Store and neighborhood differences in retailer compliance with a local staple foods ordinance

Abstract

Background: Policies to improve healthy food retail have been recognized as a potential means of reducing dietrelated health disparities. The revised 2014 Minneapolis Staple Foods Ordinance instituted minimum stocking standards for healthy, staple foods. The objective of this study was to examine retailer compliance with the policy, and whether compliance varied by neighborhood and store characteristics. Methods: In this natural experiment, audits were conducted annually pre-and post-ordinance (2014-2017) in 155 small/nontraditional stores in Minneapolis, MN and a comparison city (St. Paul, MN). Compliance measures for 10 product categories included: (1) met requirements for ≥8 categories; (2) 10-point scale (one point for each requirement met); and (3) carried any item in each category. Store characteristics included store size and ownership status. Neighborhood characteristics included census-tract socioeconomic status and low-income/low-access status. Analyses were conducted in 2018. Results: All compliance measures increased in both Minneapolis and St. Paul from pre-to post-policy; Minneapolis increases were greater only for carrying any item in each category (p < 0.01). In Minneapolis, corporate (vs. independent) stores were generally more compliant. No differences were found by neighborhood characteristics. Conclusions: Overall trends suggest broad movement among Minneapolis stores towards providing a minimum level of staple foods. Increases were greater in corporate stores. Trends do not suggest neighborhood-level disparities in compliance. Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02774330, retrospectively registered May 17, 2016.

Longitudinal Fruit and Vegetable Sales in Small Food Retailers: Response to a Novel Local Food Policy and Variation by Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status

“…Together, these findings could suggest that a simple policy, such as the Minneapolis ordinance, may not be sufficient to improve the availability of fruits and vegetables in small food retailers, particularly over this relatively short study period. Policy approaches recommended by the World Health Organization and others [ 32 , 33 ], coupled with the findings from this and other work [ 9 , 23 ], suggest more comprehensive strategies may be necessary to improve the healthfulness of retail settings. Promising additional strategies include things like incentivizing retailers and facilitating product distribution.…”

“…Store census tracts were classified into low SES or higher SES, regardless of the city in which they were located. Following our prior work [ 23 ], we defined low SES as census tracts with >50% of residents at or below 185% of the U.S. federal poverty level, based on household income and size.…”

“…Implementation of the revised ordinance occurred in April 2015, and as part of the requirements, vendors were required to stock 30 pounds or 50 items of fresh and/or frozen fruits/vegetables in at least seven varieties, with five or more varieties being fresh. Our prior studies examining the ordinance effect demonstrated that small food stores had varying degrees of increasing compliance and customers showed no clear improvements in purchasing healthier products [ 9 , 23 ]. However, we know little about the ordinance’s effect on manager-perceived sales during this time, especially among specific products, like fresh fruits and vegetables, which are notoriously challenging to stock [ 13 , 14 , 17 ].…”

Urban vs. Rural Socioeconomic Differences in the Nutritional Quality of Household Packaged Food Purchases by Store Type

“…Store stocking requirements [ 51 ] are a potential policy lever to increase the ratio of healthful to unhealthful foods (e.g., eligibility criteria for stores to accept SNAP or local ordinances). However, a recent evaluation of the Minneapolis Staple Food Ordinance found that corporate-owned stores made greater gains in complying with healthy stocking requirements compared to independently owned stores [ 52 ]. Therefore, such requirements should be coupled with financing initiatives [ 53 , 54 ] to help independently owned stores stock healthy foods (e.g., refrigerated storage) and community engagement to increase demand for healthy foods to support the commercial viability of such efforts [ 55 ].…”

A Model Depicting the Retail Food Environment and Customer Interactions: Components, Outcomes, and Future Directions

“…In other cases, ownership at sources, such as grocery stores and supermarkets, remains relatively diverse; though, these also show growing declines in the presence (number and market share) of independent ownership [ 60 ]. With these shifts in centralizing ownership to fewer hands, much remains to be investigated and understood about how these different ownership types and business models contribute to the RFE [ 63 , 64 ].…”