IMPORTANCEStrategies to improve the nutritional status of those participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are of interest to policymakers. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the proposed policy of incentivizing the purchase of fruits and vegetables and prohibiting the purchase of less nutritious foods in a food benefit program improves the nutritional quality of participants' diets.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Lower income participants (n = 279) not currently enrolled in SNAP were randomized to 1 of 4 experimental financial food benefit conditions: (1) incentive (30% financial incentive for fruits and vegetables purchased using food benefits);(2) restriction (not allowed to buy sugar sweetened beverages, sweet baked goods, or candies with food benefits); (3) incentive plus restriction (30% financial incentive on fruits and vegetables and restriction of purchase of sugar sweetened beverages, sweet baked goods, or candy with food benefits); or (4) control (no incentive or restrictions on foods purchased with food benefits). Participants in all conditions were given a study-specific debit card where funds were added every 4 weeks for a 12-week period. Outcome measures were collected at baseline and in the final 4 weeks of the experimental period. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESPrimary outcomes (from 24-hour dietary recalls) included intake of energy, discretionary calories, and overall diet quality. RESULTSA number of favorable changes were observed in the incentive plus restriction condition that were significantly different from changes in the control condition. These included (1) reduced intake of energy (−96 kcal/d, standard error [SE], 59.9); (2) reduced intake of discretionary calories (−64 kcal/d, SE 26.3); (3) reduced intake of sugar sweetened beverages, sweet baked goods, and candies (−0.6 servings/d, SE 0.2); (4) increased intake of solid fruit (0.2 servings/d, SE 0.1); and (5) improved Healthy Eating Index score (4.1 points, SE 1.4). Fewer improvements were observed in the incentive only and restriction only arms. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEA food benefit program that pairs incentives for purchasing more fruits and vegetables with restrictions on the purchase of less nutritious foods may reduce energy intake and improve the nutritional quality of the diet of participants compared with a program that does not include incentives or restrictions.CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02643576
Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractA well known problem with revealed preference methods is that when data are found to satisfy their restrictions it is hard to know whether this should be viewed as a triumph for economic theory, or a warning that these conditions are so undemanding that almost anything goes. This paper allows researchers to make this distinction. Our approach builds on theoretical support in the form of an axiomatic cardinal characterisation of a measure of predictive success due to Selten (1991). We illustrate the idea using a large, nationally representative panel survey of Spanish consumers with broad commodity coverage. The results show that this approach to revealed preference methods can lead us radically to reassess our view of the empirical performance of economic theory.Acknowledgements: We are grateful to Richard Blundell, Martin Browning, Jerry Hausman, Clare Leaver, Peter Neary and seminar audiences in Brown, Copenhagen, Leuven, LSE, Oxford, Tulane, Queen Mary and Essex for their comments. We are deeply indebted to John D. Hey who brought Selten's Theorem to our attention.
This paper examines responses to a national FDA advisory that urged at-risk individuals to limit store-bought fish consumption due to the dangers of methyl-mercury. We investigate consumer response using both parametric and nonparametric methods. Some targeted consumers significantly reduced canned fish purchases as a result of the advisory, suggesting that information-based policies can achieve the issuing agency's goals. Education and newspaper readership were important determinants of response, suggesting that information acquisition and assimilation are key factors for risk avoidance. While some groups reduced consumption as a result of the advisory, we do not find a response among the relatively large group of at-risk households which met neither the education nor readership criteria. The advisory also had unintended spillover effects; some consumers not considered at-risk reduced consumption in response to the advisory.
Recent studies on food stamp participant households' marginal propensity to spend out of food stamps versus income have had contradictory results: experimental studies have found household behavior aligns with standard economic theory where households' marginal propensity to spend on food out of food stamps is equivalent to cash income; observational studies find that households have a larger marginal propensity to spend out of food stamps than cash income. In this study, we re-examine this question by estimating how an unprecedentedly large increase in food stamp benefits due to the implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act affects food-at-home expenditure. We find that the policy change caused households to increase food-at-home expenditure as well as increase households' share of total expenditure allocated toward food-at-home expenditure. We compare these results to a time period without a meaningful food stamp policy change and find our results are unique to the ARRA implementation time period. *
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.