This is a list of food desert issues and solutions by country.
East Africa.
African food deserts are due to accelerated urbanization, the various ways individuals acquire food through formal and informal food economy markets, familial dynamics of the household, and African social, political and economic effects. African food deserts have been defined as "poor, often informal, urban neighborhoods characterized by high food insecurity and low dietary diversity, with multiple markets and market and non-market food sources but variable household access to food."
The definition of a food desert often relates to the distance between residents and the nearest supermarket. In Western nations, supermarkets prevail over traders and vendors but food sourcing methods within Africa are reversed. Certain regions have an informal economy where traders and vendors are available within the areas they live and other local areas. Urban agriculture also plays a big role within Africa as pastoralism is widely practiced – populations raise their own livestock and grow their own food creating informal rural-urban food transfer systems. These practices vary throughout Africa but do not increase food security and limits community resources to create a food desert. Low-income populations are still more inclined to source food in these ways, however supermarket growth in both urban and rural areas is cutting off these food sourcing methods and worsening food security.
Households within the same food desert source food differently. Most neighborhoods have a mix of various income levels. Those with higher incomes have better access to transportation and are more likely to shop at the nearest grocery store. Lower income households tend to stick to sourcing food from local vendors with more limited operating hours or through pastoralism. In 2014, the African Food Security Urban Network (AFSUN) found that nearly 70% of poor urban African households sourced part of their food needs from vendors and traders and 79% of these households utilized a supermarket. When these studies took frequency into account, it was found that poor Africans use informal vendors more often for most of their needs and go to supermarkets to buy large quantities of a staple.
With economic growth contributing to the building of supermarkets and other urban renewal practices, land space is taken from pastoral communities that grow and harvest their own food and reduces the resources vendors use to attain the products they sell, limiting their business practices and giving rise to food deserts in Africa. Modern food systems in towns and cities are rapidly changing, and destabilizing the already high food insecurity practices already in place.
The 2014 AFSUN survey results indicate a wide variety of factors, such as gender, income, and education affect access to nutritious food. Households headed by a man have greater access to food than those headed by a woman. This is due to various socio-political towards women that do not affect modern, Western women who have more access to financial opportunities. In Africa, female heads of households are twice as likely to be food insecure than men. Women have less mobility within Africa and thus rely more on less secure food sourcing practices.
South Africa.
Transportation problems.
African cities suffer from a large degree of fragmentation, which leads to the poor having to utilize public transportation to travel large distances, spending up to 3 hours a day in transit. This transportation problem is further exacerbated by the severely deteriorating road infrastructure and less than ideal public rail transport. With much of the day wasted in transit, poor Africans have less time to spend on shopping or preparing food, which forces them to buy more expensive, less nutritious, already prepared foods from either street vendors or restaurants. This fragmentation and mobility leads to many poor Africans shopping for groceries in places outside their township. A 2004 study in Soweto, Johannesburg, showed that most urban poor spend about 50% of their expenses in places outside their local area.
Impacts.
The 1995 South African Income and Expenditure Survey found an urban food insecurity rate of 27 percent, relative to the rural rate of 62 percent. Later studies such as the National Food Consumption Survey of 1999 and South African Social Attitudes Survey of 2008 independently assessed the urban food insecurity rate to be roughly half of that of the rural rate.
A 2000 survey conducted on rural Eastern Cape, rural Western Cape and urban Cape Town assessed the food insecurity rates to be 83, 69, and 81 percent, respectively. This survey took into account other urban African factors, where residents utilize formal food sources over informal sources like agriculture and local markets.
Australia.
Socioeconomic Disparities.
In Australia, jobs are organized into low or high class using Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO) which considers skills, education, and experience to place the job. The location of food deserts are often in areas where people's jobs and income are considered on the low side of the spectrum. In 2005 in Western Australia, a dearth of high quality and affordable fruit and vegetables in isolated regions was identified as one factor limiting consumption, along with produce seasonality. 
A 2014 review found that the less populous and very remote areas of the state had fewer grocery stores and higher prices for fruit, vegetables, and dairy than in cities. Economically it is reported that in areas with low income, families would have to spend 56% of their income on buying healthy food. Lack of availability to fresher food leads to unhealthy food consumption, resulting in what is described as a "obesogenic" neighborhood, which means that the environment's food surroundings do not support healthy eating. Of these stores, 20% did not generally supply produce that met all quality standards, with a few exceptions, unlike urban areas with exceptions for lettuce and green beans in Perth. Geographical data were not analyzed for prevalence of low income residents to define areas as food deserts.
Effects.
In 1990, a five-year campaign to increase access to healthy foods was started and led by the Department of Health in Western Australia and industry groups, to mixed success. It created community programs that provide food and transport services to families that live within a 1,600 meter radius of a grocery store, and focused on the prevention of diabetes and diabetes management. 
The minor health effects that can come from not having sustainable food options can be childhood obesity and health issues like asthma. More serious health problems include heart disease caused by obesity, and type 2 diabetes. If these bad habits continue unchanged a person affected by these disease could die prematurely. 
The department later developed a new private/public partnership to address access and consumption of fruit and vegetables. A 2008 audit found some progress as a result of incentivising fruit and vegetable access, but no headway in identifying and addressing any supply issues in development planning or elucidating cost, quality and access issues for remote, rural and urban areas.
Europe.
French researchers have noted that lower income consumers have a tendency to reach for more affordable items, such as high caloric foods, i.e. cereals, sweets, and added fats, instead of nutrient rich single source foods.
United Kingdom.
British food deserts can be broadly classified into twelve geographical types, based on the interaction of socioeconomic factors of physical access to shops, financial access (affordability of) healthy food, and attitudes towards consumption of healthy food, the desire to consume it rather than fast / convenience food, possession of cooking skills, that is, psychological access.
These twelve neighbourhood types are:
Areas 8 – 12 are rural food deserts.
Furey et al. describes food desert creation as arising where "high competition from large chain supermarkets has created a void".
North America.
United States.
Implications.
Food deserts are defined by a shortage of supermarkets and other stores that carry affordable healthful food. Research suggests that supermarkets are the most effective way to supply communities with a wide selection of fresh and relatively affordable healthful food. They are typically open year-round, provide convenient hours of operation and generally accept food stamps from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). Small-scale, full-service food markets could play a role in increasing community food security.
Affordability.
Compared to residents of higher-income neighborhoods, low socioeconomic status (SES) individuals tend to have diets higher in meat and processed foods and a lower intake of fruits and vegetables. They are more likely to purchase inexpensive fats and sugars over fresh fruits and vegetables, that are more expensive on a per calorie basis. On average, the most energy-dense foods only cost $1.76 per 1,000 calories, compared to $18.16 per 1,000 calories for low-energy nutritious foods. This is one reason cited why low-income populations and minorities are more predisposed to suffer from obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
Income may play a big role in determining the eating habits of families in food deserts. Those impacted by food deserts are typically impoverished, with an average income between $5,000 and $20,000 annually. In 2016, a USDA report stated, "Research that considers the prices paid for the same food across household income levels indicates that while some of the very poorest households—those earning less than $8,000 per year—may pay between 0.5 percent and 1.3 percent more for their groceries than households earning slightly more, households earning between $8,000 and $30,000 tend to pay the lowest prices for groceries, whereas higher income households pay significantly higher prices."
Supermarket shortage.
Chain supermarkets benefit from economies of scale to offer consumers low prices, but are less prevalent in low-income urban areas. In 1999, the number of supermarkets in low income neighborhoods was approximately 30% less than in the highest-income neighborhoods. In 2006, within cities, three times as many supermarkets are in wealthier neighborhoods than poorer ones. In 2009, a report stated that "Economies of scale, which is when the costs of operating a store decrease as store size increases, and economies of scope, which is when the costs decrease as more product variety increases, suggests that larger stores that offer greater variety can do so and offer lower prices. Both factors may account for the ability of larger stores to survive more easily than smaller stores." 
A 2008 book noted that 22% of the chain supermarkets in Minneapolis were located in the inner city, compared to more than 50% of the non-chain stores. In the end, a 1990 U.S. government report found that people in urban areas pay 3 to 37 percent more for the same groceries locally than they would in a suburban supermarket.
A 2002 report found, that in the absence of other grocery outlets, residents in low-income urban areas are often "forced to depend on small stores with limited selections of foods at substantially higher prices". A 2009 report stated that fringe food retailers have the market power to increase prices. around 30-60%, off a limited product selection dominated by processed foods. Research finds "retail prices for the same foods to be higher in deprived areas" that have a dearth of supermarkets and food stores. 2009 USDA findings are that prices for similar goods are on average higher at convenience stores than at supermarkets. As a result, people of low Socio economic status (SES) ultimately spend up to 37% more on their food purchases.
Smaller communities have fewer choices in food retailers. Resident small grocers struggle to be profitable partly due to low sales numbers, which make it difficult to meet wholesale food suppliers' minimum purchasing requirements. The lack of competition and sales volume can result in higher food costs. For example, in New Mexico the same basket of groceries that cost rural residents $85, cost urban residents only $55. However, this is not true for all rural areas. A study in Iowa showed that grocers in four rural counties had lower costs on key foods that make up a nutritionally balanced diet than did larger supermarkets outside these food deserts (greater than 20 miles away).
Grocery stores in low income communities have less variety. Small rural grocers and stores in areas where consumers are less interested in buying produce will carry less fruits and vegetables because they are more expensive compared to processed foods, especially in food deserts. This relates to the problem of "food swamps", regions that lack healthy and nutritious food choices. Even when healthy foods are available, they may not be affordable for many residents in poorer communities. Higher prices on healthy food than unhealthy potentially affects obesity rates.
In a study on urban food environments, participants described the