Frisvold, George B.

English

Research Papers in Economics

The Potential for Mobile Markets to Improve Food Access and Affordability: 
A Market Basket Analysis 
 
 
 
 
 
George B. Frisvold 
Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics 
University of Arizona 
319 Cesar Chavez Building 
Tucson, AZ 85721 
frisvold@ag.arizona.edu 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Poster prepared for presentation at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association 2010 
AAEA,CAES, & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, Denver, Colorado, July 25-27, 2010 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Copyright 2010 by George Frisvold. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of 
this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice 
appears on all such copies. The Potential for Mobile Markets to Improve Food Access The Potential for Mobile Markets to Improve Food Access
and Affordability: A Market Basket Analysis and Affordability: A Market Basket Analysis
George Frisvold George Frisvold
Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics
University of Arizona University of Arizona
What are Mobile Markets?  What are Mobile Markets? 
Discussion Discussion
• • Tucson Community Food Bank operates a Value Food Store Tucson Community Food Bank operates a Value Food Store
(VFS) selling groceries at 30-70% discount (VFS) selling groceries at 30-70% discount
• • Mobile Markets take VFS products to isolated areas of Pima Mobile Markets take VFS products to isolated areas of Pima
County County
• • New Pascua Yaqui Pueblo:  Closest 2 stores 2.7  New Pascua Yaqui Pueblo:  Closest 2 stores 2.7 – – 4.25 miles away  4.25 miles away
• • Old Nogales Highway Colonia: Closest 2 stores 5  Old Nogales Highway Colonia: Closest 2 stores 5 – – 5.6 miles away  5.6 miles away
• • For comparison, 90% of California population within 2 miles of full For comparison, 90% of California population within 2 miles of full
service grocery store service grocery store
• • Mobile markets offered significant  Mobile markets offered significant percent  percent cost reductions cost reductions
• • Items purchased at mobile markets would cost >59% more at Items purchased at mobile markets would cost >59% more at
local stores local stores
• • Mobile market purchases could reduce weekly costs of TFP or Mobile market purchases could reduce weekly costs of TFP or
healthier market basket by >10% healthier market basket by >10%
• • Absolute Absolute cost reduction to community quite small  cost reduction to community quite small
• • Program has small sales volume Program has small sales volume
• • Costs of delivery high relative to local cost savings Costs of delivery high relative to local cost savings
• • Policy Postscript Policy Postscript
• • Tucson Community Food Bank has subsequently moved from Tucson Community Food Bank has subsequently moved from
expanding the number of mobile markets expanding the number of mobile markets
• • Instead, now reducing number of sites Instead, now reducing number of sites
• • Expanding hours and sales volume of existing sites Expanding hours and sales volume of existing sites
• • This should improve cost-effectiveness of overall program This should improve cost-effectiveness of overall program
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
Support for this project was provided by a USDA Food Assistance and Nutrition Support for this project was provided by a USDA Food Assistance and Nutrition
Research Innovation and Development Grants in Economics (RIDGE) grant. Research Innovation and Development Grants in Economics (RIDGE) grant.
Research Questions  Research Questions 
• • How does the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan in the study How does the cost of the Thrifty Food Plan in the study
area compare with the rest of the United States? area compare with the rest of the United States?
• • What is the extra cost of purchasing a healthier market What is the extra cost of purchasing a healthier market
basket? basket?
• • Are healthier items available at stores near the study area? Are healthier items available at stores near the study area?
• • How much could Mobile Market purchases reduce the cost How much could Mobile Market purchases reduce the cost
purchasing the TFP and healthier market baskets? purchasing the TFP and healthier market baskets?
• • How much do Mobile Market customers save on their How much do Mobile Market customers save on their
actual purchases (because purchased items may not actual purchases (because purchased items may not
always match market basket items)? always match market basket items)?
Methods & Data Methods & Data
• • Interviewed mobile market customers about Interviewed mobile market customers about
• • Food shopping behavior Food shopping behavior
• • Self-reported change in behavior Self-reported change in behavior
• • Grocery stores surveyed to construct market baskets Grocery stores surveyed to construct market baskets
• • Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) Thrifty Food Plan (TFP)
• • Healthier Basket based on Jetter & Cassady study Healthier Basket based on Jetter & Cassady study
• • 80% less fat 80% less fat
• • Substantially more fiber Substantially more fiber
• • Mobile market substitution Mobile market substitution
• • Substitute mobile market prices into market baskets Substitute mobile market prices into market baskets
• • Recalculate basket cost and savings from mobile markets Recalculate basket cost and savings from mobile markets
• • Cost savings from actual mobile market (mm) purchases Cost savings from actual mobile market (mm) purchases
• • Begin with actual mm purchases Begin with actual mm purchases
• • Calculate costs of these purchases if made at nearest grocery Calculate costs of these purchases if made at nearest grocery
store store
Result 1  Result 1 – – Healthier basket costs 12% more than TFP  Healthier basket costs 12% more than TFP
12% 14% 10%
Percent
Difference
$13.37 $16.40 $10.33
Cost
Difference
$123.58 $131.58 $115.58
Healthier
Basket
$110.22 $115.18 $105.25 TFP
Both Years 2007 2006
Result 2  Result 2 – – Whole grains, lower fat cheeses & meats  Whole grains, lower fat cheeses & meats
most likely to be missing at local grocery stores most likely to be missing at local grocery stores
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fish, unbreaded frozen filets
Peaches in juice
French bread
Ground beef < 10% fat 
Vegetarian baked beans
Mandarin oranges in juice
Low sodium chicken broth
Yolk free noodles 
Whole wheat flour
Ground turkey
Lean ground turkey
Cheddar cheese, low fat
Hamburger buns, high fiber
Whole wheat spaghetti
Mozzarella cheese, low fat
Whole wheat bagels
8.0% 9.4% 6.1% Healthier
11.2% 12.3% 9.5% TFP
Cost savings with mobile market substitution (%)
$9.56 $12.50 $6.62 Healthier
$11.95 $14.48 $9.42 TFP
Cost savings with mobile market substitution ($)
Baseline cost savings
Both Years 2007 2006
Result 3  Result 3 – – Shopping at mobile markets reduce  Shopping at mobile markets reduce
market basket costs $9-$12 / week (8-11%) market basket costs $9-$12 / week (8-11%)
$0.59 $0.66
Community Cost Reduction per Dollar of Mobile
Market Sales
36% 39% Mobile Market % Discount from Store Cost
159% 166% Store Cost as a % of Mobile Market Cost
$99.01 $54.43 Difference from Mobile Market Cost
$266.71 $137.12 Cost of Items Sold
Higher
Volume
Low
Volume
Result 4  Result 4 – – Mobile market prices substantially less  Mobile market prices substantially less
than at local grocery stores than at local grocery stores
$0.59 $0.66
Community Cost Reduction per Dollar of
Mobile Market Sales
$0.73 $0.40
Community Cost Reduction per Dollar of
Mobile Market Labor Costs
$99.01 $54.43
Total Community Cost Reductions per
Mobile Market Visit
Higher
Volume
Low
Volume
Result 5  Result 5 – – Cost effectiveness hampered by extremely  Cost effectiveness hampered by extremely
small sales volume small sales volume

The Potential for Mobile Markets to Improve Food Access and Affordability: A Market Basket Analysis

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics