Food Environment, Food Deserts, Obesity, Consumer Behavior, Diet, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety, I18, R50,

Ver Ploeg, Michele

English

Research Papers in Economics

  
 
 
3rd Quarter 2010 | 25(3)  
FOOD ENVIRONMENT, FOOD STORE ACCESS, CONSUMER BEHAVIOR, AND 
DIET 
Michele Ver Ploeg  
JEL Classifications: I18, R50 
Some low-income neighborhoods in the United States have been dubbed “food deserts” because there are 
few sources of healthy and affordable foods. Often these neighborhoods are served by convenience stores 
or fast food restaurants but are far from grocery stores that offer a full range of healthy foods. Some residents 
of these neighborhoods that lack transportation or have low incomes may be more reliant on smaller 
neighborhood stores that do not carry a full range of groceries and may not offer them at the most 
competitive prices. Some concerned groups have argued that the lack of healthy options leads to poor diets 
and to diet-related conditions such as obesity. 
Concern over food deserts and the food environment in general has led some states and cities to enact 
programs that increase access to healthy foods. For example, Pennsylvania and New York City provide 
public and private funding to encourage supermarkets and other healthy food retailers to open in 
underserved areas. One of the four pillars of the First Lady’s Obesity Initiative, Let’s Move, is to increase 
access to affordable and healthy food, and President Obama’s proposed FY2011 budget calls for $400 
million to encourage the development of healthy food options in underserved neighborhoods (White House 
Task Force on Childhood Obesity, 2010). 
The extent to which such policies are needed and their potential success, however, depends on how many 
people are impacted by limited access to affordable and healthy food, how consumers are affected by limited 
access and the food environment, and how they cope with food access limitations. 
A Small Share of People Live in Food Deserts 
There is no single method for measuring and defining food deserts and food access, especially in a country 
as large and geographically diverse as the United States. A number of different studies using many different 
methods have examined food deserts in local areas. A national-level U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
study of the extent of the population with limited access to food used the availability of supermarkets and 
large grocery stores—including discount and supercenter stores—as a proxy for the availability of affordable, 
nutritious food (USDA, 2009). A directory of supermarkets and large grocery stores throughout the 
continental U.S. was used to examine distance to the nearest supermarket or large grocery store for 
vulnerable populations—low-income, elderly, and households without access to a personal vehicle. 
This USDA study found that about 23.5 million people, or 8.4% of the U.S. population, live in low-income 
neighborhoods that are more than a mile from a supermarket (USDA, 2009). Low-income neighborhoods are 
areas where more than 40% of the population has income less than or equal to 200% of Federal poverty 
thresholds, which was $44,000 per year for a family of four in 2008. Not all of those living in low-income 
neighborhoods are poor and so are less affected by lack of access. If only those with income below 200% of 
poverty are considered, then 11.5 million or 4.1% of Americans have low incomes and live in low-income 
neighborhoods that are more than a mile from a supermarket.  
Vehicle ownership is another indicator of whether someone who lives far from a grocery store lacks access to 
healthy food. About 2.3 million households, or 2.2%, live more than a mile from a supermarket and do not 
have access to a vehicle (USDA, 2009). For these households, lack of transportation poses a barrier to 
accessing affordable and nutritious food. 
Healthier Food Environments, Healthier Diets, and Thin Causal Evidence 
Many factors contribute to an individual’s body weight and overall dietary health. These include individual 
factors, such as demographic characteristics, socioeconomic status, education, and preferences for food. 
Environmental factors can also impact body weight and dietary health. Such factors can include access to 
stores and restaurants, parks and recreation facilities, sidewalks, and the availability of public transportation, 
and social environmental factors like crime, neighborhood cohesion, and the social and cultural norms 
around food. Research has shown that individual factors can explain some differences in who becomes 
obese or who acquires diabetes, but alone, they cannot account for all the differences in rates of these 
diseases. The food environment and food store access may help explain differences in diet and health 
outcomes (Diez-Roux, 2009). 
A number of studies have examined the relationship between food access, dietary intake, and obesity. 
Although results are not universal, most find that better access to supermarkets is associated with healthier 
diets and reduced risk of obesity, while greater access to convenience stores is associated with increased 
risk of obesity (Larson, Storey, and Nelson, 2009). In contrast, the relationship between fast food restaurant 
access and diet and obesity is not as consistent in the literature. 
The National Food Stamp Program Survey (NFSPS) has been used to understand how store access was 
related to food spending—particularly on fruits and vegetables. Rose and Richards (2004) found that those 
with limited access spent less on fruits than those with better access. USDA (2009) found that those with 
limited access spent less on noncanned fruits, non-canned vegetables, and milk than those with better 
access. 
These studies suggest a correlation between store access and diet-related outcomes, but none of these 
studies uses methods that can determine whether store access causes differences in diet or obesity. Only a 
few studies have used methods that can help assess causal relationships— and their evidence is mixed. Two 
studies used longitudinal data and a pre-post intervention design to measure how changes in access affect 
shopping behavior and dietary intake when supermarkets opened in underserved areas in Leeds and 
Glasgow, UK (Wrigley, Warm, and Margetts, 2003; Cummins et al. 2005). Both found that many sampled 
individuals from the neighborhood switched their shopping to the new store. Consumption of fruits and 
vegetables increased modestly in one study—just over one-third of a serving, but did not increase in the 
other study. Chen et al. (2010) use spatial econometrics to account for how residential choice and social 
networks influence diet. Accounting for these factors, this study found that proximity to fast food restaurants 
slightly increases body mass index (BMI), while proximity to grocery stores slightly decreases BMI. The sizes 
of the total effects were less than half a BMI point but were larger for people who lived very close to a store 
or restaurant. 
Low-Income Consumers Shop for the Lowest Prices 
Improved access to sources of healthy foods may have a small impact on diet because those who live in food 
deserts cope by shopping at supermarkets outside their neighborhoods. As a result, their diets may not 
change much if a new supermarket opens closer to them. Research on the food-shopping behavior of 
participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—shows that almost 90% of SNAP 
benefits are redeemed at supermarkets or large grocery stores (USDA, 2009). Further, while SNAP 
participants on average lived 1.8 miles from the nearest supermarket, they traveled an average of 4.9 miles 
to get to the store they most often used to buy groceries (Ohls et al. 1999). Shopping further from home 
means greater travel and time costs as has been estimated by other studies (Rose et al. 2009; USDA 2009). 
On the other hand, lower prices at supermarkets and supercenters may offset these travel and time costs. 
 The 2009 USDA study also examined prices consumers paid at four different store formats—grocery, 
convenience, discount/supercenters, and “other”—for three frequently purchased foods—milk, ready-to-eat 
cereal, and bread. Data on food purchases of approximately 40,000 representative U.S. households were 
used and characteristics of the foods, such as fat content of milk or product size, were controlled. Results 
show that convenience store prices were higher than prices at grocery stores—milk prices were 5% higher; 
cereal, 25% higher; and bread, 10% more. However, food purchases at convenience stores make up just 2% 
to 3% of total food expenditures for low-income consumers who, along with middle-income consumers, are 
more likely than higher income consumers to purchase food at supercenters, where prices are lower (Broda, 
Leibtag, and Weinstein, 2009). 
Broda, Leibtag, and Weinstein (2009) used the same household-level purchase data to analyze differences 
in prices paid for the same food items by consumers with different income levels. The analysis shows that 
many low-income consumers can find lower prices, but not all. Consumers with annual incomes between 
$8,000 and $30,000 paid the least of all income groups for the same food items. More worrisome, however, 
is that households with annual incomes less than $8,000 paid slightly more—between 0.5 to 1.3%—for the 
same foods compared with those with incomes between $8,000 and $30,000. Households with annual 
incomes over $100,000 paid the most for the same food items—between 2% to 3% more than poorer 
households. Presumably this is because they are less likely to shop at supercenters than low- and middle-
income consumers, do not buy sale items as often as lower-income consumers, and are less willing to incur 
the time costs of shopping for the lowest prices. 
Supply or Demand Factors and Access to Healthy Food 
Economic theory suggests that either supply factors or demand factors or both could cause variation in what 
and where food stores are available. A neighborhood could lack a supermarket or large grocery store 
because the costs food retailers face when building and/or operating a store in those locations are higher. 
Zoning rules, such as the amount of parking required for new businesses, employee training, and security 
costs have also been cited as reasons for few stores in underserved, poor communities (Food Marketing 
Institute, 1998; The Reinvestment Fund, 2008). Consumers’ demographic and economic characteristics, 
buying habits, and tastes could also explain why stores do not locate in some areas or carry particular foods. 
More densely populated neighborhoods and those with growing populations are often able to support more 
stores. As a result, some less densely populated rural areas, or urban areas with diminishing populations, 
have fewer supermarkets. Food expenditures increase as income rises, which may explain why higher-
income neighborhoods have more supermarkets than some lower income neighborhoods. 
Many communities are developing policies to encourage stores to locate in underserved areas or to help 
existing stores offer more healthy options. The Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative is a public-
private partnership that has used state and Federal funding, along with private funding, to provide grants and 
loans to develop new stores or refurbish existing stores in underserved markets. This program is the model 
of the proposed Federal Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI). In other efforts, communities have modified 
existing corner stores by upgrading coolers; increasing the availability of fruits and vegetables, low-fat milk 
options, and whole grain foods; or changing the physical layout of the store. Baltimore City created a grocery 
delivery system to increase access to healthy foods. Grocery ordering, delivery and pick-up, including 
redemption of SNAP benefits, are available in public libraries in lower-income Baltimore neighborhoods with 
few sources of healthy food (Schleter, 2010). 
There is very little research on the effectiveness of these different private and public policies to improve 
healthy food spending, diet, and health outcomes. Most policies to reduce the impact of food access 
limitations have focused on increasing or improving the supply of healthy foods. This could be an important 
investment in underserved areas for economic, social, and cultural reasons, and it may make it easier for 
residents of the area to access healthy food. But it is unlikely that these policies will make much of a dent in 
improving diets, reducing obesity, and improving dietary health unless consumers change their eating habits. 
Almost two-thirds of Americans are overweight, but national estimates presented here indicate that only 2% 
to 8% of Americans have limited access to healthy food. Even though most Americans have fabulous access 
to healthy foods, on average, they eat only about half the recommended daily levels of fruits and vegetables 
(Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, 2010). Even if supermarkets are accessible to all, it is 
not clear consumers will significantly improve their diets by shopping at them—supermarkets carry all the 
unhealthy foods that small corner stores do and usually offer them at lower prices. 
It may be that for too many Americans, healthier foods are not the easiest choices to make. Less healthy foods could be relatively easier—and for many, tastier—to choose because they are easily accessible and 
because healthier foods, particularly fruits and vegetables and home cooked meals can take more time to 
plan and prepare. Unhealthy foods may “swamp” healthy foods in many areas (Rose et al. 2009), but 
perhaps particularly in areas that are food deserts. In addressing limited access to healthy foods and 
improving diets in general, it may be more important to encourage greater demand for healthy foods in a way 
that discourages demand for less healthy food. 
For More Information 
Broda, C., Leibtag, E., and Weinstein, D.E. (2009, Spring). The role of prices in measuring the poor’s living 
standard. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(2), 77-97. 
Chen, S.E., Florax, R.J.G.M., Snyder, S., and Miller, C.C. (2010). Obesity, and access to chain grocers. 
Economic Geography. Early View Article. Available online: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1944-
8287.2010.01090.x/abstract. 
Cummins S., Findlay, A., Petticrew, M., and Sparks, L. (2005). Healthy cities: The impact of food retail-led 
regeneration on food access, choice and retail structure. Built Environment, 31(4), 288-301. 
Diez-Roux A. (2009, January 26). The local food environment and health: Where are we and where do we go 
next? Presented at the IOM/NRC Workshop on the Public Health Effects of Food Deserts, Washington, D.C. 
Food Marketing Institute. (1998). Urban Supermarkets. Washington, D.C: Food Marketing Institute. 
Larson, N.I., Story, M.T., and Nelson, M.C. (2009). Neighborhood environments: Disparities in access to 
healthy foods in the U.S. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 36(1), 74-81. 
Ohls, J.C., Ponza, M., Moreno, L., Zambrowski, A., and Cohen, A. (1999). Food stamp participants’ access to 
food retailers. Report submitted to U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, by 
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. 
The Reinvestment Fund. (2008). CDFI financing of supermarkets in underserved communities: A case study. 
Supported by the CDFI Fund. Available online: 
http://www.trfund.com/resource/downloads/policypubs/TRF_CDFI_SupermarketStudy.pdf. 
Report of the dietary guidelines advisory committee on the dietary guidelines for Americans. (2010). 
Available online: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-DGACReport.htm. 
Rose, D., Bodor, J.N., Swalm, C.M., Rice, J.C., Farley, T.A., Hutchinson, P.L. (2009). Deserts in New 
Orleans? Illustrations of urban food access and implications for policy. National Poverty Center Working 
Paper: Available online: http://www.npc.umich.edu/news/events/food-access/index.php. 
Rose, D., and Richards, R. (2004). Food store access and household fruit and vegetable use among 
participants in the U.S. Food Stamp Program. Public Health Nutrition, 7(8), 1081-1088. 
Schleter, B. (2010, March 17). Virtual supermarket program provides food access to underserved 
communities. Health Department, City of Baltimore. Available online: 
http://www.baltimorehealth.org/press/2010_03_17_VS_PR.pdf. 
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2009, June). Access to affordable and nutritious food: Measuring and 
understanding food deserts and their consequences. Report to Congress. Administrative Publication No (AP-
036), Available online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/AP/AP036/. 
White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity. (2010). Solving the problem of childhood obesity within a 
generation. http://www.letsmove.gov/obesitytaskforce.php. Wrigley, N., Warm, D. and Margetts, B. (2003). Deprivation, diet, and food-retail access: Findings from the 
Leeds ‘Food Deserts’ study. Environment and Planning, A35, 151-188. 
Michele Ver Ploeg (sverploeg@ers.usda.gov) is an economist at the Economic Research Service, U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, Washington D.C. The views expressed here are those of the author and may not 
be attributed to the Economic Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 
This article was drawn from a 2009 USDA report to Congress entitled Access to Affordable and Nutritious 
Food: Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their Consequences. The author would like to thank 
the team of researchers at the Economic Research Service of USDA for their work on the Congressionally 
mandated report. The author is also grateful for the comments of two anonymous reviewers. 
 © 1999-2010 Choices. All rights reserved. Articles may be reproduced or electronically distributed as long as 
attribution to Choices and the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association is maintained.  
 
 

Food Environment, Food Store Access, Consumer Behavior, and Diet

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics