Search

Fortified fruit juice represents a growing segment in the otherwise contracting juice industry. Health concerns and changing food policy have driven US consumers to demand fruit juice fortified with micronutrients. Fruit-juice manufacturers have responded by expanding their portfolio to include juice products fortified with vitamins and minerals. This study is the first to analyze determinants of US household expenditures on fortified fruit juice. Collectively, results indicate fruit-juice fortification is a viable strategy for improving public health among demographic subgroups that are disproportionately vulnerable or at-risk for nutrient deficiencies. Findings suggest that fruit-juice manufacturers’ fortification efforts are improving the nutritional intake of toddlers and children but are less effective at reaching other demographic subgroups (rural and minority-headed households) with high nutrient-deficiency incidence. Manufacturers should consider employing targeted marketing and outreach efforts to maximize improvement in dietary quality among fruit-juice consumers.

This study examined the nutritional quality of shopping trips at non-traditional retailers by SNAP-authorization status. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using National Household ...

Objective:National concerns over food insecurity and obesity have prompted legislation seeking to further restrict Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) purchases. The objective of this study is to provide insight on the potential impact of proposed purchase restrictions by comparing SNAP participant and income-eligible non-participants’ expenditures on current SNAP-restricted foods, that is, hot foods, prepared foods, alcohol, vitamins and meal supplements.Design:Cross-sectional study. Bivariate analysis and multivariable regression analysis with an instrumental variables approach were employed to compare the probability of purchasing and expenditures on current SNAP-restricted foods among SNAP participants and income-eligible non-participants.Setting:National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey, 2012–2013.Participants:2513 households, of which 1316 were SNAP participants and 1197 were income-eligible non-participants.Results:Both the share of households purchasing and household expenditures on current SNAP-restricted foods were similar among SNAP participants and income-eligible non-participants.Conclusions:Results provide further empirical evidence that proposed SNAP purchase restrictions on sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods and luxury foods are unlikely to have a meaningful effect on SNAP household food purchases.

Discrimination in tipping creates concerns of inequity in service quality for restaurant operators (Brewster 2017). We use the National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey data to conduct one of the very few nationally representative examinations of tipping behavior at US restaurants. We focus on differences in tipping behavior between groups with identifiable characteristics and investigate whether tipping differences between groups are robust to inclusion of a variety of controls. We investigate tipping at the extensive and intensive margins. In contrast to earlier studies, we find little evidence that tipping varies by race and gender.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze households’ acquisition of healthy food away from home (FAFH) from restaurants. Specifically, determinants of households’ decision to purchase healthy FAFH, the share of households’ FAFH expenditures allocated to healthy FAFH and the share of households’ FAFH calories obtained from healthy items are identified. Design/methodology/approach Using data from the National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey, the UK Food Standards Agency’s Nutrient Profiling Model is used to classify the healthfulness of households’ FAFH purchases. A double-hurdle model is estimated to identify determinants of households’ decision to purchase healthy FAFH and the share of their FAFH expenditures and calories allocated to healthy items. Findings Households’ acquisition of healthy FAFH varies with income, food assistance, FAFH purchase frequency, dieting, restaurant type, household composition, region and season. There is little difference in the impact of these factors on healthy FAFH expenditure shares vs calorie shares, suggesting that healthy FAFH expenditures proxy the contribution of healthy FAFH to a households’ diet. Practical implications Results suggest that increased availability of healthy FAFH may need to be supplemented by targeted advertising and promotions, revisions to nutrition education programs, improved nutrition information transparency and value pricing in order to improve the dietary quality of households’ FAFH acquisitions. Originality/value This study is the first to analyze household acquisition of healthy FAFH.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop a group-based food diversity index, which represents diversity in household expenditures across food subgroups. The index is compared to a product code-based index and applied to reassess determinants of food diversity demand. Design/methodology/approach A group-based food diversity index is developed by adapting the US Healthy Food Diversity Index. Using Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey data on 4,341 US households, correlation coefficients, descriptive statistics and linear regressions are estimated to compare and reassess the determinants of group and product code-based food diversity demand. Findings Results show that the group and product code indices capture different forms of food diversity. The indices are only moderately correlated and have varying means and skewness. Education, gender, age, household size, race, SNAP and food expenditures are found to significantly affect food diversity. However, the magnitude and direction of the effects vary between group and product code indices. Given these differences, it is essential that studies select a diversity index that corresponds to their objective. Results suggest that group-based indices are appropriate for informing food and nutrition policy, while product code-based indices are ideal for guiding food industry management’s decision making. Originality/value A group-based food diversity index representative of household expenditures across food subgroups is developed.

This study analyzes how agri-food Entrepreneurial Assistance Programs (EAPs) create value for entrepreneurs. Using the MSU Product Center as a unit of analysis, the effect of agri-food EAP assistance on firms’ venture evaluation, perceived legitimacy, and performance is examined. Results indicate that agri-food EAP assistance prevents untenable business ideas from launching, improves the survival of launched ventures and develops entrepreneurs’ perceived legitimacy with trading partners. Further, results imply that targeted EAPs are a viable policy approach for promoting entrepreneurial activity in the agri-food industry, and that they can be particularly well suited to assisting nascent entrepreneurs.

Introduction Between 2000 and 2017, a total of 23 states proposed legislation to further restrict Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) purchases. In the absence of a pilot program, the potential effect of such restrictions is unclear. The objective of this study is to provide insight on the proposed restrictions’ effectiveness by characterizing SNAP households’ expenditures on current and proposed restricted foods, and comparing them with their cash expenditures. Restrictions on sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods, and foods ineligible under the Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) are considered. Methods The National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (collected 2012–2013) provided weekly food expenditures for 1,234 SNAP households. Descriptive statistics and t-tests (completed in 2017) were used to characterize and compare households’ cash and restricted food expenditures. Results On average, SNAP households’ allocated 7%, 6%, 17%, and 66% of their food expenditures to currently restricted foods, sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods, and WIC-ineligible foods. Given a sugar-sweetened beverage or snack food restriction, the average SNAP household can cover their restricted expenditures with cash. However, the average household’s expenditures on current restricted and WIC-ineligible foods exceed their cash expenditures by a mean of $40.84 (SE=$2.44). Note that results characterize the impact of proposed SNAP restrictions on the average SNAP household. Individually, it is likely that some SNAP households would be affected by a sugar-sweetened beverage or snack food restriction. Conclusions Legislation restricting specific foods will likely be less effective at altering SNAP households’ food expenditures than legislation seeking to restrict all WIC-ineligible foods.