research
Linkages Between Greater Fruit and Vegetable Consumption and Agriculture
- Publication date
- Publisher
Abstract
This study will estimate the benefits to fruit and vegetable industries and consumers should people in the U.S. meet the USDA minimum dietary guidelines. Specifically the objectives of the study are to 1) estimate the benefits to fruit and vegetable industries and consumers should people eat the general and subgroup 7-a-day and 9-a-day recommendation; 2) estimate the benefits should smaller increases of only 10 percent or 25 percent be achieved; and 3) determine how agricultural inputs, including land and labor, would be affected by the increase in demand for fruits and vegetables. To protect against the incidence of chronic diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer the 2005 USDA dietary guidelines recommend the consumption of 3 to 4 fruit servings and 4 to 5 vegetable servings a day. They also provide recommendations on the composition of fruit and vegetable consumption as well as the level. For example, almost one serving of dark leafy vegetables is recommended per day. Depite the known health benefits, many people do not eat the amounts recommended in the USDA dietary guidelines and low income consumers (those whose median household income is less than 25,000ayear)eatfewerservings.BasedontheNHANES4(Nationalhealthandnutritionexaminationsurvey)andNHANES5,averageconsumptionoffruitbylow−incomeconsumerswouldneedtoincreasebyatleast83percentatmeetthe3adayrecommendationand39percentinordertomeetthe4adayrecommendation.Peopleinhigher−incomehouseholdsonlyneedtoincreaseconsumptionbyonly60percentforfruitand30percentforvegetables.Theproportionalincreasesinconsumptionassumethatpeoplenolongereatpotatochipsorfrenchfriesinordertomeetdietaryguidelinesonfatconsumption.Ashiftinconsumptionpatternstotherecommendedlevelswouldcausethedemandforfruitsandvegetablestorisesignificantly,leadingtohigherpricesandincreasedproduction,shiftingtheuseofagriculturalresources(suchasland,labor,andwater)intotheproductionofthosecommodities,andbenefitingtheentireagriculturalsector.Despitethepotentialgainstoagriculture,thesevalueshavebeenignoredinpreviousstudiesofimprovednutrientintake.Suchabenefittoproducersmightjustifyadditionalpublicsectorinvestmentinpromotinghealthierdiets.Thechangesinprices,agriculturalproduction,agriculturalinputusage,andtradewillbesimulatedusinganequilibriumdisplacementmodel.Thedualapproachusedinthisanalysislaysoutbasicdemandandsupplyequationsfromdemandandcostfunctionstoshowhowequilibriumconditionschangeinresponsetoshocks,suchasanincreaseinthedemandforfruitsandvegetables.Thefunctionscharacterizethefinalmarket,allowforsubstitutabilitybetweenmarketingandnon−marketinginputsinthemarketingsector,includesthefarmsector,andchangesininputuseresultingfromchangesincropmixandsubstitutabilityinland,laborandotherinputs.Equilibriumdisplacementmodelshavebeenwidelyusedtoestimatethebenefitsofagriculturalresearchagriculturalpoliciesandthebenefitstothedairyindustryofasocialmarketingprogramtomiddleschoolchildren.Themodelisparameterizedwithfarm,marketandconsumptiondata.TheincreaseinfruitandvegetableconsumptionismodeledasashiftinthedemandcurvewiththeshiftequaltothepercentageincreaseneededtomeettheUSDAdietaryguidelines.Producersurplusisestimatedfromthechangesingrowerpricesandagriculturalproduction,lesschangesinthecostofinputs.Consumersurplusforpeoplelivinginlow−incomehouseholds(lessthan25,000 a year median income) and higher income households is estimated from the changes in retail prices and final market quantities consumed by each income group.Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,