Household Food Security in the United States in 2016
01 Sep 2017-Research Papers in Economics (United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service)-
TL;DR: An estimated 87.7 percent of American households were food secure throughout the entire year in 2016, meaning they had access at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members.
Abstract: An estimated 87.7 percent of American households were food secure throughout the entire year in 2016, meaning they had access at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members. The remaining households (12.3 percent) were food insecure at least some time during the year, including 4.9 percent with very low food security, meaning that at times the food intake of one or more household members was reduced and their eating patterns were disrupted because the household lacked money and other resources for obtaining food. Changes from 2015 to 2016 in food insecurity overall (from 12.7 to 12.3 percent) and in very low food security (from 5.0 to 4.9 percent) were not statistically significant, but they continued a downward trend in food insecurity from a high of 14.9 percent in 2011. Among children, changes from 2015 in food insecurity and very low food security were also not statistically significant. Children and adults were food insecure in 8.0 percent of households with children in 2016, essentially unchanged from 7.8 percent in 2015. Very low food security among children was 0.8 percent in 2016, essentially unchanged from 0.7 percent in 2015. In 2016, the typical food-secure household spent 29 percent more on food than the typical food-insecure household of the same size and household composition. About 59 percent of food-insecure households participated in one or more of the three largest Federal food and nutrition assistance programs during the month prior to the 2016 survey (food stamps (SNAP); Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC); and the National School Lunch Program).
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Approaches that address structural racism and discrimination may have important implications for alleviating racial/ethnic disparities in food insecurity and promoting health equity overall.
Abstract: Food insecurity is defined as "a household-level economic and social condition of limited or uncertain access to adequate food." While, levels of food insecurity in the United States have fluctuated over the past 20 years; disparities in food insecurity rates between people of color and whites have continued to persist. There is growing recognition that discrimination and structural racism are key contributors to disparities in health behaviors and outcomes. Although several promising practices to reduce food insecurity have emerged, approaches that address structural racism and discrimination may have important implications for alleviating racial/ethnic disparities in food insecurity and promoting health equity overall.
199 citations
TL;DR: This work suggests examining the distribution of food insecurity within households, the impact of the food distribution system on food insecurity, the coping mechanisms of low-income food secure families, food insecurity among American Indians, the effects of charitable food assistance, the causal relationship between food insecurity and health outcomes, and the declining age gradient in food security among Seniors.
Abstract: Food insecurity is now recognized as a major health crisis in the United States. This is due to the size of the problem—more than 42 million persons were food insecure in 2015—as well as the multiple negative health outcomes and higher health care costs attributable to food insecurity. An extensive body of literature from multiple fields has examined the causes and consequences of food insecurity and the efficacy of food assistance programs—especially the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. We review this literature and provide suggestions for future research directions. We suggest examining the distribution of food insecurity within households, the impact of the food distribution system on food insecurity, the coping mechanisms of low-income food secure families, food insecurity among American Indians, the effects of charitable food assistance, the causal relationship between food insecurity and health outcomes, the declining age gradient in food insecurity among Seniors, the effects of labor force participation and the Great Recession on food insecurity, and the long-term consequences of food insecurity. In addition, the impact of two recent policy recommendations on food insecurity – the minimum wage and the Affordable Care – Act should be considered.
175 citations
TL;DR: An estimated 88.2 percent of U.S. households were food secure throughout the entire year in 2017, meaning they had access at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members.
Abstract: An estimated 88.2 percent of U.S. households were food secure throughout the entire year in 2017, meaning they had access at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members. The remaining households (11.8 percent) were food insecure at least some time during the year, including 4.5 percent with very low food security, meaning that at times the food intake of one or more household members was reduced and their eating patterns were disrupted because the household lacked money and other resources for obtaining food. Declines from 2016 in food insecurity overall and in very low food security were statistically significant. The rate of food insecurity declined from 12.3 percent in 2016, and very low food security declined from 4.9 percent, continuing downward trends. Among children, changes from 2016 in food insecurity and very low food security were not statistically significant. Children and adults were food insecure in 7.7 percent of U.S. households with children in 2017, versus 8.0 percent in 2016. Very low food security among children was 0.7 percent in 2017, essentially unchanged from 2016. In 2017, the typical food-secure household spent 23 percent more on food than the typical food-insecure household of the same size and household composition. About 58 percent of food-insecure households participated in one or more of the three largest Federal food and nutrition assistance programs (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps); Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC); and the National School Lunch Program) during the month prior to the 2017 survey.
153 citations
Cites background or methods from "Household Food Security in the Unit..."
...Median household food spending relative to the cost of the TFP—which adjusts for food price inflation and adjusts more precisely for the food needs of persons in different age-gender categories—was 1.24, essentially unchanged from 1.22 in 2016 (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2017)....
[...]
...19Estimates of food insecurity and very low food security for 2016 were published in Household Food Security in the United States in 2016 (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2017)....
[...]
...Changes in food spending from 2016 described in the text are based on comparable estimates of 2016 categorical food-spending data published in Coleman-Jensen et al. (2017)....
[...]
TL;DR: Food security interventions and administrative policy should consider a new model of the traditional campus food pantry that reduces concerns of social stigma and is supported by clear and ongoing communications of operational procedures tailored for the college student population.
Abstract: Background: The number of food pantries on U.S. college campuses has increased in response to students’ food insecurity, but limited information is available to describe the impact of this resource. The objective of this cross-sectional investigation was to examine the relationship between food insecurity and food pantry awareness, use, and perceived barriers to use. Methods: Students attending the University of Florida in fall 2017 (n = 899) completed the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Adult Food Security Survey and responded to questions about food pantry awareness and use. Sociodemographic data were also collected and included in multivariate logistic regression models. Results: While most students (70%) were aware of the existing food pantry, nearly a third of respondents were classified as being food insecure. After adjusting for sociodemographic correlates, factors such as identifying as being food insecure, international status, and receiving a student loan or a need-based federal financial aid (Pell grant) increased the likelihood of utilizing the campus food pantry. Despite these predictors, only 38% of food insecure students reported food pantry use. Among students who provided qualitative insights, four main barriers to using the on-campus food pantry were identified: social stigma, insufficient information on pantry use policies, self-identity, and inconvenient hours. Conclusions: Food security interventions and administrative policy should consider a new model of the traditional campus food pantry that reduces concerns of social stigma and is supported by clear and ongoing communications of operational procedures tailored for the college student population.
113 citations
27 Mar 2018
TL;DR: Evidence on interventions intended to reduce household food insecurity in high-income countries suggests solutions likely lie upstream in social protection policies, but evidence also suggests they may be limited in effectiveness if they do not reach people experiencing food insecurity.
Abstract: Household food insecurity is a serious public health concern in high-income countries. Canada and the USA regularly monitor household food insecurity, while in other countries, such as the UK, it has been the rapid rise of food bank usage that has drawn increased attention to this longstanding, but largely overlooked, problem. This review evaluates evidence on interventions intended to reduce household food insecurity in high-income countries. Research on social protection interventions suggests both cash transfers and food subsidies (e.g. the US Supplement Nutrition and Assistance Programme) reduce household food insecurity. In contrast, research on community-level interventions, such as food banks and other food programmes, suggests limited impacts. Although food banks have become a common intervention for food insecurity in high-income countries, evidence suggests their reliance on donations of volunteer time and food make them inevitably limited in the assistance they are able to provide. The stigma people feel using food banks may also make them untenable. Alternatives to, or enhanced, food banks such as community shops or community kitchens, have become common, but evidence also suggests they may be limited in effectiveness if they do not reach people experiencing food insecurity. This review highlights the difficulty of trying to address household food insecurity with community-based food interventions when solutions likely lie upstream in social protection policies.
111 citations
Cites background from "Household Food Security in the Unit..."
...Based on a threshold of three or more items affirmed on the HFSSM, over 12 % of households in the USA are food insecure((13))....
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: The Expert Panel recognized that they could not provide a comprehensive design for the evaluation of nutritional status for all difficult-to-sample populations that would be appropriate for all public health and policy purposes and concentrated their discussions on enumeration of the various issues that must be considered in planning any effort to evaluate the nutritional concerns for such populations.
Abstract: The report provides an introduction to the concept of nutritional state and the components that must be considered in identifying core indicators for its assessment in difficult-to-sample populations. These components include food security, nutritional concerns, survey coverage, and sampling concerns. Core indicators of nutritional state are suggested in the context of the purposes for which the data are to be used
1,149 citations
"Household Food Security in the Unit..." refers background in this paper
...In concept, “food secure” means that all household members had access at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life (Anderson, 1990)....
[...]
...In concept, “food secure” means that all household members had access at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life (Anderson, 1990).9 The remaining 12.3 percent (15.6 million households) were food insecure at some time during the year....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the extent of under-reporting for ten transfer programs in five major nationally representative surveys by comparing reported weighted totals for these programs with totals obtained from government agencies was investigated.
Abstract: High rates of understatement are found for many government transfer programs and in many datasets. This understatement has major implications for our understanding of economic well-being and the effects of transfer programs. We provide estimates of the extent of under-reporting for ten transfer programs in five major nationally representative surveys by comparing reported weighted totals for these programs with totals obtained from government agencies. We also examine imputation procedures and rates. We find increasing under-reporting and imputation over time and sharp differences across programs and surveys. We explore reasons for under-reporting and how under-reporting biases existing studies and suggest corrections.
374 citations
"Household Food Security in the Unit..." refers background in this paper
...19Prevalence rates for 1996-98 reported in Prevalence of Food Insecurity and Hunger, by State, 1996-1998 (Nord et al., 1999) are not directly comparable with the rates reported here because of differences in screening procedures in the CPS Food Security Supplements from 1995 to 1998....
[...]
...About 7.7 percent of households interviewed in the CPS food security survey did not respond to the food-spending questions or reported zero usual food spending and were excluded from the analysis....
[...]
...The food security status of each interviewed household is determined by the number of food-insecure conditions and behaviors the household 2In 2016, 22.3 percent of households that responded to the monthly December CPS did not complete the Food Security Supplement....
[...]
...For years before 2011, standard errors of national estimates use a design factor of 1.6 based on the complex CPS sample design....
[...]
...Source: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 2014, 2015, and 2016 Current Population Survey (CPS) Food Security Supplements....
[...]
TL;DR: This paper measures the effectiveness of SNAP in reducing food insecurity using an instrumental variables approach to control for selection and suggests that receipt of SNAP benefits reduces the likelihood of being food insecure by roughly 30% and reduces thelihood of being very food insecurity by 20%.
Abstract: Nearly 15% of all U.S. households and 40% of near-poor households were food insecure in 2009. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the cornerstone of federal food assistance programs and serves as the first line of defense against food-related hardship. This paper measures the effectiveness of SNAP in reducing food insecurity using an instrumental variables approach to control for selection. Our results suggest that receipt of SNAP benefits reduces the likelihood of being food insecure by roughly 30% and reduces the likelihood of being very food insecure by 20%.
354 citations
TL;DR: A comprehensive benchmark measure of the severity and prevalence of food insecurity and hunger in the United States is developed and is being used by researchers throughout the U.S. and Canada.
Abstract: Since 1992, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) has led a collaborative effort to develop a comprehensive benchmark measure of the severity and prevalence of food insecurity and hunger in the United States. Based on prior research and wide consultation, a survey instrument specifically relevant to U.S. conditions was designed and tested. Through its Current Population Survey (CPS), the U.S. Bureau of the Census has fielded this instrument each year since 1995. A measurement scale was derived from the data through fitting, testing and validating a Rasch scale. The unidimensional Rasch model corresponds to the form of the phenomenon being measured, i.e., the severity of food insufficiency due to inadequate resources as directly experienced and reported in U.S. households. A categorical measure reflecting designated ranges of severity on the scale was constructed for consistent comparison of prevalence estimates over time and across population groups. The technical basis and initial results of the new measure were reported in September 1997. For the 12 months ending April 1995, an estimated 11.9% of U.S. households (35 million persons) were food insecure. Among these, 4.1% of households (with 6.9 million adults and 4.3 million children) showed a recurring pattern of hunger due to inadequate resources for one or more of their adult and/or child members sometime during the period. The new measure has been incorporated into other federal surveys and is being used by researchers throughout the U.S. and Canada.
344 citations
"Household Food Security in the Unit..." refers methods in this paper
...4The methods used to measure the extent and severity of food insecurity have been described in a number of studies (Hamilton et al., 1997a, 1997b; Andrews et al., 1998; Bickel et al., 1998; Carlson et al., 1999; Bickel et al., 2000; Nord and Bickel, 2002)....
[...]
TL;DR: The authors showed that food stamp recipients have the same probability of food insufficiency as non-recipients, even after controlling for other factors, and established a theoretical framework to address this adverse selection.
Abstract: Food stamp participants have higher food insufficiency rates than eligible nonparticipants, even after controlling for other factors. Given the Food Stamp Program's prominent role in the alleviation of hunger, this is a counterintuitive result. We conjecture that these higher rates are due to adverse selection insofar as households more likely to be food insufficient are also more likely to receive food stamps. We establish a theoretical framework to address this adverse selection. Using a simultaneous equation model with two probits, we show that once one controls for this adverse selection, food stamp recipients have the same probability of food insufficiency as nonrecipients. Copyright 2001, Oxford University Press.
321 citations