A History of the Ministry of Information, 1939-46
3. SHOPPING AND SHORTAGES
New Series H.2
I QUEUES
Interviewing: 24th June to 11th July, 1942
Introduction
The purpose of this inquiry was to assess the incidence of queuing among housewives in June to July, 1942; and to find out for what commodities they queued, with a view to comparing the results at this time with those of a previous inquiry into the subject, made by the Wartime Social Survey in December, 1941.
The questions asked in both inquiries were identical, except that in the present survey housewives' opinions about queuing were not asked.
The December survey was based on interviews made with 2776 housewives. In the present survey 2530 housewives were interviewed.
Summary
The incidence of queuing had increased by 11% since December, 1941.
This increase is partly, but not entirely accounted for by the fact that at this time of year certain commodities such as tomatoes were in season, and could be queued for.
There was a greater increase in the incidence of queuing in the middle classes than in the working classes.
The incidence of queuing is higher in Scotland.
It is possible that the increase in queuing is in part due to summer weather, and a breaking down of earlier prejudices against queuing.
The chief commodities queued for were tomatoes, fish and cakes.
Although the incidence of queuing had increased, the average number of queues per housewife who queued had not increased.
There was little change in the time for which housewives waited in queues.
The conclusion may be drawn that whilst queuing is affecting a greater number of housewives than in December, the inconvenience experienced through queuing has not increased for individual housewives.
The Incidence of Queuing
QUESTION. “Did you have to stand in a queue at all you were shopping last week?”
There is an increase of rather more than 10% in the proportion of housewives queuing as compared with December.
It will be seen in the next section of this report, which deals with the commodities for which housewives queued, that the increase is in part due to the presence in shops of commodities such as tomatoes, fruit and new potatoes, which were not in season in the December period.
Analysis by region shows some marked difference.
Scotland shows by far the highest proportion queuing. London is also definitely above averages. Queuing is least in East Anglia. The North East and the South East also have relatively low proportions queuing.
Results may be compared with the December Survey.
% Queuing
Queuing has increased in all regions, but the extent to which it has increased differs from one region to another.
The increase in most marked in Scotland and in London and the South East, and in the South West where it amounts to about 18%.
The North East, the Midlands and South Wales, show only very small increases. In fact if the margin of error is applied it will be seen that it is doubtful whether there has been an increase in these districts.
East Anglia, the lowest in December is also the lowest in June, but there is some increase. The increase in the North West, (also low in December) is much more marked.
Scotland has the highest proportion queuing in both periods. The Midlands, high in December, is about average in June.
Breakdown by income groups gives the following result.
(J = June to July, D = December)
At both periods the incidence is higher among working class than middle class housewives, but in the June period the difference between the classes is much less marked, and there is no difference between classes A and B.
The most striking increase is in class A. Classes B and D show relatively small increases, and class C shows an increase slightly above the average increase of 11%.
The Commodities for which Housewives Queued
Housewives who had queued during the last week were asked: “What did you have to queue for?%
The table given below shows (a) the percentages of the sample, and (b) the percentages of those who queued, mentioning different commodities.
Figures are only given where the number mentioning a commodity amounts to more than 1% of the whole sample.
In comparing these results with those of December it is necessary to distinguish between seasonal and non-seasonal commodities.
|
June to July
% sample |
December
% sample |
|
| Seasonal | ||
| Tomatoes | 9.1 | - |
| New potatoes | 4.2 | - |
| Fruit | 4.1 | - |
| - | ||
| “Greengroceries" | 2.6 | - |
It will be seen from these results that the seasonal commodities which were absent in December do not altogether account for the increase in the incidence of queuing, since most of the commodities queued for in December were also queued for, by a rather higher proportion of housewives, in June and July.
In considering the results for biscuits and sweets it should be noted that interviewing was carried out before these commodities were rationed, and that points rationing has been introduced since the December survey, which might be expected to affect the figure for “groceries (unspecified)”.
Results given below show the incidence of queuing for different commodities in five regions. Figures are only given where the proportion queuing is great enough to have significance.
The percentages are based on the whole sample for the region.
Where there are no people or very few people queuing for particular commodities, as for instance tomatoes in Scotland, this may be either to the complete absence of tomatoes in the shops or to the supplies of tomatoes being sufficient.
The regional differences are very marked.
With regard to tomatoes and new potatoes, it should be noted that the southern region includes the bulk of the rural interviews in the sample, and many interviews with housewives living in small market towns.
London is the only region where there was no considerable proportion of housewives in our sample who queued for cakes, and in London and Scotland sweets and chocolate are absent from the list.
The incidence of meat queuing is very much higher in Scotland than in the other regions. Meat and fruit were not queued for in the North of England or the Midlands. Rationed groceries and “greengroceries” are queued for only in London and “groceries (unspecified)” only in Scotland, in significant proportion.
The Midlands was the only region with a significant proportion queuing for cooked meat and pies.
Figures for the eleven smaller regions included in the above are not large enough to give reliable percentages, but a rough comparison may be made of the five broader regions with the corresponding breakdown in the December survey.
Seasonal commodities, such as tomatoes and new potatoes are not included in the table given below as these do not appear in the December figures.
(J = June to July, D = December)
In Scotland the same commodities are high on the list as in December, but whereas there is a considerable increase in queuing for fish, cakes and “groceries (unspecified)", there is little or no increase in queuing for meat.
Queuing for cakes in the North of England and for rationed groceries and biscuits in London are new developments.
Sweets and chocolates were not queued for in significant proportions in any region in December, but come up in three regions in June to July.
Analysis by income group shows that classes C and D queued for a wider variety of commodities than classes A and B. In the case of commodities for which both groups queued there is little difference in the proportions queuing except in the case of tomatoes.
Results given below show the proportions of the sample queuing for different commodities wherever more than 2% queued.
Biscuits, new potatoes and both sorts of groceries are absent in the case of classes A and B.
Such differences as there are in the proportions queuing for commodities for which both groups queue can be seen better if percentages are besed on the number queuing instead of on the sample.
Fish, fruit and greengroceries are higher in the case of classes A and B, tomatoes in the case of classes C and D.
Numbers are not sufficient to show statistically significant differences as between classes A and B. Classes C and D queued in similar proportions for all commodities with th exception of chocolates and sweets for which 4.6% of class D housewives queued as against 2.4 (±.25)% of class C, or 14.6% of those queuing in class D as against 8.2% of those queuing in class C.
In the inquiry made in December the following results were obtained:-
| %of those classes A & B | Queuing Classes C & D | |
| Fish | 35.2 | 24.8 |
| Cakes | 29.4 | 19.1 |
| Biscuits | 10.1 | 20.0 |
| Groceries | 6.7 | 14.0 |
| Number queuing | 119 | 450 |
It will be seen that in December as in June, fish comes higher among those queuing in classes A and B than among those queuing in classes C and D. Cakes show a higher percentage in A and B, unlike the present survey which showed similar proportions in the two groups.
Biscuits and groceries, both absent from the middle class list in June, are lower than in the case of classes C and D in December also.
Frequency of Queuing
Housewives who had queued were asked how many times they queued “last week” for each commodity mentioned.
The 803 housewives who queued stood in altogether 2121 queues, giving an average of 2.6 queues per housewife who queued, or 0.8 per housewife in the total sample.
The difference between these averages and those of December (2.4 per housewife who queued and 0.5 per housewife in sample) are not large enough to have statistical significance if the standard deviation is taken into account.
The table given below shows the frequency with which housewives queued in June to July and December.
It will be seen that about a third of the housewives who queued did so more than twice.
There are no statistically significant differences between the proportions of those queuing who queued once, twice, etc., In December and June to July.
The percentages based on the sample show increases in every group queuing because more housewives queued.
It is clear from these figures that whilst queuing is affecting a greater number of housewives, no greater inconvenience is being experienced by housewives who queued June to July than by housewives who queued in December.
The table below shows the proportions of those queuing who queued once and more than once for the different commodities.
The proportion queuing more than once is relatively high in the case of fish, greengroceries and “groceries (unspecified)”.
As the commodities queued for are not in all cases the same as in December, and percentages based on the whole sample give figures too small for comparison, the table below shows the ratio (in tenths) of those queuing once to those queuing more than once in the case of those commodities which were mentioned in both surveys.
The proportion queuing more than once has increased in the case of fish and both sorts of groceries. In the case of cakes, meat, chocolate and sweets and cooked meat and pies, the proportion queuing more than once has decreased. In the case of the other commodities it is roughly the same in June as in December.
The Commodities that Housewives queued longest for
Housewives who had queued were asked which commodity they had waited longest for. (Where only one commodity was queued for this was counted as the one “queued longest for”).
Results are as follows for the first twelve commodities.
In the December inquiry it was noted that the commodities which housewives queued longest for were also those for which they queued the most. This is also true of the present results, in the case of the four principal commodities queued for.
Housewives were asked to say how long they queued for the commodities that they queued longest for. 755 of the 803 housewives who queued were able to give an estimate of this time. Below results are compared with those of December.
|
June-July
% |
December
% |
|
| 0-15 minutes | 26.2 | 25.8 |
| 16-30 “ | 41.3 | 36.2 |
| 31-45 “ | 11.6 | 11.6 |
| 46-60 “ | 13.1 | 15.6 |
| Over 60 “ | 7.8 | 10.8 |
| Sample | 755 | 524 |
A slightly higher proportion queued for half an hour and less in the present survey, and a slightly lower proportion queued for more than three-quarters of an hour.
The median time queued (for the commodities queued longest for) in the present survey, calculated from a frequency table giving five minute intervals, is 27 minutes. The median time queued in December was 26 minutes.
Sample
Total: 2530 housewives
| Region * | % | Type of District | % |
| Scotland | 6.2 | Urban | 86.9 |
| North of England | 22.8 | Rural | 13.1 |
| Midlands and Wales | 19.9 | ||
| South, S.W. and E. Anglia | 33.6 | ||
| London | 17.5 | ||
| Income Group | % | Age | |
| Class A | 5.2 | Under 35 | 25.6 |
| “ B | 18.9 | 35-50 | 42.7 |
| “ C | 38.4 | Over 50 | 31.7 |
| “ D | 37.5 |
II DELIVERIES OF FOOD BY RETAILERS
Interviewing: 14th May to 6th June, 1942
The purpose of this inquiry was to find out to what extent goods were being delivered to housewives' doors by retailers and housewives' attitudes to fetching their own shopping instead if necessary.
Question : “ Which of these things are delivered at your doors ?
How many deliveries per week ?”.
There are marked differences as between urban and rural districts.
% having deliveries
| Urban | Rural | Total | |
| Groceries | 17.5 | 44.8 | 21.0 |
| Meat | 11.2 | 45.1 | 15.6 |
| Bakeries | 31.0 | 80.6 | 37.4 |
| Greengroceries | 8.2 | 9.3 | 8.4 |
| Sample : | 2556 | 388 | 2944 |
It will be seen that in the case of all the commodities except greengroceries a very much higher proportion of housewives have goods delivered in the country than in towns.
The proportions having one, two or more deliveries per week, however, show only statistically significant differences, except in the case of meat.
% of those having any deliveries
| Urban | Rural | |
|
No: of deliveries
Per week: |
1 2 3 or more | 1 2 3 or more |
| Meat | 68.1 24.9 7.0 | 92.0 8.0 - |
| Number having any deliveries: | 285 | 175 |
Breakdown by income groups gives the following results:-
% having deliveries
* Very few housewives had any of these commodities delivered more than three times a week. The numbers having more than three deliveried are as follows:-
It will be seen than a greater proportion of housewives have goods delivered in the higher income groups than in the lower. The trend is the same in the case of each commodity.
There are no statistically significant differences shown in the proportions having one, two or more deliveries per week, in different income groups, except in the case of groceries. In this case class A shows a difference from all other classes. In this group, of those having groceries delivered at all, 60.2 ± 9% have one delivery per week, and 39.8 ± 9% have more than one. The corresponding proportions i the other classes are:- B.95.8% and 4.2%, C. 93.6% and 6.4%, and D.95.-8% and 4.2%.
Those who had goods of any sort delivered were asked would it be much trouble to fetch it from the shop?
| Would not mind fetching | Would mind fetching | Number answering | |
| % | % | % | |
| Groceries | 49.4 | 50.6 | 615 |
| Meat | 51.3 | 49.7 | 450 |
| Bakeries | 57.6 ± 3 | 42.4 | 1099 |
| Greengroceries | 44.7 ± 6.2 | 55.3 | 242 |
It will be seen than the proportions are about half and half in the case of groceries, meat and greengroceries. A slightly higher proportion would not object to fetching their bakeries than would object.
Breakdown by Urban and Rural gives the following results:-
Percentages are not given for greengroceries as the number answering is to small to give reliable results.
There is a slight tendency for those in rural areas to objects to fetching goods more than those in urban areas. Application of the margin of error in the case of each item separately would show these result to have little statistical significance, but as the same trend is observed in all three cases, there is evidence that tendency exists.
Class have been analysed in two groups instead of four as the numbers answering are small.
Except in the case of meat the lower income groups tend to object less to fetching things from the shops than the higher.
Those who said they would mind fetching any commodity were asked the reason for this. Different commodities were not considered separately in these answers.
III RE-REGISTRATION
Interviewing: 26th August to 11th September, 1942
Housewives were asked whether they had changed their retailers for meat, fats, bacon, sugar and preserves, cheese, or eggs, when the new ration books were issued. The proportions changing their retailer for each commodity were as follow:
| Meat | Fats | Bacon | Sugar & preserves | Cheese | Eggs | |
| % | ||||||
| Changed | 7.1 | 11.6 | 12.4 | 12.2 | 11.8 | 13.3 |
| Did not change | 92.9 | 88.4 | 87.6 | 87.8 | 88.2 | 86.7 |
| Sample | 3018 | |||||
The similarity of the proportions changing retailers for all commodities except meat, which is fairly consistent throughout the breakdowns, indicates that in the majority of cases such changes were made by housewives registered at the same shop for all these commodities.
There are no statistically significant differences between results for urban and rural areas, or between the different regions in England. Results for Scotland, however, show some differences.
| Meat | Fats | Bacon | Sugar & preserved | Cheese | Eggs | |
| % | ||||||
| Changed | 7.7 | 16.0 | 16.0 | 16.0 | 15.6 | 18.8 |
| Did not change | 92.3 | 84.0 | 84.0 | 84.0 | 84.4 | 81.2 |
| Sample | 288 | |||||
In the case of groceries and eggs, a higher proportion of housewives changed their retailers in Scotland than in England. There is no statistically significant difference in the case of meat.
There are very slight differences as between different income groups. Individual percentages do not show statistically significant differences from one another in most cases, but as a similar trend can be seen in the case of all commodities, figures are given below:
Percentages Changing
It will be seen that classes C and D show consistently higher proportions changing than classes A and B, and that the proportion in class C is, in all cases, very slightly higher than in Class D.
Analysis by age groups shows no statistically significant differences.
Analysis by housewives with young children, children of school age, and no children, shows consistent trends, though individual differences are barely significant.
Percentages Changing
| Meat | Fats | Bacon | Sugar & preserves | Cheese | Eggs | Sample * | |
| With children Under 5 | 9.3 | 13.4 | 14.1 | 13.4 | 13.4 | 15.7 | 828 |
| With children 5-16 | 7.9 | 12.0 | 13.0 | 12.0 | 12.0 | 13.5 | 1193 |
| With no children | 6.3 | 10.7 | 11.7 | 11.6 | 10.9 | 12.4 | 1433 |
| Total | 7.1 | 11.6 | 12.4 | 12.2 | 11.8 | 13.3 |
In the case of all commodities there is a slightly higher proportion changing in the group with young children, and those with no children show the lowest proportions changing.
Housewives who had changed their retailers were asked what sort of shop they had been registered at before changing, and at what sort they were registered now.
In classifying shops distinction was made between multiple shops (ten or more branches) independent traders (less than ten branches or one shop only) and Co-operative Societies.
Results were as follows:
Differences may be seen more clearly if the proportions are expressed as percentages of those changing instead of as percentages of the sample.
Percentage of those changing in each commodity:
If only the proportions changing from one type to another type, and to one type from another type, are considered, the following results are obtained:
Percentage of sample
Percentage of those changing
From the first table, showing percentages of the sample, the loss and gain of customers by different types of shops may be worked out as follows:
Percentage of sample. (Loss -: Gain +)
| Meat | Fats | Bacon | Sugar & preserves | Cheese | Eggs | |
| % | ||||||
| Multiple | 0 | -2.3 | -2.2 | -2.3 | -2.1 | -1.9 |
| co-op | 0 | +0.6 | +0.5 | +0.4 | +0.6 | +0.8 |
| Independent | 0 | +1.7 | +1.7 | +1.9 | +1.5 | +1.1 |
Thus, in the case of all commodities except meat, the independents and co-operatives gained customers at the expense of the multiple shops. The gain to the independent trades is large than to the co-ops. More than half of the customers leaving multiples chose independents in very case.
The numbers in the sample changing their retailers are not large enough for detailed breakdowns, showing the type of changes made, to be given.
Housewives who had changed their retailers were asked the reason for this. These were as follows:
Percentage of house changing.
The proportions changing for the first three reasons, which may be grouped together as expressing dissatisfaction with the services given, are about a third in the case of meat, bacon, sugar and cheese, and rather less than a third in the case of eggs.
In the case of all commodities , half of those who changed did so for seasons of convenience, generally dependent on locality.
The difference in the proportions for eggs may perhaps be accounted for by people's being registered in some cases at dairies and not grocery stores. Where changes for more than one item are made by the same housewife from the same shop, the reasons would necessarily be the same except in the the case of the first, “Could not get what I wanted", where supplies of individual item might make a difference and in the cases of miscellaneous reasons.
It should be noted, by way of explanation, that “moved to another district” includes both long and short distance removals. In the case of would be necessary to change all retailers, but with short distance removals it might be necessary only to change some.
The numbers changing from or to any new of shop from another type are in all cases less than 100, and therefore a breakdown of reasons for changing by the type of shop would not give statistically significant results.
Similarly the numbers included are not large enough to give breakdowns of reasons by class, Region, etc.
IV FOOD SHORTAGES AND SHOPPING DIFFICULTIES (i)
Interviewing: 14th May to 6th June, 1942
“ Which of the foods that are now in short supply would you most like to have more of if this were possible ?"
House wives were asked to give a first, second and third choice.
The following results are given by adding all choices together
(The percentages given above add up to 300, as three choices were allowed to each housewife).
Breakdowns are given only for first choices. There are some regional differences.
It will be seen that fats are mentioned first by a relatively high proportion in the Midlands and meat by a high proportion in London. Sugar is rather high in the Southern region and eggs in Scotland.
Those living in rural districts tend to say “sugar” more frequently. Otherwise there are no statistically significant differences. There are some differences as between different income groups.
The higher income groups tend to say “fruit” more than the lower. D class has a rather high proportion wanting more sugar and a relatively low proportion wanting more facts.
Tea is more important in the lower income groups, particularly in D class.
A separate breakdown made of those housewives who had children under 5 showed no statistically significant differences.
In every case housewives were asked their reasons for wanting more of the particular foods mentioned. Results are tabulated overleaf for all three choices together.
% of those wanting more
It will be seen that in the case of some items (fats, meat, eggs, tea, milk and jam) the most frequently given reason is simply that the ration or allowance is not enough.
Other more specific reasons are also given. Health, in general, is often given as a reason from wanting more fruit (26.5%), milk (23.2%), eggs (18.4%), and butter (17.2%); whilst it is said that fruit (24.4%), milk (13.7%), jam (21.1%), eggs (12.7%) and sugar (11.4%) are particularly needed for children. Meat (19.6%), bacon (11.6%) and cheese (9.6%) are considered more important for men.
Cheese (36.1%), cooked meat (54.2%) and margarine (24.4%) are particularly wanted for making up packed meals to take to work. Tea (25.9%), and sugar, are also required to take to work.
Sugar (34.6%), fats (20.0%), dried fruit (69.5%), and to a lesser extent milk and eggs, are wanted for cooking.
A reason given for wanting more bacon (36.2%), cheese (15.2%) and cooked meat (14.0%) is that “You can make a meal of it” or that it is useful for the smaller meals such as breakfast, supper and lunch.
12.1% of those wanting more butter say that they dislike margarine.
Apart from not being able to get everything you want, have you had any other shopping difficulties lately ?
Interviewers report that it was in many cases difficult to steer housewives away from the subject of shortages.
Only a small proportion (18.5%) of the housewives interviewed were able to think of other shopping difficulties they had experienced.
It should be remembered in this connection that housewives were interviewed at their homes and that therefore the sample does not include many who were doing other work as well as their household duties.
Replies are classified as follows:-
As the number of people unable to mention shopping difficulties, apart from shortages, is so small, problems such as those given in the table should be investigated separately, and specific questions asked about the more frequently mentioned ones.
This is already being done in the case of queues.
A sample of women workers in industry should also be asked about their shopping difficulties, as it likely that some of these problems are felt more acutely by them than by housewives who have no other work to do. *
V FOOD SHORTAGES (ii)
New Series G.4
Interviewing: 18th January – 8th February, 1943
A sample of 2671 men and women selected in representative proportions from different regions and occupation groups was interviewed.
Informants were asked “Which of the foods that are now in short supply would you most like to have more of if this were possible?” Exactly the same question had been asked of housewives in our inquiry carried out in May – June, 1942.
The present inquiry was undertaken with a view to comparing replies received from a general sample of the population with those received from housewives who may be expected to have a special point of view about food matters.
The general sample included 869 housewives, and replies from this group may be set beside those of the earlier inquiry in order to compare differences due to changes in the foods in short supply.
It should be noted that the earlier inquiry was carried out in the early summer and the present inquiry in winter. Certain foods, particularly fruit and milk were more plentiful in the summer, and also summer needs are in some cases different from winter needs so far as diet is concerned.
Informants were allowed three choices. In the table below results for the first choice of the whole general sample, the housewives in the present sample, and the previous housewives sample are given.
Which of the foods now in short supply would you most like to have more of if this were possible ?
In the earlier survey milk and fish were mentioned by less than 3% and were therefore included with “others”.
If results for the two sets of housewives are compared, it will be seen that butter was mentioned more frequently in the summer and “fats unspecified and lard” in the winter. This perhaps reflects the difference in season, more fatty and fried foods being needed in winter. The proportions answering fats of one sort or another are very similar.
The proportions answering milk, sugar and eggs have increased, whilst those mentioning fruit and other miscellaneous foods have decreased. The reason for the change in milk and eggs may be that the ration is less now.
Housewives differ from the population as a whole in that they more frequently want more fats and sugar and less frequently want more meat. This is no doubt due in part to the different point of view of the housewife who is more concerned with cooking.
Otherwise there are no statistically significant differences.
The table below shows results for first, second and third choices and all choices added together in the present sample, and for all choices in the earlier 107 sample. The fourth and fifth column add up to 300 as each person had three choices.
Meat is much less frequently given as a second or third choice than as a first choice as compared with other foods, and when all choices are added together sugar comes higher on the list than meat.
Meat, eggs and milk are more frequently mentioned in the present survey than in the earlier one. It has been shown by a comparison of the first choices that in the case of meat the difference is partly due to the fact that one is a general and the other a housewife sample. In the case of milk and eggs though, the difference is more likely to be due to the reduction in supplies, as housewives mention these about as frequently as other groups.
The proportions answering fats and fruit have decreased.
Breakdowns by different groups have been made of first choices only.
There are some differences between urban and rural areas.
Results are given only for the most frequently mentioned foods, as the others show no statistically significant differences.
Fats and sugar are mentioned more frequently in country districts. It should be borne in mind that a higher proportion of housewives are included in the rural than the urban sample, 43.2% of the rural sample being housewives and 30.7% of the urban sample.
Eggs are not so much wanted in the country as in urban districts.
Analysis by broad areas given the following results:
The proportions wanting more facts are relatively low in Scotland and London. The same sort of difference was observed in the earlier housewife inquiry, fats being mentioned by 22.4% in Scotland and 18.7% in London as against 38.1%, 41,8% and 31.8% in the North, Midlands and South respectively. There is a difference however in the Midlands. In the present survey a higher proportion mention fats in the south than in this area.
Scotland and London show relatively high proportions choosing eggs. This too may be compared with the trend in the earlier survey. 14% in Scotland and 11.6% in London chose eggs in the earlier survey, as against 6.9%, 2.7% and 3.4% in the other areas respectively.
Sugar is more in favour in Scotland and the North. In the earlier inquiry Scotland and the South showed the highest proportions choosing sugar. Jam-making in the Southern region where more fruit is available may be the reason. The differences in milk are not statistically significant.
Breakdown by sex reflects the difference between housewives and other groups, the results for all women resembling those for housewives. 54% of the women interviewed were housewives.
Men are more in favour of meat and women of butter and fats and sugar. Results are shown below for some different occupation groups.
The desire for meat is much more marked in the mixed group heavy workers and among factory workers than in other groups.
Fats and fruit are chosen more frequently by those doing lighter jobs and by housewives and unoccupied people.
Tea, milk and sugar all have relatively high figures in the retired and occupied group, and tea is favoured rather more also by factory and other heavy workers and by housewives.
The table below shows results for two income groups. A and B includes housewives in these classes and managerial and professional workers, and C and D housewives in these classes and all other workers.
Meat and tea are mentioned more frequently by the lower income groups, butter and fats by the higher.
Informants were asked their reasons for wanting more of particular sorts of foods.
A breakdown of reasons by different foods is given over page for all choices together where the number are sufficient.
Butter, eggs, milk, fruit and fish are wanted more for health reasons than are other foods. Meat is considered particularly necessary for heavy workers, and eggs and fruit for children.
Tea, sugar and fats are needed to take to work, and sugar and fats particularly for cooking.
Eggs, bacon and fish are said to be “useful” because “you can make a meal of them”, or because they are needed for particular meals. Fish particularly is needed “to eke out other foods”.
However, in the case of nearly all items a relatively high proportion say simply that the rations are small or that they are allowed less than they were used to having.
SAMPLE
Total: 2671
% of those wanting more
VI VEGETABLES (i)
New Series H.3
Interviewing: 26th August to 11th September, 1942
The purpose of this inquiry was to find out to what extent housewives were affected by the shortage of various vegetables, and whether there had been any change in the consumption of potatoes and other vegetables.
(i) Shortage
Housewives were asked: “Have you been able to get all the vegetables you want recently?”
As might be expected, a higher proportion had been unable to get all the vegetables they wanted in the urban areas than in the rural areas.
There are some differences as between different regions.
It should be noted that in some cases the sample figures are small and, therefore, the results are subject to a wide margin of error. This is given in the third column below.
East Anglia shows the lowest proportion unable to get all the vegetables required. The south and south-east also has a low figure. Both these regions are largely agricultural and a number of rural interviews are included. London also appears to be well supplied.
Yorkshire and the north-east shows a high proportion unable to get vegetables and differs markedly from other regions. The towns in which interviews were carried out in this region are Newcastle, South Shields, Sunderland, Leeds, Dewsbury, Normanton, Sheffield, Rotherham and Mexborough.
Analysis by income group shows no statistically significant differences. The “yes” figure for Class A is 90.3%. This is subject to a margin of 4.4%. It is possible, therefore, but not certain, that the needs of Class A are slightly better met than those of other classes. It will be seen later that members of the higher income groups more frequently grow their own vegetables than members of the lower income groups.
Informants who had been unable to get all the vegetables they wanted were asked to name the vegetables of which they had been unable to get sufficient. Interviewers were instructed to record not more than three sorts. The average number mentioned was 1.36 and, therefore, replies were hardly affected by this limitation.
The table below shows the percentage of those asked the question and of the whole sample who were unable to get enough of different sorts of vegetables.
Tomatoes are by far the most frequently mentioned. It may be noted in this connection that a survey made by the Wartime Social Survey (New Series Region H.2 June to July, 1942) on queuing, showed a relatively high proportion queuing for tomatoes.
Vegetables mentioned by less than ten housewives, such as parsley, Swedes, turnips, leeks, are not included in the table above. Altogether there were 45 such mentions.
Housewives were asked why they were unable to buy the vegetables that they mentioned.
In the case of most vegetables the numbers are too small to give statistically reliable results. Figures are given below for the three vegetables most frequently mentioned.
| % of those unable to buy | |||
| Tomatoes | Onions | Cauliflower | |
| None in shops | 69.6 | 92.2 | 3.1 |
| Too expensive | 17.7 | 1.9 | 96.9 |
| Would have to queue | 10.0 | 1.0 | |
| Miscellaneous | 2.7 | 4.9 | |
| Sample | 220 | 102 | 65 |
Although the number concerned is small, figures are given for cauliflowers as it is clear that expense is here the main difficulty.
Shortage is the main difficulty in the case of onions, and, a lesser extent, in the case of tomatoes, where expense is also a consideration.
For all vegetables mentioned results were as follows: Percentages are here based on the number of reasons given and not on the number of housewives, as some mentioned more than one sort of vegetable.
(ii) Growing Vegetables
Informants were asked whether they grew any vegetables themselves. It should be noted that the extent to which vegetables were grown was not considered and that some families may have grown vegetables on a much larger scale than others.
Informants were asked what vegetables they grew. There was no limitation of the number that might be recorded and the average number mentioned by informants who grew vegetables was 5.1.
Vegetables grown by 30% or more of those growing them at all were as follows:
| % of those growing any vegetables | |
| Cabbage and “greens” | 71.1 |
| Potatoes | 69.4 |
| Beans | 54.2 |
| Carrots | 40.5 |
| Peas | 39.2 |
| Onions | 37.0 |
| Beetroot | 30.0 |
| Sample | 1620 |
A much higher proportion grew vegetables in rural than in urban districts:
|
Urban
% |
Rural
% |
Total
% |
|
| Grew vegetables | 50.3 | 91.1 | 55.6 |
| Did not grow any | 49.7 | 8.9 | 44.4 |
| Sample | 2631 | 382 | 2990 |
There are considerable differences in this respect between different regions.
Rural interviews were included in the North and East Midlands, East Anglia, the south and south-east, and the south-west, and not in other regions. This would account mainly for the high figures in these regions.
Of other regions, Lancashire and Scotland show relatively low figures. It should be noted that about one-third of the Scottish interviews were with Glasgow housewives, and that the majority of people in this city live in blocks of tenements where no gardens are provided. Similarly, a high proportion of the smaller houses in Lancashire towns have no gardens.
There are considerable differences between different income groups. Here again the matter of gardens may be expected to have much influence on whether vegetables are grown, the higher income groups more commonly having gardens than the lower.
% growing vegetables
(iii) Consumption of Potatoes
Housewives were asked whether their families were eating more, less, or the same amount of potatoes compared with before the war.
Thus about a third of the families contracted were of the opinion that they were eating more potatoes.
Analysis by urban and rural areas is as follows:
|
Urban
% |
Rural
% |
||
| More | 34.6 | 37.8 | ± 4.9 |
| Less | 2.4 | 5.0 | ± 2.2 |
| Same | 60.2 | 52.5 | ± 5.1 |
| Don't know | 2.8 | 4.7 | |
| Sample | 2635 | 383 |
Rural areas show a rather lower proportion eating the same amount, proportions in the other groups being correspondingly higher.
Breakdowns by income group and region show no statistically significant differences, except that in Class C 38.5% (+ or – 2.9) said they were eating more potatoes.
Analysis by housewives with and without children show marked differences.
| With children under 5 | With children 5-16 | No children | Total | |
| % | % | % | % | |
| More | 40.4 | 41.5 | 28.1 | 34.9 |
| Less | 2.1 | 1.2 | 4.1 | 2.7 |
| Same | 54.5 | 54.6 | 64.4 | 59.4 |
| Don't know | 3.0 | 2.7 | 3.4 | 3.0 |
| Sample | 825 * | 1187 * | 1434 | 2990 |
It will be seen that families with no children show a much lower proportion eating more potatoes than families with children.
Those housewives who said their families were eating more or less potatoes were asked the reason for this.
Reasons for eating more were as follows:
The first three answers, given by 67.2%of those asked, are all concerned with making up for other shortages.
There are no statistically significant differences between urban and rural areas, or the different regions.
The number eating less potatoes than before the war is not large enough for the reasons for this to be expressed statistically and tend to be of a miscellaneous character. Health reasons, however, were given by nearly a quarter of those eating less.
(iv) Consumption of other Vegetables
Housewives were asked whether their families were eating more, less, or the same amount of other vegetables as before the war. Individual vegetables were not distinguished.
Slightly less than a third thought they were eating more vegetables other than potatoes.
Analysis by urban and rural areas shows no statistically significant differences.
There are some differences between different regions.
Lancashire, the Midlands and Wales, and London show the lowest proportions eating more vegetables, the south and south-east, and the south-west, the highest.
There are some differences between different income groups:
| Class | Total | ||||
| A | B | C | D | ||
| % | % | % | % | % | |
| More | 44.4 | 36.4 | 32.6 | 25.7 | 31.7 |
| Less | 1.1 | 1.5 | 2.3 | 3.4 | 2.5 |
| Same | 53.4 | 59.9 | 62.5 | 66.6 | 62.8 |
| Don't know | 1.1 | 2.2 | 2.6 | 4.3 | 3.0 |
| Sample | 176 | 651 | 1122 | 1061 | 2990 |
It will be seen that increased consumption of vegetables other than potatoes is more common in the higher income groups than in the lower.
Breakdown by families with and without children is as follows. The same tendencies are seen as in the case of potatoes, but are less marked.
Reasons for increased consumption were as follows. The percentages are based on the number eating more vegetables.
Breakdowns by urban and rural areas and by region show no statistically significant differences.
Breakdown by families with and without children gives the following result:
The numbers saying that less other vegetables are eaten are too small for results showing reasons to be expressed statistically, but it may be noted that about a quarter said that they were too expensive.
VII VEGETABLES (ii)
New Series H. 12
Interviewing 1st to 13th March, 1943
A sample of 2535 housewives selected in representative proportions from different regions, income groups and age groups was interviewed.
The purpose of the inquiry was to find out whether housewives were able to obtain (either by growing them themselves or buying from shops) all the vegetables they required, and why they did not buy certain sorts of vegetables.
Summary
63.4% of the sample had either gardens or allotments. More households in rural districts and in the Southern area had gardens or allotments than those in other groups.
51% of the sample and 80.5% of those with gardens or allotments grew some vegetables. More use was made of gardens for growing vegetables in Scotland and the South than in London and the North.
Sprouts, cabbages and root vegetables were grown more frequently than other sorts.
97% had been able to buy sufficient vegetables for their meals, in general.
27.55% had had difficulty in buying particular sorts of vegetables. Such difficulty was more marked in urban than in rural areas and in Scotland and London than in other regions. The lower income groups more frequently experienced difficulty than the higher.
Onions, leeks and cauliflowers were the vegetables most frequently mentioned as being difficult to buy, the first two being in short supply and the last too expensive.
Carrots, cabbages, savoys, sprouts and swedes were bought more frequently than other vegetables.
Habit and taste were important reasons for not buying the less commonly bought vegetables.
(i) Facalities for Growing Vegetables
Housewives were asked first whether they had a garden or an allotment.
| % | |
| Garden only | 49.9 |
| Allotment only | 4.9 |
| Garden and allotment | 8.6 |
| No garden or allotment | 36.2 |
| No information | .4 |
| Sample: | 2535 |
As might be expected more households had facilities for growing vegetables in the country than in towns.
|
Urban
% |
Rural
% |
Total
% |
|
| Garden only | 46.8 | 68.2 | 49.9 |
| Allotment only | 4.6 | 7.1 | 4.9 |
| Garden and allotment | 7.3 | 16.5 | 8.6 |
| No garden or allotment | 41.0 | 7.4 | 36.2 |
| No information | .3 | .8 | .4 |
| Sample | 2170 | 365 | 2535 |
Breakdown by area is as follows:-
It should be noted that of the rural interviews 71% were made in the Southern regions and 29% in the Midlands regions, or putting it another 43.5% of the interviews made in the Soutnern area were in rural districts and 19.1% of those in the Midland area.
A considerably higher proportion of household in the Midlands than in other areas possess gardens.
In the Southern regions a high figure would be excepted as the bulk of the rural sample is included here. The figure for allotments is also high in this area. London shows the lowest proportions having any facilities for growing vegetables.
(ii) Extent to which Vegetables are Grown
Those housewives who had either gardens or allotments were asked: “Do you grow any of your own vegetables?"
| % those with gardens or allotments | % whole sample | |
| Grew vegetables | 80.5 | 51.0 |
| Did not grow vegetables | 19.5 | 12.4 |
| No garden or allotment | - | 36.2 |
| No information | - | .4 |
| Sample: | 1609 | 2335 |
Thus about four fifths of those with facilities grew vegetables, and these represent about one half of the whole sample.
Of those housewives who had gardens but no allotments 75.9% grew vegetables.
A higher proportion of households with gardens or allotments grew vegetables in country districts than in the towns.
| % of those with gardens or allotments | |||
| Urban | Rural | Total | |
| Grew vegetables | 76.3 | 96.7 | 80.5 |
| Did not grow vegetables | 23.7 | 3.3 | 19.5 |
| Sample: | 1272 | 535 | 1609 |
In considering regional results the distribution of rural interviews in the different areas should be born in mind.
% those with gardens or allotments
| Scotland | North of England | Midlands and Wales | South, South West and East Anglia | London | Total | |
| Grew Vegetables | 90.2 ± 5 | 70.5 | 81.5 | 90.8 | 65.8 ± 7 | 80.5 |
| Did not grow vegetables | 9.8 | 29.5 | 18.5 | 9.2 | 34.2 | 19.5 |
High proportion growing vegetables in the Southern area is partly accounted for by the proportion of rural interviews made in these regions. Otherwise Scotland shows the highest proportion growing vegetables and London the lowest. The North of England also shows a relatively low proportion.
Breakdown by income group shows that in Class A 90.4% (+ or - 5) 0 of those with gardens or allotments grow vegetables. Results for the other groups show no statistically significant differences from the average.
(iii) Types of Vegetables Grown
Those housewives who grew vegetables were asked: “Of which vegetables have you grown enough not to need to buy any since Christmas?” Replies were as follows:-
Amongst those who mentioned other sorts of vegetables 5.8% of the whole sample said they had grown enough “greens” to keep themselves supplied, without mentioning any particular sort, 5.6% of the whole sample mentioned kale, 4.5% curly greens, 2.6% spinach and 2.3% celery. Other sorts were only mentioned infrequently.
Breakdown by urban and rural areas of the sorts of vegetables grown shows that in country districts more households have kept themselves supplied with individual sorts of vegetable than those living in towns.
The proportion of vegetable growers who have not grown enough of any one sort to keep themselves supplied is higher in towns.
In considering regional figures, it should be remembered that the sample figures are small and the subject to a wide margin of error.
London shows a very much higher proportion of vegetable growers who had not kept themselves supplied with any sort of vegetable than other areas and the proportion mentioning different sorts of vegetables is generally lower than elsewhere.
Scotland differs from other areas in that the proportion growing cauliflowers and onions is much lower. Potatoes are more frequently grown in the Southern and Midland regions than elsewhere. The Southern area has a relatively high proportion growing beetroots.
Breakdown by income group shows that a slightly higher proportion of those growing vegetables in the lower income groups than in Classes A and B had not kept themselves fully supplied with any sort of vegetable. The proportions answering “none” were as follows
The proportions mentioning the various sorts of vegetables are consequently slightly lower in Classes C and D than in Classes A and B.
Otherwise the only noteworthy differences between income groups are as follows:-
| % growing sufficient for need since Christmas | |||||
| A | B | C | D | Total | |
| Carrots | 29.8 | 27.2 | 31.2 | 37.9 | 31.6 |
| Beetroots | 30.8 ± 9.6 | 16.2 | 15.3 | 12.6 | 15.7 |
| Potatoes | 22.3 | 22.1 | 21.3 | 27.5 | 23.3 |
It will be seen that carrots and potatoes are grown more frequently by the lower income groups than by the higher, whereas results for all other vegetables show a trend in the opposite direction. In Class A a relatively high proportion grow beetroots.
(iv) Difficulties in Buying Vegetables
All housewives were asked: “Since Christmas have you been able to buy as many vegetables as you needed for your meals?” This question was general and if housewives had not been able to buy particular sorts of vegetables the answer was not counted as “No” unless they had been unable to get other sorts of vegetables instead.
It should be noted that the period covered was January and February.
Results were:-
Thus almost all housewives had been able to buy enough vegetables of one sort or another for their meals.
Breakdowns by urban and rural, by areas, by income groups and by those who grow and do not grow vegetables show no statistically significant differences.
Housewives were then asked: “Are there any particular sorts of vegetables which you have been unable to buy as much as you would like of for any reason?”(Since Christmas)
Rather more than a quarter had had difficulties in getting particular sorts of vegetables. A higher proportion had had difficulty in urban than in rural areas.
|
Urban
% |
Rural
% |
Total
% |
|
| Yes | 29.6 | 14.8 | 27.5 |
| No | 69.7 | 84.4 | 71.8 |
| No information | .7 | .8 | .8 |
| Sample : | 2170 | 365 | 2535 |
Breakdown by areas shows some differences.
Scotland and London are the areas in which difficulties were most frequently experienced. In considering the relatively low inability to buy in the Southern regions it should be remembered that a high proportion of rural interviews were included here.
Analysis by income group is as follows:-
|
Class A
% |
Class B
% |
Class C
% |
Class D
% |
Total
% |
|
| Yes | 16.6 ± 6.2 | 25.0 ± 3.8 | 31.2 ± 3 | 26.5 ± 3 | 27.5 |
| No | 82.0 | 74.2 | 68.3 | 72.7 | 71.8 |
| No information | 1.4 | .8 | .5 | .8 | .7 |
| Sample : | 145 | 523 | 966 | 895 | 2535 |
In the lower income groups higher proportions had been unable to buy than in the upper income groups. Class D, however, shows a slightly lower figure than Class C. It may be noted nere that of all the reasons given for inability to buy certain sorts of vegetables 27.3% were “too expensive”,
There is some difference in the replies received from those who do and who do not grow some of their own vegetables.
|
Those who growing vegetables
% |
Those not growing vegetables
% |
Total
% |
|
| Yes | 22.3 | 32.8 | 27.5 |
| No | 76.6 | 66.9 | 71.8 |
| No information | 1.1 | .3 | .7 |
| Sample: | 1294 | 1229 | 2535 |
The vegetables of which housewives said they not been able to buy enough were as follows:-
Other vegetables were mentioned only by very small proportions.
Housewives were asked why they had been unable to buy the vegetables mentioned. Results are given only for onions, leeks and cauliflowers as in the case of other vegetables the numbers unable to buy are not large enough to give statistically significant results.
| % unable to buy | |||
| Onions | Leeks | Cauliflowers | |
| None in shops, scarce | 99.4 | 87.0 | 8.6 |
| Too expensive | .2 | 12.4 | 91.4 |
| Other reasons | .4 | .6 | - |
| Sample: | 479 | 177 | 116 |
In the case of cauliflowers price is the biggest difficulty.
(v) Extent to which different sorts of vegetables are Bought
Housewives were asked whether and how frequently they had bought certain vegetables since Christmas. The list of vegetables about which this information was required was drawn up by the Ministry of Food.
Replies were classified as “Three times or more”, “occasionally” meaning less than three times, and “none bought” since Christmas.
Carrots, cabbages, sprouts, savoys, turnips and swedes were bought more frequently than other sorts of vegetables.
Spinach, kale, turnip tops, curly greens, broccoli, sprout tops and onions were bought infrequently.
Since cauliflowers were not on the list a note was made when housewives mentioned spontaneously that they had bought these. 9.3% said they had bought cauliflowers often and 3.2% occasionally. However, these should be regarded only as minimum figures as housewives were specifically asked about the other sorts of vegetables, but not about cauliflowers.
Breakdown by areas is as follows.
The tables below show the proportions buying the different sorts of vegetables three or more times not at all since Christmas in the five areas.
In general the South shows the highest and London the lowest proportions not buying the various sorts of vegetables. It will be remembered that the South grows most vegetables and London grows least in gardens and allotments.
Scotland also buys rather more vegetables than other regions. Although the incidence of vegetable growing is high in Scotland among those who have gardens, it will be remembered that half of those interviewed in this area had no facilities for-growing vegetables.
The proportion buying broccoli is* relatively high in the area including the Midlands and Wales. This is mainly accounted for by Wales where 51.7% of housewives had bought broccoli often.
Onions are bought by a higher proportion in London than elsewhere, and it should be added that 31.8% in London bought onions occasionally. The South also shows a rather high proportion buying onions.
Scotland in general shows higher proportions buying root vegetables than London and lower proportions buying green vegetables.
In the North of England a relatively low proportion had bought leeks three or more times, but 27% had bought them occasionally as against 22.2% in the country as a whole.
Turnip tops and sprout tops were bought very much more in London than in other regions.
Breakdown by income group shows some marked differences.
It will be seen that the vegetables most commonly bought, cabbages, sprouts, savoys, turnips, parsnips, swedes and carrots, are bought relatively more frequently by the lower income groups than by the higher, whereas the vegetables that are bought less frequently taking the sample as a whole, broccoli, spinach, kale and onions are bought relatively more frequently by the higher income groups.
Leeks and sprout tops are bought rather more frequently by the lower income groups than by the higher.
(vi) Reasons for not buying Vegetables
Those housewives who had not bought certain vegetables since Christmas were asked why they had not done so, and those who had only bought vegetables occasionally were asked why they did not buy them more often.
The tables given below show the proportions of those who had not bought, and had only occasionally bought, the different sorts of vegetables, who gave different reasons.
It should be noted that the proportions saying “We grow our own” differ from those given earlier in this report as percentages are based here on the numbers not buying and occasionally buying, and not as previously on the number growing vegetables of any sort. The table on page 40 shows the proportions of the sample giving this answer as compared with the proportions saying previously that they grew enough for their needs.
In the case of the less commonly bought vegetables, broccoli, spinach, kale, curly greens, sprout tops and turnip tops, habit is a strong reason for not buying. “Don't care for it” is also a frequently given reason except in the case of sprout tops. From 10 to 16% say they have not seen them in the shops.
Those who only buy occasionally, more frequently give expense as the reason for this. This is particularly marked in the case of broccoli. Sprouts, spinach and kale are also said to be too expensive by 10 to 15% of those who only buy them occasionally.
Housewives were unable to buy onions and to a lesser extent leeks because these were in short supply.
The proportions “not caring for” savoy and preferring other vegetables are relatively high.
“We grow our own” is the reason given most frequently for not buying cabbages, savoy, sprouts, and carrots. It will be remembered that relatively high proportions said they had grown enough of these vegetables for their needs. From 29 to 38% say they have not bought sprout tops, turnips, parsnips and leeks because they have grown their own, and these vegetables too were mentioned frequently in answer to the earlier question.
“Miscellaneous” reasons were in most cases that they had been given vegetables by friends and so had not needed to buy any.
In the table below the proportions of the sample giving “we grow our own” as a reason for not buying any are compared with the proportions saying that they grew enough for their need previously
In the case of cabbages and savoys, sprouts and sprout tops and carrots the proportions are very close. “Cabbages and savoys” and “sprouts and sprout tops” were classified together in analyzing answers to the earlier question. These results may be compared, however, as they are similar sorts of vegetables and enough of one or the other is grown.
Rather more say that they grow broccoli as a reason for not buying it than say they cauliflowers and broccoli unprompted in the first question. It is possible that these vegetables are looked on as “extras”, and therefore not mentioned in answer to the first question, and that some of the people concerned would not “need to buy” any even if they did not grow them. The same explanation may hold in the case of leeks and onions.
Other vegetables are not comparable owing to the different classification used in the earlier question.
(vii) Other Difficulties
Housewives were asked: “Have you had any other trouble in buying vegetables recently that you feel the Ministry of Food should know about?”
89.3% said that they had not or could not think of anything that they had not already said.
The remaining 10.7% answered as follows:
| Price of cauliflowers too high | 3.2 |
| Price of other vegetables too high | 5.0 |
| Too much favouritism among shop-keepers | .7 |
| Quality of potatoes poor | .4 |
| Miscellaneous | 1.4 |
| No complaint | 89.4 |
| Sample: | 2535 |
It should be noted that the 3.2% who mentioned the price of cauliflowers were not the same people as did so in answer to the previous question about difficulties in buying. Altogether 8.2% mentioned cauliflowers when the results of both questions are added.