Understanding the Experiences of Low-Income Individuals Receiving Farmers’ Market Incentives in the United States: A Qualitative Study

Roskos, Mateja R. Savoie; Wengreen, Heidi J.; Gast, Julie; LeBlanc, Heidi; Durward, Carrie

doi:10.1177/1524839917715438

Cited by 36 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The program examined by Olsho et al [34], was structured similarly, in that some participants received the incentive through a match after they made a purchase, while others received the incentive from community-based organizations absent of any purchase, usually after they attended a nutrition workshop or other health and fitness program. Similarly, two incentive distribution methods were employed in the program examined by Savoie-Roskos et al [39]; participants received either "regular incentives", which were distributed at regular intervals without any purchase requirement, or matched incentives. Bowling et al [27] employed both POS incentives and tokens; all SNAP recipients shopping at participating markets received a matched incentive when they used their EBT card at these markets, which could not be saved for future use, but at every third market, participants also received $20 in "Bonus Buck" tokens.…”

Section: Delivery and Timing Of Incentive Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some programs implemented multiple forms of incentives. For example, Savoie-Roskos et al [39] provided one group of participants with incentive benefits that did not require them to make a purchase and another group with benefits, in the form of spending matches, that augmented the incentive. A comparison of the outcomes between the groups was not reported.…”

Section: Financial Value Of Incentive To Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The foods that were eligible for purchase using incentive benefits also differed. While some of the programs provided benefits that could be utilized to purchase only FV, others were triggered by an FV purchase, but provided benefits redeemable for a diverse range of foods, such as any SNAP-eligible food [7,36,39]. A drawback of awarding incentives that can be used for any SNAP-eligible food is the possibility that incentive benefits are used to purchase foods with low nutrient density.…”

Section: Eligible Foodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fruit and Vegetable Incentive Programs for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participants: A Scoping Review of Program Structure

Engel

Ruder

2020

Nutrients

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The low intake of fruits/vegetables (FV) by Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants is a persistent public health challenge. Fruit and vegetable incentive programs use inducements to encourage FV purchases. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify structural factors in FV incentive programs that may impact program effectiveness, including (i.) differences in recruitment/eligibility, (ii.) incentive delivery and timing, (iii.) incentive value, (iv.) eligible foods, and (v.) retail venue. Additionally, the FV incentive program impact on FV purchase and/or consumption is summarized. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for scoping reviews, a search of four bibliographic databases resulted in the identification of 45 publications for consideration; 19 of which met the pre-determined inclusion criteria for full-length publications employing a quasi-experimental design and focused on verified, current SNAP participants. The data capturing study objective, study design, sample size, incentive program structure characteristics (participant eligibility and recruitment, delivery and timing of incentive, foods eligible for incentive redemption, type of retail venue), and study outcomes related to FV purchases/consumption were entered in a standardized chart. Eleven of the 19 studies had enrollment processes to receive the incentive, and most studies (17/19) provided the incentive in the form of a token, coupon, or voucher. The value of the incentives varied, but was usually offered as a match. Incentives were typically redeemable only for FV, although three studies required an FV purchase to trigger the delivery of an incentive for any SNAP-eligible food. Finally, most studies (16/19) were conducted at farmers’ markets. Eighteen of the 19 studies reported a positive impact on participant purchase and/or consumption of FV. Overall, this scoping review provides insights intended to inform the design, implementation, and evaluation of future FV incentive programs targeting SNAP participants; and demonstrates the potential effectiveness of FV incentive programs for increasing FV purchase and consumption among vulnerable populations.

show abstract

Section: Delivery and Timing Of Incentive Benefitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Financial Value Of Incentive To Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Eligible Foodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fruit and Vegetable Incentive Programs for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participants: A Scoping Review of Program Structure

Engel

Ruder

2020

Nutrients

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even though the CSA model is the most common in our sample, it only appears in 15% of the papers. Farmers' markets, which are one of the most widespread, promoted and funded forms of AFNs [57][58][59], are included in only 13.7% of the papers.…”

Section: Rq2 What Types Of Afns Have Been Studied In Relation To Susmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability in Alternative Food Networks: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to individuals’ organizing themselves and managing food systems in an ‘alternative’ and more sustainable way. Such emerging food initiatives are most commonly known as ‘Alternative Food Networks’ (AFNs). However, there is an ongoing debate concerning the extent to which AFNs facilitate social, economic and environmental change. There are criticisms of the overall sustainability promise of AFNs related to sufficiency of impact, possible counter effects and the relevance of impacts. Because empirical studies often only focus on specific sustainability issues or AFNs, it has been difficult to develop more robust theories about the relations between diverse AFNs arrangements and sustainability. Thus, the aim of this paper is to contribute towards reducing this knowledge gap through a systematic literature review on AFNs in relation to sustainability. We summarize main methodological approaches, the types of AFNs studied and sustainability dimensions addressed in literature to date. Findings serve as reference to propose opportunities for future research regarding sustainability in AFNs.

show abstract

“…Previous research on matching programs has primarily focused on customer impacts and perspectives. Studies have found positive impacts on participating customers, including increased food security, FM use, and fruit and vegetable consumption (Pellegrino et al, 2018;Savoie Roskos, Wengreen, Gast, LeBlanc, & Durward, 2017;Young et al, 2013). While some research has explored the economic benefits to vendors, including an increase in sales and new customers (Lehnerd, Sacheck, Griffin, Goldberg, & Cash, 2018;Mann et al, 2018;Oberholtzer, Dimitri, & Schumacher, 2012), few studies to date have examined vendor perspectives on participation in matching programs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of a Farmers Market Incentive Program in Maryland: Perspectives from Vendors

Misiaszek

Hecht

Headrick

et al. 2020

J. Agric. Food Syst. Community Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of farmers markets have begun to offer matching incentive programs as a way to increase access to fresh foods for low-income families and increase sales among vendors. However, research evaluating the implementation of these programs is limited. This process evaluation study employed a qualitative approach, interviewing vendors (n=19) selling at four farmers markets in Maryland to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementing the Maryland Market Money program. Overall, vendors reported positive attitudes toward the incentive program. Interviewed vendors identified key facilitators such as ease of implementation and positive social and economic impact of the program for participants and themselves. Vendors also discussed barriers, which included a lack of understanding among customers about how the program operated, poor program promotion, and lack of educational materials. Some vendors described nega-Funding Disclosure This research was supported by funding from the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future and a cooperative agreement between the Maryland Farmers Market Association and the U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service. Training support for AAH was provided by the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future-Lerner Fellowship. The funders had no role in the design, analysis, or writing of this manuscript.

show abstract

Understanding the Experiences of Low-Income Individuals Receiving Farmers’ Market Incentives in the United States: A Qualitative Study

Abstract: The perceived benefits and barriers to shopping at FM and receiving FM incentives should be considered by future programmers and funding agencies.

Cited by 36 publications

References 30 publications

Fruit and Vegetable Incentive Programs for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participants: A Scoping Review of Program Structure

Fruit and Vegetable Incentive Programs for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participants: A Scoping Review of Program Structure

Sustainability in Alternative Food Networks: A Systematic Literature Review

Implementation of a Farmers Market Incentive Program in Maryland: Perspectives from Vendors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About