Maintaining Food and Nutrition Security in the United States with Welfare Reform

Kramer-LeBlanc, Carol S.; Basiotis, P. Peter; Kennedy, Eileen

doi:10.2307/1244388

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, a $1 increase in FSP benefits would lead to an additional $0.17 to $0.47 being spent on food. More recent estimates, such as those of Kramer-LeBlanc, Basiotis, and Kennedy (1997), also appear to fall in this range.…”

Section: The Efficacy Of the Fspmentioning

confidence: 83%

U.S. Food and Nutrition Programs

Currie¹

2003

Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States

111

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Efficacy Of the Fspmentioning

confidence: 83%

U.S. Food and Nutrition Programs

Currie¹

2003

Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the United States

111

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…0•452 0•078 0•375 Knaub (45) DR PSID Part. 0•325 0•073 0•253 Kramer-LeBlanc et al (46) DR CSFII Part. 0•349 0•066 0•283 Kramer-LeBlanc et al (46) DR CSFII Part.…”

Section: Impact Of Systematic Biasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…0•325 0•073 0•253 Kramer-LeBlanc et al (46) DR CSFII Part. 0•349 0•066 0•283 Kramer-LeBlanc et al (46) DR CSFII Part. 0•345 0•079 0•266 Lane (47) PNP Other Eligible 0•375 Levedahl (48) DR Other Part.…”

Section: Impact Of Systematic Biasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The potential impact of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) restrictions on expenditures: a systematic review

Cuffey¹,

Beatty²,

Harnack³

2015

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To systematically review the potential impact of reducing the set of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-eligible foods (e.g. not allowing purchase of sugar-sweetened beverages with SNAP benefits) on expenditures for restricted foods. Design: The impact on food expenditures of a $US 1 reduction in available SNAP benefits can be used to estimate the impact of restrictions on SNAP-eligible foods. An electronic search of EconPapers, AgEcon Search, EconLit, WorldCat, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, PubMed and NALDC, and a snowball search were conducted to obtain a sample of studies up to March 2015 that estimate the impacts of SNAP and other income on household food expenditures. The studies were classified according to study population, study design and whether they attempted to correct for major study design biases. Setting: Estimates were extracted from fifty-nine published and unpublished studies. Subjects: US households. Results: Fifty-nine studies were found, yielding 123 estimates of the impact of SNAP benefits on food expenditures and 117 estimates of the difference in impacts between SNAP benefits and other income. Studies correcting for or mitigating study design biases had less estimate variation. Estimates indicate that expenditures on the restricted item would decrease by $US 1·6 to $US 4·8 if $US 10 of SNAP benefits would have otherwise been spent, with a median overall impact of $US 3. Conclusions: The present literature suggests that restrictions on SNAP-eligible items may result in a small but potentially meaningful decrease in SNAP expenditures for restricted items. Further research is needed to evaluate whether this would translate into improvements in diet quality. Some studies have shown that participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) suffer more from obesity than non-participants (1,2) , possibly due to poor diet quality (3) . Policy proposals to address these issues typically consist of either incentivizing healthier food options (4) or restricting the set of foods that can be bought with benefits (5) . The effectiveness and impact of restrictions, however, is a subject of considerable debate. Whether restrictions will actually lead to a decrease in purchasing and consumption of restricted foods depends on how much a decrease in SNAP purchasing power leads to a corresponding decrease in food expenditures. An individual may simply decide to offset the decrease in SNAP purchasing power by using other income to purchase any restricted items. Thus, the extent to which SNAP participants are willing to substitute other income for SNAP income determines the ability of restrictions to reduce purchasing of restricted foods.Over fifty studies, appearing between 1974 and 2014 and using a variety of methods, have estimated the extent of this substitution. However, the most recent review of this literature included studies only up to 2001 (6) . Additionally, that review as well as earlier reviews (7)(8)(9) did not undertake a comprehensive search...

show abstract

“…Under these conditions, urban communities are often deprived of access to a wide variety of foodstuffs for political, logistical and economic reasons exacerbated by racial, ethnic, gender, class and age disparities (Block et al. 2004; Kramer‐LeBlanc et al. 1997; Pothukuchi and Kaufman 1999; Shaw 2006; Slocum 2011).…”

Section: The Production Of Inequality In the Industrial Food Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beyond the historical-geographical unevenness inherent in the North American food system at large (see Dirks 2003;Feagin 2007;Kahn and McAlister 1997;Levenstein 1988Levenstein , 1993Patel 2007;Poppendieck 1998), stark conditions of racial, gendered and class-based urban inequality produce significant barriers to accessing affordable and healthy food for many inner city residents (see Alkon 2008;Alkon and Agyeman 2011;Barraclough 2009;Heynen 2009;Slocum 2007Slocum , 2008Witt 1999). Under these conditions, urban communities are often deprived of access to a wide variety of foodstuffs for political, logistical and economic reasons exacerbated by racial, ethnic, gender, class and age disparities (Block et al 2004;Kramer-LeBlanc et al 1997;Pothukuchi and Kaufman 1999;Shaw 2006;Slocum 2011). Since the 1980s, the proportion of black adolescents who are overweight has increased 120% (Sorof et al 2004) within U.S. inner cities, over twice the rate of white adolescents.…”

Section: The Production Of Inequality In the Industrial Food Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food Justice, Hunger and the City

Heynen¹,

Kurtz²,

Trauger³

2012

Geography Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are amidst a long‐overdue increase of interest in issues related food, cities and inequality within geography. While there has certainly been significant scholarship done on the issue, this area seems to be on the verge of defining many other sub‐disciplinary trajectories as opposed to the opposite which has historically been the case. In this short review essay, we hope to signal the utility of the concepts of community food security, food sovereignty and urban agriculture for conceptually linking food, justice, and cities.

show abstract

Maintaining Food and Nutrition Security in the United States with Welfare Reform

Cited by 12 publications

References 6 publications

U.S. Food and Nutrition Programs

U.S. Food and Nutrition Programs

The potential impact of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) restrictions on expenditures: a systematic review

Food Justice, Hunger and the City

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About