scale measure is valid and reliable when used with Asians and Pacific islanders. The Journal of Nutrition, 130(11), 2666–2674.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Elliot, B., Jayatilaka, D., Brown, C., Varley, L., & Corbett, K. K. (2012). “We are not being heard”: Aboriginal perspectives of traditional foods access and food security. Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 130945, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Fazzino, D. (2010). Whose food security? Confronting expanding commodity production and the obesity and diabetes epidemics. Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, 15(3), 393–417.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. First Nations Development Institute. (2014). Food sovereignty assessment tool (2nd ed.). Longmont: First Nations Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  31. First Nations Development Institute. (2017). Research note - twice invisible: Understanding rural native America. Longmont: First Nations Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  32. First Nations Development Institute. (2018a). Indian country food price index: Exploring variation in food pricing across native communities - a working paper II. Longmont: First Nations Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  33. First Nations Development Institute. (2018b). Nourishing native foods and health: Grantmaking trends from the native agriculture and food systems initiative 2015–2017. Longmont: First Nations Development Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Fisher, A. (2017). Big hunger: The unholy alliance between corporate America and anti-hunger groups. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ford, J. D., & Beaumier, M. (2011). Feeding the family during times of stress: Experience and determinants of food insecurity in an Inuit community. The Geographical Journal, 177(1), 44–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Gaudin, V. L., Receveur, O., Walz, L., Girard, F., & Potvin, L. (2014). A mixed methods inquiry into the determinants of traditional food consumption among three Cree communities of Eeyou Istchee from an ecological perspective. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 73(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Gaudin, V. L., Receveur, O., Girard, F., & Potvin, L. (2015). Facilitators and barriers to traditional food consumption in the Cree Community of Mistissini, northern Quebec. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 54(6), 663–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Grey, S., & Patel, R. (2015). Food sovereignty as decolonization: Some contributions from indigenous movements to food system and development politics. Agriculture and Human Values, 32, 431–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Gunderson, C. (2008). Measuring the extent, depth, and severity of food insecurity: An application to American Indians in the USA. Journal of Population Economics, 21(1), 191–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Gurney, R. M., Caniglia, B. M., Mix, T. L., & Baum, K. A. (2015). Native American food security and traditional foods: A review of the literature. Sociology Compass, 9(8), 681–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Heizer, R. F., & Elsasser, A. B. (1980). The natural world of the California Indians. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hormel, L. M., & Norgaard, K. M. (2009). Bring the salmon home! Karuk challenges to capitalist incorporation. Critical Sociology, 35(3), 343–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hoover, E. (2017). You can’t say you’re sovereign if you can’t feed yourself: Defining and enacting food sovereignty in American Indian community gardening. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 41(3), 31–70.

  44. Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., Becker, A. B., Allen, A. J., & Guzman, R. (2003). Critical issues in developing and following community based participatory research principles. In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Community based participatory research for health (pp. 53–76). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jernigan, V. B. B., Salvatore, A. L., Styne, D. M., & Winkleby, M. (2012). Addressing food insecurity in a native American reservation using community-based participatory research. Health Education Research, 27(4), 645–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Jernigan, V. B. B., Garroutte, E., Krantz, E. M., & Buchwald, D. (2013). Food insecurity and obesity among American Indians and Alaska natives and whites in California. Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition, 8, 453–471.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Jernigan, V. B. B., Huyser, K. R., Valdes, J., & Simonds, V. W. (2017). Food insecurity among American Indians and Alaska natives: A national profile using the current population survey–food security supplement. Journal of Hunger and Environmental Nutrition, 12(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Johnson, K.N., Franklin, J., & Johnson, D. (2008). A plan for the Klamath Tribes’ management of the Klamath Reservation Forest. Prepared by the Klamath tribes.

  49. Jones, A. D., Ngure, F. M., Pelto, G., & Young, S. L. (2013). What are we assessing when we measure food security? A compendium and review of current metrics. Advanced Nutrition, 4(5), 481–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Karuk Climate Change Projects. (2016). Chapter 5: Mental health impacts of denied access to management and culture. https://karuktribeclimatechangeprojects.wordpress.com/chapter-5-mental-health-impacts-of-denied-access-to-management-and-culture/. Accessed 31 May 2018.

  51. Karuk Ethnographic Notes transcribed and edited by J. Ferrara. (2004). Northern/Central California. Papers of John Peabody Harrington, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution.

  52. Kaufman, P., Dicken, C., & Williams, R. (2014). Measuring access to healthful, affordable food in American Indian and Alaska Native tribal areas, IB-131. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

  53. Krohn, E. (2010). The Traditional Foods of Puget Sound Project Final Report 2008–2010. Cooperative extension office, northwest Indian college. http://depts.washington.edu/uwbg/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/Traditional-Foods-of-Puget-Sound.pdf. Accessed 13 August 2018.

  54. Kuhnlein, H. V., Erasmus, B., & Spigelski, D. (2009). Indigenous peoples’ food systems: The many dimensions of culture, diversity and environment for nutrition and health. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Center for Indigenous Peoples’ Nutrition and Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Lake, F. K., Wright, V., Morgan, P., McFadzen, M., McWethy, D., & Stevens-Rumann, C. (2017). Returning fire to the land: Celebrating traditional knowledge and fire. Journal of Forestry, 115(5), 343–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Lambden, J., Receveur, O., & Kuhnlein, H. V. (2007). Traditional food attributes must be included in studies of food security in the Canadian Arctic. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 66(4), 308–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Leung, C. W., Williams, D. R., & Villamor, E. (2012). Very low food security predicts obesity predominantly in California Hispanic men and women. Public Health Nutrition, 15(12), 2228–2236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2014). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata (3rd ed.). College Station: Stata Press.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Loring, P. A., & Gerlach, S. C. (2009). Food, culture, and human health in Alaska: An integrative health approach to food security. Environmental Science and Policy, 12, 466–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Madley, B. (2016). An American genocide: The United States and the California Indian catastrophe. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Mucioki, M., Sowerwine, J., & Sarna-Wojcicki, D. (2018). Thinking inside and outside the box: Local and national considerations of the food distribution program on Indian reservations (FDPIR). The Journal of Rural Studies, 57, 88–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Mullany, B., Neault, N., Tsingine, D., Powers, J., Lovato, V., Clitso, L., Massey, S., Talgo, A., Speakman, K., & Barlow, A. (2012). Food insecurity and household eating patterns among vulnerable American-Indian families: Associations with caregiver and food consumption characteristics. Public Health Nutrition, 16(4), 752–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Myers, A. M., & Painter, M. A., II. (2017). Food insecurity in the United States of America: An examination of race/ethnicity and nativity. Food Security, 9(6), 1419–1432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Natcher, D., Shirley, S., Rodon, T., & Southcott, C. (2016). Constraints to wildlife harvesting among aboriginal communities in Alaska and Canada. Food Security, 8(6), 1153–1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. National Center for Health Statistics. (2016). About the national health and nutrition examination survey. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/about_nhanes.htm. Accessed 31 May 2018.

  66. National Research Council. (2005). Measuring food insecurity and hunger: Phase 1 Report. Panel to review U.S. Department of Agriculture’s measurement of food insecurity and hunger. Committee on National Statistics, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  67. National Research Council. (2006). Food insecurity and hunger in the United States: an assessment of the measure. Panel to Review the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Measurement of Food Insecurity and Hunger, Gooloo S. Wunderlich and Janet L. Norwood, Editors, Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  68. Native American Rights Fund. (2013). Let all that is Indian within you die! NARF Legal Review, 8(2), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Nord, M. & Bickel, G. (2002). Measuring children’s food security in U.S. households, 1995-99. Food assistance and nutrition research report no. 25. Food and rural economics division, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

  70. Norgaard, K.M. (2005). The effects of altered diet on the health of the Karuk people. Submitted to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, docket# P-2082 on behalf of the Karuk tribe of California.

  71. Norgaard, K. M. (2014). The politics of fire and the social impacts of fire exclusion on the Klamath. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 36, 73–97.

    Google Scholar 

  72. O’Connell, M., Buchwald, D. S., & Duncan, G. E. (2011). Food access and cost in American Indian communities in Washington state. Journal of the Ameorican Dietetic Association, 111(9), 1375–1379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. O’Donnell-King, E., & Newell-Ching, M. (2017). Analysis: Hunger in Oregon drops, but still remains persistently high. Issue Brief. Partners for a Hunger Free Oregon.

  74. Ogunwole, S.U., Drewery, M.P., & Rios-Vargas, M. (2012). The population with a bachelor’s degree or higher by race and Hispanic origin: 2006–2010. American community survey briefs. U.S. Department of Commerce, economics and statistics department, and U.S. Census Bureau.

  75. Panelli, R., & Tipa. (2009). Beyond foodscapes: Considering geographies of indigenous well-being. Health and Place, 15, 455–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Pardilla, M., Prasad, D., Suratkar, S., & Gittelsohn, J. (2013). High levels of household food insecurity on the Navajo nation. Public Health Nutrition, 17(1), 58–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Patchell, B., & Edwards, K. (2014). The role of traditional foods in diabetes prevention and management among native Americans. Current Nutrition Reports, 3, 340–344.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Patel, R. (2009). Food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(3), 663–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Power, E. M. (2008). Conceptualizing food security for aboriginal people in Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 99(2), 95–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Radimer, K. L., Olson, C. M., Greene, J. C., Campbell, C. C., & Habicht, J. P. (1992). Understanding hunger and developing indicators to assess it in women and children. Journal of Nutrition Education, 24(1), 36S–44S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Ray, A. J. (2006). Kroeber and the California claims: Historical particularism and cultural ecology in court. In R. Hander (Ed.), Central sites, peripheral visions: Cultural and institutional crossings in the history of anthropology (pp. 248–274). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Ready, E. (2016). Challenges in the assessment of Inuit food security. Arctic, 69(3), 266–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Schreier, M. (2014). Qualitative content analysis. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 170–183). Los Angeles: SAGE Publication Ltd..

    Google Scholar 

  84. Semega, J.L., Fontenot, K.R., & Kollar, M.A. (2016). Income and poverty in the United States: 2016. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Census Bureau.

  85. Sheehy, T., Kolahdooz, F., Schaefer, S. E., Douglas, D. N., Corriveau, A., & Sharma, S. (2014). Traditional food patterns are associated with better diet quality and improved dietary adequacy in aboriginal peoples in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 28, 262–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Skinner, K., Hanning, R. M., Desjardins, E., & Tsuji, L. J. S. (2013). Giving voice to food insecurity in a remote indigenous community in subarctic Ontario, Canada: Traditional ways, ways to cope, ways forward. BMC Public Health, 13(427).

  87. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. New York: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Socha, T., Zahaf, M., Chambers, L., Abraham, R., & Fiddler, T. (2012). Food security in a northern first nations community: An exploratory study on food availability and accessibility. Journal of Aboriginal Health, 8(2), 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Tomayko, E. J., Mosso, K. L., Cronin, K. A., Carmichael, L., Kim, K., Parker, T., Yaroch, A. L., & Adams, A. K. (2017). Household food insecurity and dietary patterns in rural and urban American Indian families with young children. BMC Public Health, 17, 611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Turner, N. J., & Turner, K. L. (2008). ‘Where our women used to get our food’: Cumulative effects and loss of ethnobotanical knowledge and practice; a case study from coastal British Columbia. Botany, 36, 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Urban Institute. (2018). Does SNAP cover the cost of a meal in your County? Urban Institute: elevate the debate. https://www.urban.org/does-snap-cover-cost-meal-your-county. Accessed 25 April 2018.

  92. USDA. (2017a). Food security in the U.S.: interactive charts and highlights. USDA and Economic Research Service https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/interactive-charts-and-highlights/. Accessed 13 August 2018.

  93. USDA. (2017b). Food security in the U.S.: measurement. USDA and Economic Research Service. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/measurement. Accessed 13 August 2018.

  94. Van Arsdale, J., & Barry, J.J. (2006). County-level reports: Access to health care and food security. California Center for Rural Policy. Humboldt State University. http://www2.humboldt.edu/ccrp/county-level-reports-access-to-health-care-food-security/. Accessed 24 April 2018.

  95. Wallerstein, N., & Duran, B. (2006). Using community-based participatory research to address health disparities. Health Promotion Practice, 7(3), 312–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Waxman, E., Gunderson, C., & Thompson, M. (2018). How far do SNAP benefits fall short of covering the cost of a meal? The Urban Institute.

  97. Whiting, E. F., & Ward, C. (2010). Food provisioning strategies, food insecurity, and stress in an economically vulnerable community: The northern Cheyenne case. Agriculture and Human Values, 27, 489–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Williams, R. (2006). Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables. The Stata Journal, 6(1), 58–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Williams, R. (2016). Understanding and interpreting generalized ordered logit models. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 40(1), 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Wilmsen, C., Elmendorf, W.F., Fisher, L., Ross, J., Sarathy, B., & Wells, G. (2008). Partnerships for empowerment: participatory research for community-based natural resource management. London: Earthscan.

  101. Wunder, J. R. (1999). Native American sovereignty. Taylor & Francis. pp. 248–249.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was part of a 5-year collaborative research, extension and education project co-led by UC Berkeley, and the Karuk, Yurok and Klamath Tribes with support from the USDA-National Institute of Food and Agriculture-Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Food Security Grant # 2012-68004-20018. Our research was made possible by invaluable contributions of project collaborators from the Karuk Tribe, Yurok Tribe, Hoopa Tribe, and Klamath Tribes in the development of the household survey and interview scripts, successful data collection with tribal members, oversight, interpretation of the results, and contributions to the recommendations presented in this study. We are also thankful to all those who participated in the household survey, focus groups, and interviews.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer Sowerwine.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

All study procedures and ethical considerations for human subjects were approved by the University of California at Berkeley’s Ethics Review Board #2012–07- 4484 and each Tribe’s respective research review. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Specifically, informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study; all study participants remain anonymous with private and culturally sensitive information protected; and all tribal collaborators have had the opportunity to read and comment on this article prior to publication.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sowerwine, J., Mucioki, M., Sarna-Wojcicki, D. et al. Reframing food security by and for Native American communities: a case study among tribes in the Klamath River basin of Oregon and California. Food Sec. 11, 579–607 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00925-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • HFSSM
  • Native foods
  • Food sovereignty
  • Native Americans
  • Community based participatory research