TUGAS TRANSLATE JURNAL
THE EFFECT OF THE FOOD STAMP
PROGRAM ON NUTRIENT INTAKE
J.S. Butler and Jennie E. Raymond
Economic Inquiry. 34.4 (Oct. 1996): p781+. From Gale Business and Economics Collection 2019. Copyright: COPYRIGHT 1996 Western Economic Association International
http://www.weainternational.org/journals.htm
PENGARUH PROGRAM KUPON MAKANAN
PADA ASUPAN NUTRISI
Penerjemah:
SAWITRI SUKILAH
PROGRAM SARJANA ILMU GIZI
FAKULTAS ILMU KEPERAWATAN DAN KESEHATAN
UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SEMARANG
1
HASIL TRANSLATE Judul:
Pengaruh program kupon makanan pada asupan nutrisi.
Abstrak :
Penerimaan kupon makanan sering diamati berkorelasi positif dengan
asupan nutrisi. Namun, fakta yang diamati ini bisa menjadi hasil seleksi sendiri ke
dalam program kupon makanan oleh individu-individu yang lebih tertarik dalam
menjaga nutrisi yang baik. Kami mengamati bahwa, mengendalikan partisipasi
dalam program kupon makanan, nutrisi dipengaruhi secara negatif oleh pendapatan
kupon makanan untuk sampel orang tua. Namun, kami menemukan bahwa kadar
nutrisi tidak cukup berkurang untuk menyebabkan individu jatuh di bawah
Recommended Dietary Allowance.
Naskah Lengkap: I. PENDAHULUAN
Salah satu tujuan Program Pangan Makanan, sebagaimana dinyatakan
dalam pembukaan undang-undang, adalah untuk memastikan bahwa rumah tangga
berpenghasilan rendah memiliki kesempatan untuk mendapatkan makanan bergizi
yang memadai. Studi ekonomi sebelumnya yang mengevaluasi efek dari
pendapatan stempel makanan pada asupan nutrisi biasanya menemukan korelasi
yang positif, biasanya kecil, antara penerimaan kupon makanan dan nutrisi. Dua
makalah terbaru oleh Devaney dan Moffitt [1991] dan Horton dan Campbell
[1991] mencapai kesimpulan yang sangat positif mengenai efek pendapatan pada
umumnya. Makalah dari literatur nutrisi umumnya menemukan efek positif tetapi
lemah dan sering tidak signifikan pendapatan pada nutrisi.
Kami menggunakan informasi tentang dua kelompok orang berpenghasilan
rendah dan menemukan hasil yang sedikit berbeda untuk kedua kelompok, tetapi
hasil yang sangat berbeda dari banyak penelitian lain. Untuk sampel keluarga
pedesaan, yang diambil dari data dari Percobaan Pemeliharaan Pendapatan
2
makanan atau bukti bias seleksi. (1) Namun, untuk sampel orang lanjut usia, dari
Food Stamp Cashout Project , kami menemukan bukti kuat bahwa seleksi diri ke
dalam Program Food Stamp sangat berkorelasi dengan pencapaian kecukupan gizi
dan bahwa, pengendalian untuk seleksi mandiri, pendapatan stempel makanan dan
pendapatan lain memiliki efek negatif pada nutrisi.
Kami memeriksa kembali hubungan antara pendapatan kupon makanan dan
asupan gizi orang miskin dan memperbaiki literatur yang ada dalam beberapa cara
penting. Pertama, ada kemungkinan bahwa korelasi positif antara penerimaan
kupon makanan dan nutrisi bukanlah hubungan kausal langsung, tetapi lebih
merupakan hasil dari faktor lain yang mempengaruhi keduanya. Sebagai contoh,
dalam salah satu sampel yang diteliti dalam makalah ini, hanya 50 persen dari
mereka yang memenuhi syarat yang benar-benar mengajukan dan menerima kupon
makanan. Bisa jadi kasus bahwa mereka yang lebih peduli tentang gizi pada saat
yang sama lebih mungkin untuk mengajukan dan menerima kupon makanan dan
lebih mungkin untuk mempertahankan diet nutrisi yang cukup. Masalah seleksi diri
yang mungkin ini dapat dipisahkan dari kemungkinan efek langsung dari
pendapatan stempel makanan pada nutrisi dengan menggunakan prosedur estimasi
yang benar untuk bias seleksi.
Masalah lain yang diteliti oleh penelitian kami adalah bahwa tingkat satu
gizi mungkin berkorelasi dengan tingkat nutrisi lain. Ini dapat terjadi karena
individu yang peduli dengan nutrisi mungkin lebih mungkin untuk mencapai level
yang cukup dari semua nutrisi atau karena kombinasi nutrisi terjadi secara alami
dalam makanan. Kami menempatkan model multi-persamaan tingkat nutrisi dan
memungkinkan gangguan pada setiap persamaan untuk dikorelasikan. Tak satu pun
dari studi sebelumnya yang menganggap korelasi ini.
Akhirnya, kami mengakui fakta bahwa, di atas tingkat tertentu, nutrisi ekstra
tidak berguna. Jika seseorang telah mencapai diet yang cukup gizi, maka apakah
pendapatan stempel makanan memungkinkan dia untuk mengkonsumsi lebih
banyak nutrisi tidak relevan. Kami terutama tertarik pada, oleh karena itu, apakah
seseorang mencapai tingkat gizi yang memadai, daripada jumlah absolut dari nutrisi
3
membahas secara bersamaan masalah seleksi bias dan superfluity nutrisi di atas
beberapa tingkat.
Temuan bahwa pendapatan stempel makanan sebenarnya menurunkan
asupan gizi, ceteris paribus, adalah hasil baru untuk studi Program Pangan, tetapi
itu tidak akan menjadi novel dalam literatur tentang gizi di negara-negara kurang
maju (Pitt dan Rosenzweig [1985], Behrman dan Deolalikar [1987]). Adalah masuk
akal untuk percaya bahwa, ketika pendapatan meningkat, rumah tangga
menggunakan lebih banyak uang daripada waktu dalam produksi rumah tangga (ini
adalah penjelasan Silberberg [1985] untuk penurunan efisiensi dalam menghasilkan
nutrisi murni); dengan kata lain, ketika pendapatan meningkat, orang menghabiskan
lebih sedikit waktu menyiapkan makanan dan lebih banyak uang untuk makanan
yang lebih mudah disiapkan. Jika, seperti yang sering terjadi, makanan yang lebih
nyaman untuk dipersiapkan kurang bergizi dibandingkan makanan yang
membutuhkan banyak waktu untuk dipersiapkan, maka hasil kami tidak
mengejutkan. (2)
Penting untuk diingat bahwa meskipun gizi mungkin menderita sebagai
akibat dari pendapatan yang lebih tinggi, peserta dalam Program Pantangan
Makanan masih dapat mempertahankan diet yang cukup nutrisi. Apakah diet cukup
atau tidak adalah masalah yang terpisah dari apakah jumlah absolut dari suatu gizi
meningkat atau menurun dengan pendapatan. Untuk mengatasi masalah kedua ini,
kami menggunakan hasil estimasi kami untuk memprediksi probabilitas bahwa
individu akan mencapai diet yang cukup gizi. Hasil kami memungkinkan kami
untuk mengidentifikasi faktor-faktor yang tampaknya penting untuk kecukupan
gizi. Kami menemukan bahwa faktor-faktor yang memiliki efek terbesar pada
kemungkinan mencapai diet yang cukup adalah, secara umum, komposisi rumah
tangga (yaitu, apakah ada anak-anak dalam keluarga atau apakah individu hidup
sendiri), pendidikan, dan tindakan pengetahuan individu tentang gizi. (Hal ini juga
dibuat oleh Clarkson [1975].) Efek dari pendapatan adalah penting untuk sampel
orang tua dan tidak signifikan untuk sampel keluarga pedesaan. Kesimpulan kami
adalah bahwa, paling tidak untuk rumah tangga lanjut usia, faktor-faktor lain
4
memadai daripada pendapatan. Lebih lanjut, hasilnya konsisten dengan teori bahwa
setelah tingkat nutrisi yang memadai atau hampir mencukupi tercapai, individu
mungkin lebih suka mengganti makanan padat uang, yang mungkin lebih rendah
dalam nilai gizi, untuk makanan intensif waktu, seperti Silberberg [1985]. ]
menunjukkan. (3)
Sisa dari makalah ini disusun sebagai berikut: Bagian II menyajikan
tinjauan pustaka, bagian III membahas data, bagian IV membahas metodologi
ekonometrik dan hasil dari estimasi, bagian V berisi perkiraan kami tentang
probabilitas untuk mencapai diet yang bergizi secukupnya. , dan bagian VI berisi
pernyataan penutup.
II. TINJAUAN LITERATUR
Kami secara singkat mengulas di sini berbagai makalah yang mempelajari
hubungan antara pendapatan dan dukungan stempel makanan pada gizi orang
miskin. (4) Sebagian besar studi sebelumnya menemukan korelasi positif antara
pendapatan kupon makanan dan gizi. (5) Clarkson [1975] menunjukkan bahwa
orang-orang dengan pendapatan lebih banyak umumnya memiliki asupan gizi yang
lebih tinggi, tetapi hingga tahun 1975 keuntungan dalam pendapatan agregat
disertai penurunan gizi. Dia merangkum empat studi, termasuk Madden dan Yoder
[1972]: "Hasil nutrisi terbaru dari Program Pangan Makanan tampaknya sama-sama
buruk. Ketika hasilnya disesuaikan untuk variabel lain, satu-satunya faktor yang
secara sistematis muncul untuk meningkatkan diet adalah program pendidikan gizi
(pendapatan kadang-kadang merupakan variabel yang signifikan tetapi sangat
berkorelasi dengan pendidikan). " Dia melanjutkan dengan atribut hasil ke
substitusi makanan yang nyaman, dikemas atau diproses sebagai hasil dari
dukungan stempel makanan.
Hanya dua penelitian awal yang mengontrol partisipasi endogen atau yang
dipilih sendiri dalam program kupon makanan. Akin dkk. [1985] melaporkan efek
positif berdasarkan perkiraan koefisien dari persamaan mereka untuk peserta dan,
biasanya, efek negatif dalam persamaan mereka untuk nonpartisipan dan ineligibles
5
tetapi partisipasi kode sebagai variabel boneka, sehingga mengabaikan nilai kupon
makanan yang diterima.
Devaney dan Moffitt [1991], mempelajari efek dari berbagai jenis
pendapatan pada konsumsi sepuluh nutrisi pada sampel nasional rumah tangga
berpenghasilan rendah, menemukan efek positif yang signifikan pada nutrisi
perangko makanan dan pendapatan lainnya dengan lebih kuat, (tiga tujuh kali lebih
tinggi) efek untuk kupon makanan. Mereka benar untuk seleksi bias di tingkat
nutrisi dan dalam efek pendapatan. Koreksi membuat sedikit perbedaan. Devaney
dan Moffitt [1991] tidak memiliki ukuran pendidikan umum atau pengetahuan
tentang gizi. Juga mereka tidak benar untuk nutrisi yang direkomendasikan gizi vs
nutrisi yang melebihi tingkat yang direkomendasikan. Namun demikian, hasil
mereka menunjukkan efek nutrisi yang sangat positif dari program kupon makanan.
Beberapa penelitian yang membahas masalah ini untuk negara lain
melaporkan dampak kecil atau negatif dari pendapatan pada nutrisi. Devaney dan
Fraker [1986] mempelajari Puerto Rico dan menemukan perbedaan gizi yang tidak
signifikan antara kupon makanan dan uang tunai. Pitt dan Rosenzweig [1985],
memeriksa nutrisi di rumah tangga pertanian di Indonesia, melaporkan keuntungan
kecil (upah dan keuntungan pertanian) elastisitas nutrisi. Dalam sebuah studi
tentang keluarga di daerah pedesaan India selatan, Behrman dan Deolalikar [1987]
melaporkan bahwa pendapatan meningkatkan pengeluaran makanan tetapi tidak
asupan gizi.
Horton dan Campbell [1991], yang mempelajari efek dari berbagai faktor,
terutama pekerjaan istri dalam rumah tangga, pada pengeluaran makanan dan
asupan nutrisi yang jelas di Kanada, melaporkan bahwa pendapatan memiliki efek
positif yang signifikan pada semua nutrisi tetapi dengan penurunan efek marginal.
Akhirnya, ada studi dalam literatur nutrisi yang menghubungkan
pendapatan dan asupan nutrisi. (6) Tidak ada dari kertas-kertas ini yang mengontrol
untuk bias seleksi, tetapi mereka memberikan dukungan untuk pengamatan bahwa
efek pendapatan pada kualitas diet lemah dan variabel, sedangkan pendidikan
6
penggunaan dua pertiga dari Recommended Dietary Allowance sebagai kriteria
untuk diet yang cukup.
Dua penelitian, Kohrs, Czajka-Narins, dan Nordstrom [1989, 308] berfokus
pada lansia dan menyimpulkan bahwa pendapatan memiliki korelasi positif dengan
asupan energi dan zat besi. Davis [1981, 298] menyimpulkan bahwa "penelitian
telah menunjukkan bahwa semakin rendah tingkat pendapatan, semakin besar risiko
bahwa asupan gizi akan turun di bawah tunjangan diet yang direkomendasikan."
Kami menyimpulkan ulasan ini dengan dua kutipan dari Guthrie [1986].
Orang miskin telah diidentifikasi dalam banyak survei gizi sebagai
kelompok dengan makanan yang umumnya kurang dari cukup. Hal ini disebabkan
sebagian karena sumber daya mereka yang terbatas untuk semua kebutuhan hidup,
termasuk makanan, dan sebagian karena kenyataan bahwa keluarga berpenghasilan
rendah umumnya memiliki pendidikan yang lebih sedikit dan pengetahuan gizi
yang kurang sehat untuk mendasari pilihan makanan mereka. Masalah mereka
diperparah oleh kenyataan bahwa biaya makanan yang lebih murah yang dimakan
oleh orang miskin, yang menghabiskan 37 persen dari pendapatan mereka untuk
makanan, meningkat lebih cepat daripada makanan yang lebih mahal yang biasanya
dikonsumsi oleh orang yang lebih kaya. Yang menarik, orang miskin mendapatkan
lebih banyak nutrisi per dolar yang dibelanjakan untuk makanan daripada yang
memiliki lebih banyak uang.
Masalah gizi orang tua berasal dari faktor psikologis dan sosial seperti
pendapatan rendah, kebiasaan makan lama, kesepian, perumahan miskin,
kurangnya fasilitas penyimpanan dan persiapan yang memadai, kurangnya
transportasi ke toko, dan ketidakpedulian atau ketidaktahuan akan makanan yang
memadai. kebiasaan. Secara fisiologis mereka menderita penurunan kemampuan
untuk menyerap dan mengangkut nutrisi, meningkatkan ekskresi nutrisi, dan
dengan demikian kebutuhan yang relatif meningkat.
III. DATA
Dua kelompok yang dianalisis di sini adalah keluarga yang berpartisipasi
7
lanjut usia dari Program Asuransi Tunjangan Sosial Asuransi Tambahan / Lansia.
The Rural Income Maintenance Experiment adalah salah satu dari empat percobaan
dalam pajak pendapatan negatif. Ini mengumpulkan data di Manson, Iowa dan
Warsawa, North Carolina dari musim panas 1969 hingga September 1973. (7) The
Food Stamp Cashout Project dioperasikan dari April 1980 hingga Agustus 1981 di
enam situs, satu situs demonstrasi dan satu situs perbandingan masing-masing di
New York, South Carolina, dan Oregon. (8) Di tempat-tempat demonstrasi, uang
tunai diganti dengan kupon makanan dalam pembayaran kepada orang tua dan
kepada orang yang menerima Asuransi Sosial Tambahan. Kupon makanan
disediakan seperti biasa di situs perbandingan. Analisis kami terbatas pada peserta
lanjut usia dalam proyek, beberapa di antaranya menerima kupon makanan atau
uang tunai dan yang lain tidak.
Asupan gizi diukur dengan menentukan makanan yang dikonsumsi oleh
individu dan kemudian mengubah makanan tersebut menjadi nutrisi menggunakan
program komputer yang dapat menganalisis hampir 5000 kategori makanan [AS.
Departemen Pertanian 1975]. Kami memiliki ukuran sepuluh nutrisi untuk peserta
dalam program Pendapatan Pedesaan dan untuk sembilan nutrisi untuk peserta Feed
Stamp Money. (9) Tingkat gizi diukur sebagai persentase dari Rekomendasi
Santunan Diet USDA untuk nutrisi yang dikonsumsi. Ukuran nutrisi ini, Rasio
Kecukupan Gizi, dihitung untuk individu dalam proyek Food Stamp Cashout.
Namun, untuk peserta program Pendapatan Pedesaan, Rasio Kecukupan Gizi
dihitung untuk seluruh keluarga: asupan gizi dari keluarga ditambahkan bersama
dan dibagi dengan Recommended Dietary Allowance untuk semua anggota
keluarga.
Dalam kedua sampel, informasi tentang makanan yang dikonsumsi
dikumpulkan menggunakan survei recall dua puluh empat jam. (10) Untuk peserta
dalam program Pendapatan Pedesaan, data nutrisi dikumpulkan dua kali, dalam
Family Management Interviews V (September 1970) dan XIII ( September 1972).
Sayangnya, data nutrisi dari Iowa untuk wawancara pertama tidak lagi tersedia.
8
banyak keluarga yang ada dua pengamatan) dan 254 pengamatan pada keluarga di
Iowa.
Untuk para peserta dalam proyek Food Stamp Cashout, wawancara panjang
dan rumit dilakukan untuk menentukan kelayakan dan sumber pendapatan dari
orang-orang dalam sampel. Sebagian dari mereka yang memenuhi syarat
diwawancara ulang untuk menentukan konsumsi makanan mereka dan beberapa
item lain, seperti skala psikologis dan tinggi dan berat badan. Secara keseluruhan,
2033 orang diwawancarai di akhir survei asupan makanan. Namun, kami
membatasi analisis kami kepada 1542 orang yang memiliki data lengkap.
IV. MODEL DAN HASIL EMPIRIS
Nutrisi berbeda dari komoditas lain karena mereka biasanya tidak
dikonsumsi secara langsung, melainkan secara tidak langsung melalui makanan.
Makanan memiliki atribut selain nutrisi, seperti rasa, penampilan, dan kemudahan
persiapan, yang juga dapat dinilai oleh individu. Asupan gizi akan tertinggi di antara
orang-orang yang menghargai karakteristik gizi makanan dan yang mungkin
bersedia mengorbankan atribut lain untuk mendapatkan nutrisi. Kami berhipotesis
bahwa asupan gizi tergantung pada karakteristik individu yang mempengaruhi
kemauan dan kemampuan untuk mengkonsumsi nutrisi.
Clarkson [1975, 75] menulis: "Ada perbedaan dalam diet rumah tangga
sebagai hasil dari informasi gizi, pendidikan ibu rumah tangga, lokasi geografis,
iklim, kepadatan penduduk, latar belakang etnis, distribusi usia, tingkat aktivitas,
pendapatan, dan variabel lainnya." Kami mengontrol semua faktor ini dalam model
kami.
Faktor fisik, seperti tinggi dan berat badan, dapat memengaruhi tingkat
nutrisi yang dibutuhkan. Orang yang lebih tinggi atau lebih berat mungkin
memerlukan tingkat nutrisi yang lebih tinggi untuk menjaga kesehatan atau
melakukan tugas-tugas fisik. Kami menyertakan tinggi seorang individu dalam
model kami, tetapi, karena berat adalah endogen, kami menghilangkannya. Kami
9
mungkin berpengaruh pada asupan gizi, meskipun efeknya mungkin terutama
karena alasan sosial daripada fisik.
Komposisi rumah tangga juga dapat mempengaruhi keinginan untuk
mengkonsumsi nutrisi. Khususnya, mereka yang tinggal sendiri mungkin kurang
bersemangat untuk menyiapkan makanan sehat karena kemungkinan
ketidakefisienan teknis memasak untuk satu orang. Laki-laki lansia yang tinggal
sendiri mungkin tidak tertarik pada tugas-tugas rumah tangga dan bahkan lebih
kecil kemungkinannya untuk mempertahankan nutrisi yang cukup. Jika rumah
tangga termasuk anak-anak, mungkin ada insentif tambahan untuk menyiapkan
makanan bergizi, atau, sebaliknya, kehadiran anak-anak dapat mengurangi
kemampuan keluarga untuk menyediakan nutrisi yang cukup untuk semua orang.
Kami memasukkan variabel untuk mengendalikan komposisi rumah tangga, dan,
dalam sampel orang lanjut usia, variabel untuk rumah tangga di mana seorang pria
lansia tinggal sendirian.
Diet bervariasi di berbagai daerah di negara ini, dan mereka yang tinggal di
daerah pedesaan mungkin memiliki akses ke makanan yang berbeda dari mereka
yang tinggal di daerah perkotaan. Kami mengontrol untuk wilayah negara di mana
rumah tangga berada dan bagi mereka yang tinggal di daerah pedesaan.
Orang-orang yang memiliki lebih banyak modal manusia mungkin lebih
mampu merencanakan dan menyiapkan makanan bergizi. Kami memasukkan dua
ukuran modal manusia, tahun pendidikan formal dan ukuran pengetahuan individu
tentang gizi dasar. Responden dalam percobaan Pendapatan Pedesaan ditanya
pertanyaan berikut:
Selanjutnya saya ingin menanyakan ide Anda tentang makanan dan
minuman apa yang harus dipelihara seseorang dalam keadaan sehat. Apa yang
menurut Anda orang sehat harus makan atau minum setiap hari agar sehat?
[Wawancara 3 triwulan, 1970, Bagian B, halaman 29.]
Pertanyaan serupa ditanyakan dalam Survei Pencairan Uang Tunai. Dalam
setiap kasus responden dapat menyebutkan sejumlah makanan dan hasilnya
dikodekan dengan menghitung jumlah dari empat kelompok makanan dasar yang
10
Perilaku mungkin berbeda pada akhir pekan dari itu pada hari kerja, dan
asupan nutrisi mungkin berbeda juga. Kami menyertakan variabel dummy untuk
mengontrol apakah nutrisi yang dilaporkan dikonsumsi pada akhir pekan, meskipun
kami tidak dapat memprediksi apakah akan ada efek positif atau negatif pada
nutrisi.
Kemampuan untuk memperoleh nutrisi tergantung pada sumber daya yang
tersedia untuk membeli makanan. Baik pendapatan dan jumlah kupon stempel
makanan telah lama diketahui memiliki efek positif pada jumlah yang dibelanjakan
untuk makanan (Holbrook dan Stafford [1971], Benus, Kmenta, dan Shapiro
[1976], Blanchard dkk. [1982] ). Tetapi apakah pengeluaran yang meningkat pada
makanan diterjemahkan ke dalam peningkatan nilai gizi dari makanan yang dibeli
tergantung pada nilai untuk individu dan biaya atribut lain dari makanan relatif
terhadap nilai dan biaya nutrisi. Kami menyertakan jumlah bonus kupon makanan
dan pendapatan lainnya dalam persamaan kami, tetapi tidak memprediksi
tanda-tanda koefisien. Jika, ketika pendapatan meningkat, makanan yang rasanya lebih
baik atau yang lebih mudah disiapkan lebih mungkin untuk dibeli, maka pengaruh
pendapatan pada asupan nutrisi mungkin negatif.
Kami telah membahas pembenaran untuk memasukkan jumlah bonus kupon
makanan dalam persamaan untuk nutrisi. Namun, jumlah kupon stempel makanan
tidak bersifat eksogen; itu diamati hanya jika seorang individu berpartisipasi dalam
Program Food Stamp. Dengan demikian, jika orang-orang yang lebih mungkin
untuk berpartisipasi dalam Program Pantangan Makanan juga lebih mungkin untuk
menghargai gizi, maka termasuk jumlah bonus kupon makanan dalam persamaan
nutrisi memperkenalkan bias seleksi
VI. KESIMPULAN
Kami telah memeriksa pengaruh dukungan stempel makanan dan
pendapatan pada gizi dua kelompok orang di AS, satu lansia dan yang lainnya di
pedesaan. Kami menemukan bahwa pendapatan yang memadai tidak menjamin
nutrisi yang memadai; peningkatan penghasilan, baik terbatas pada kupon makanan
11
Belum ada konsensus yang jelas dalam literatur seperti apa efek ini seharusnya.
Makalah terbaru telah menemukan beberapa efek positif, tetapi kebanyakan
makalah telah menemukan efek yang lemah.
Hasil kami menunjukkan bahwa bahkan pengetahuan gizi yang belum
sempurna dapat meningkatkan asupan nutrisi secara signifikan. Pendidikan selama
bertahun-tahun tidak berpengaruh pada kasus lanjut usia, tetapi efek substansial
dalam kasus pedesaan, yang menegaskan hasil campuran untuk pendidikan yang
ditemukan dalam literatur. Kapan pun dapat diukur, pengaruh pengetahuan gizi
sebelumnya selalu sangat besar. Seperti Clarkson [1975, 56] menulis, "jalan yang
lebih menjanjikan [daripada peningkatan pendapatan] untuk mengurangi malnutrisi
adalah memberikan pendidikan tentang nilai meningkatkan gizi serta nilai makanan
dari sumber makanan alternatif (termasuk kombinasi makanan tertentu) dan pada
12
LAMPIRAN :
The effect of the food stamp program on
nutrient intake
J.S. Butler and Jennie E. Raymond
Economic Inquiry. 34.4 (Oct. 1996): p781+. From Gale Business and Economics Collection 2019.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 1996 Western Economic Association International
http://www.weainternational.org/journals.htm
Listen
Abstract:
Receipt of food stamps is often observed to be positively correlated with intake of nutrients. However, this observed fact could be the result of self-selection into the food stamp program by those individuals who are more interested in maintaining good nutrition. We observe that, controlling for participation in the food stamp program, nutrition is negatively affected by food stamp income for a sample of elderly people. However, we find that the levels
of nutrients do not decrease enough to cause individuals to fall below the Recommended Dietary Allowance.
Full Text:
I. INTRODUCTION
13
We employ information on two groups of low-income people and find slightly different results for the two groups, but very different results from many of the other studies. For a sample of rural families, taken from data from the Rural Income Maintenance Experiment, we find almost no effect of food stamp income or evidence of selection bias.(1) However, for a sample of elderly people, from the Food Stamp Cashout Project, we find strong evidence that self selection into the Food Stamp Program is highly correlated with attaining nutritional adequacy and that, controlling for the self selection, food stamp income and other income have a negative effect on nutrition.
We re-examine the relationship between food stamp income and the nutrient intake of the poor and improve upon the existing literature in several important ways. First, it is possible that the positive correlation between the receipt of food stamps and nutrition is not a direct causal link, but rather is the result of other factors affecting both. For example, in one of the samples examined in this paper, only 50 percent of those eligible actually apply for and receive food stamps. It could be the case that those who care more about nutrition are at the same time more likely to apply for and receive food stamps and more likely to maintain a nutritionally adequate diet. These possible self-selection problems can be disentangled from possible direct effects of food stamp income on nutrition using estimation procedures which correct for selection bias.
Another issue which our research addresses is that the level of
one nutrient may be correlated with the levels of other nutrients. This may occur either because individuals who care about nutrition may be more likely to attain adequate levels of all nutrients or because combinations of nutrients occur naturally in foods. We posit a multi-equation model of the levels of nutrients and allow the disturbances in each equation to be correlated. None of the previous studies considered this correlation.
Finally, we recognize the fact that, above some level,
14
The finding that food stamp income actually lowers nutrient intake, ceteris paribus, is a novel result for studies of the Food Stamp
Program, but it would not be novel in the literature on nutrition in less developed countries (Pitt and Rosenzweig [1985], Behrman and Deolalikar [1987]). It is reasonable to believe that, as income increases, households employ relatively more money than time in household production (this is Silberberg's [1985] explanation for decreased efficiency in producing pure nutrients); in other words, as income increases, people spend less time preparing meals and more money on foods which are easier to prepare. If, as is often the case, foods which are more convenient to prepare are less nutritious than foods which require a lot of time to prepare, then our result is not surprising.(2)
It is important to keep in mind that although nutrition may suffer as a result of higher income, participants in the Food Stamp Program still may maintain nutritionally adequate diets. Whether or not a diet is adequate is a separate issue from whether the absolute amount of a nutrient increases or decreases with income. To address this second issue, we use the results of our estimation to predict the probability that individuals will attain nutritionally adequate diets. Our results enable us to identify those factors which appear to be crucial to nutritional adequacy. We find that the factors which have the largest effect on the probability of achieving an adequate diet are, in general, the composition of the household (i.e., whether there are children in the family or whether the individual lives alone),
education, and measures of an individual's knowledge of nutrition. (This point is also made by Clarkson [1975].) The effects of income are substantial for the sample of elderly persons and insignificant for the sample of rural families. Our conclusion is that, at least for the elderly households, other factors contribute more to the probability of attaining adequate levels of nutrition than does income. Further, the results are consistent with the theory that once adequate or near-adequate levels of nutrients are attained, individuals may prefer to substitute money-intensive foods, which may be lower in nutritional value, for time-intensive foods, as Silberberg [1985] shows.(3)
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: section II
15 II. LITERATURE REVIEW
We briefly review here the wide variety of papers that study the relationship between income and food stamp support on nutrition of the poor.(4) Most earlier studies find a positive correlation between food stamp income and nutrition.(5) Clarkson [1975] shows that people with more income generally have higher nutrient intake, but that up to 1975 gains in aggregate income accompanied declining nutrition. He summarizes four studies, including Madden and Yoder [1972]: "Recent nutritional outcome of the Food Stamp Program appears to be equally poor. When the outcome is adjusted for other variables, the only factor that systematically appears to improve diets is a program of nutrition education (income is sometimes a
significant variable but is highly correlated with education)." He goes on to attribute the results to the substitution of convenient, packaged or processed food as a result of food stamp support.
Only two early studies control for endogenous or self-selected participation in food stamp programs. Akin et al. [1985] report positive effects based on the estimated coefficients from their equations for participants and, usually, negative effects in their equations for eligible nonparticipants and ineligibles. Butler, Ohls, and Posner [1985] found positive results but coded participation as a dummy variable, thus ignoring the value of food stamps received.
Devaney and Moffitt [1991], studying the effects of various types of income on the consumption of ten nutrients on a national sample of low-income households, find significant positive effects on nutrition of food stamps and of other income with stronger, (three to seven times as high) effects for food stamps. They correct for selection bias in the level of nutrients and in the effect of income. The correction makes little difference. Devaney and Moffitt [1991] had no measure of general education or knowledge of nutrition. Also they do not correct for nutritionally recommended consumption vs.nutrients in excess of the recommended levels. Nevertheless, their results suggest very positive nutrient effects from food stamp programs.
Several studies that address this issue for other countries report small or negative effects of income on nutrition. Devaney and Fraker [1986] study Puerto Rico and find nonsignificant differences in
16
study of families in rural south India, Behrman and Deolalikar [1987] report that income increases food expenditures but
not nutrient intake.
Horton and Campbell [1991], who study the effect of various factors, especially the employment of the wife in a household, on food
expenditure and apparent nutrient intake in Canada, report that income has a significant positive effect on all nutrients but with a declining marginal effect.
Finally, there are studies in the nutrition literature that relate income and nutrient intake.(6) None of these papers controls for selection bias, but they provide support for the observation that effects of income on dietary quality are weak and variable, whereas education has measurable effects on dietary quality. They also provide some support for the use of two-thirds of the Recommended Dietary Allowance as a criterion for an adequate diet.
Two studies, Kohrs, Czajka-Narins, and Nordstrom [1989, 308] focused on the elderly and concluded that income has a positive correlation with energy and iron intake. Davis [1981, 298] concluded that "studies have shown that the lower the income level, the greater the risk that nutritional intake will fall below the recommended dietary allowances."
We conclude this review with two excerpts from Guthrie [1986].
The poor have been identified in many nutritional surveys as a group with generally less than adequate diets. This is attributed in part to their limited resources for all necessities of life, including food, and in part to the fact that low-income families generally have less
education and less sound nutritional knowledge on which to base their food choices. Their problem is compounded by the fact that the cost of less expensive foods eaten by the poor, who spend 37
percent of their income on food, is rising faster than that of more expensive foods usually consumed by the more affluent.
Interestingly, the poor get more nutrients per dollar spent on food than do those with more money.
The nutritional problems of the elderly stem from psychological and social factors such as low income, long-standing food habits,
17
ignorance of adequate food habits. Physiologically they suffer from decreased ability to absorb and transport nutrients, increased
excretions of nutrients, and thus relatively increased need. [pp. 634-35]
Inadequate income is an obvious factor in undernutrition.... Although money is no guarantee of an adequate diet, when income falls below a certain point, the chances of obtaining enough nutrientsdecrease. [p. 645]
III. THE DATA
The two groups analyzed here are families who participated in the Rural Income Maintenance Experiment and a group of elderly people from the Supplemental Social Insurance/Elderly Food Stamp
Cashout Project. The Rural Income Maintenance Experiment was one of four experiments in negative income taxes. It collected data in Manson, Iowa and Warsaw, North Carolina from the summer of 1969 to September 1973.(7) The Food Stamp Cashout Project operated from April 1980 to August 1981 in six sites, one demonstration site and one comparison site each in New York, South Carolina, and Oregon.(8) In the demonstration sites, cash was substituted for food stamps in payments to the elderly and to persons receiving
Supplemental Social Insurance. Food stamps were provided as usual in the comparison sites. Our analysis is restricted to the elderly participants in the project, some of whom received food stamps or cash and others of whom did not.
Nutrient intake is measured by determining the foods consumed by an individual and then converting those foods into nutrients using computer programs which can analyze almost 5000 categories of food [U.S. Department of Agriculture 1975]. We have measures of ten nutrients for the participants in the Rural Income program and for nine nutrients for the Food Stamp Cashout participants.(9) The level of a nutrient is measured as the percentage of the USDA's
18
In both samples, the information on foods consumed was collected using a twenty-four hour recall survey.(10) For the participants in the Rural Income program, nutrient data were collected twice, in Family Management Interviews V (September 1970) and XIII (September 1972). Unfortunately, nutrition data from Iowa for the first interview are no longer available. The sample consists of 799 observations on families in North Carolina (there may be many families for which there are two observations) and 254 observations on families in Iowa.
For the participants in the Food Stamp Cashout project, a long and complex interview was undertaken to determine the eligibility and the sources of income of the persons in the sample. A subset of those who were eligible was re-interviewed to determine their food
consumption and a few other items, such as psychological scales and height and weight. Altogether, 2033 individuals were interviewed to the end of the food intake survey. However, we restrict our
analysis to those 1542 individuals for whom we have complete data.
IV. THE EMPIRICAL MODEL AND RESULTS
Nutrients differ from other commodities in that they are usually not consumed directly, but rather indirectly through food. Foods have attributes other than nutrients, such as taste, appearance, and ease of preparation, which individuals may also value. Nutrient intake will be highest among people who value the nutritional characteristics of food and who may be willing to sacrifice other attributes to
obtain nutrients. We hypothesize that nutrient intake depends on individual characteristics which affect the willingness and ability to consume nutrients.
Clarkson [1975, 75] wrote: "There are differences in household diets as the result of nutritional information, homemaker education,
geographic location, climate, population density, ethnic background, age distribution, activity levels, income, and other variables." We control for all of these factors in our model.
Physical factors, such as height and weight, may affect the level of nutrients required. People who are taller or heavier may require higher levels of nutrients to maintain health or to perform physical tasks. We include the height of an individual in our model, but, since weight is endogenous, we omit it. We include other individual
19
on nutrient intake, although the effect may be due primarily to social rather than physical, reasons.
The composition of the household may also affect the willingness to consume nutrients. In particular, those who live alone may be less eager to prepare healthy meals due to the possible technical inefficiency of cooking for one. Elderly men who live alone may be uninterested in domestic tasks and even less likely to maintain adequate nutrition. If the household includes children, there may be an added incentive to prepare nutritious meals, or, conversely, the presence of children may reduce the ability of a family to provide adequate nutrition for everyone. We include variables to control for the composition of the household, and, in the sample of elderly people, a variable for those households where an elderly man lives alone.
Diets vary in different regions of the country, and those who live in rural areas may have access to different foods from those who live in urban areas. We control for the region of the country where the households are located and for those who live in rural areas.
Those individuals who possess more human capital may be better able to plan and prepare nutritious meals. We include two measures of human capital, years of formal education and a measure of an individual's knowledge of elementary nutrition. Respondents in the Rural Income experiment were asked the following question:
Next I would like to ask your ideas about what food and drinks a person should have to keep in good health. What things to you think a healthy person should eat or drink daily to be healthy? [3rd
quarterly interview, 1970, Part B, page 29.]
A similar question is asked in the Food Stamp Cashout Survey. In each case the respondent could name any number of foods and the result was coded by counting the number of the four basic food groups represented.(11)
20
The ability to acquire nutrients depends on the resources available to purchase food. Both income and the amount of the food stamp
bonus have long been known to have a positive effect on the amount spent on food (Holbrook and Stafford [1971], Benus, Kmenta, and Shapiro [1976], Blanchard et al. [1982]). But whether the increased expenditure on food translates into an increase in the nutrient value of the food purchased depends on the value to the individual and the cost of the other attributes of the food relative to the value and cost of nutrients. We include both the amount of the food stamp bonus and other income in our equation, but do not predict the signs of the coefficients. If, as income increases, foods which taste better or which are easier to prepare are more likely to be purchased, then the effect of income on nutrient intake may be negative.
We have already discussed the justification for the inclusion of the amount of the food stamp bonus in the equations for nutrients.
However, the amount of the food stamp bonus is not exogenous; it is observed only if an individual participates in the Food Stamp
Program. Thus, if those individuals who are more likely to participate in the Food Stamp Program are also more likely to value nutrition, then including food stamp bonus amount in the nutrient equations introduces selection bias
We can model this more formally as a variant on an endogenous switching model:(12)
(1a) [y.sub.ij] = [[Beta].sub.11][x.sub.1] + [[Beta].sub.12][x.sub.2] + [u.sub.1], - [Gamma][Z.sub.i] [greater than or equal to] [u.sub.3].
(1b) [y.sub.ij] = [[Beta].sub.21][x.sub.1] + [[Beta].sub.22][x.sub.2] + [u.sub.2], - [Gamma][Z.sub.i] [less than] [u.sub.3].
(2) ,
where [y.sub.ij] is the amount of nutrient j consumed by individual i, [x.sub.1] is the vector of explanatory variables common to both equations (1a) and (1b), [x.sub.2] is the amount of food stamp
21
terms. The switching is endogenous if [u.sub.3] is correlated with [u.sub.1] or [u.sub.2]. Since we believe that it is plausible that such a correlation exists, we need to control for the endogeneity of the actual food stamp bonus amount received.
Heckman [1979] suggests what is the standard correction for selection bias in this framework. Equation (2) is estimated using probit, and the inverse Mills ratios ([Lambda]'s) are formed from the results of the probit estimation. The [Lambda]'s are included in equations (1a) and (1b) which are then estimated by OLS.(13) The estimated coefficients are the covariances between [u.sub.1] and [u.sub.3] and between [u.sub.2] and [u.sub.3] respectively.
There are additional considerations which simplify the model
somewhat and allow us to collapse equations (1a) and (1b) into one equation. First, since [x.sub.1] appears in both equations, if we assume that the coefficients on [x.sub.1] are the same in both equations ([[Beta].sub.11] = [[Beta].sub.21]), we can reduce the number of parameters to be estimated. Further, for those who do not participate in the Food Stamp Program, the amount of food stamp bonus, [x.sub.2], has no effect on nutrition ([[Beta].sub.22] = 0) and since the value of [x.sub.2] is zero, we can eliminate that regressor from the equations. Finally, if we assume that [[Sigma].sub.13] = [[Sigma].sub.23], we can include the individual's value of [Lambda] as one regressor. Therefore, for one nutrient, we have collapsed the endogenous switching model into the following equations:
(1[prime]) [y.sub.ij] = [[Beta].sub.1][x.sub.1] + [[Beta].sub.2][x.sub.2] + [[Sigma].sub.1] *[[Lambda].sub.1] + [v.sub.1],
(2) .
We hypothesize that, in general, those factors which
affect nutrient intake also affect the probability that an individual will participate in the Food Stamp Program. However, the value of
assets held by a family may also affect the participation decision but not have an effect on nutrition. Assets can affect the flow of income which the household receives; however, we control for that. Assets which do not produce a cash flow probably do not improve the diet. Finally, assets can affect the perception by the participants
22
We estimate the model two ways: using the Heckman structure and by entering the food stamp bonus amount into the equation and using the potential food stamp bonus amount as an instrumental variable for it. Signs and magnitudes of the estimated coefficients were very similar, but the standard errors were smaller with the Heckman procedure, as they should be, since it uses more information in constructing the estimates.
A final econometric consideration is that we believe that the level of nutrient intake is correlated across nutrients: an individual who consumes large amounts of one nutrient may also tend to consume large amounts of other nutrients. We have an equation (1[prime]) for each of several nutrients and we estimate those as a seemingly unrelated regression model. The equations have identical
23
Table I presents the summary statistics for the Rural Income
Maintenance Experiment sample. The average household contains about four people, and the average head of the household is forty-eight years old and has forty-eight years of education. There are
24
pertinent to either the decision to participate in the Food Stamp Program or to the attainment of adequate nutrition. If a household grows or otherwise produces its own food, then nutrition may be higher in that household than in others. Almost half the families in the sample consume food produced at home. It may also be the case that if the health of the family is poor or if the availability of health care is limited, individuals may have a greater incentive to supplement their financial resources by applying for food stamps. We have one measure of the health of the family: the number of times a child in the family was sick during the year, and several measures of the availability of health care: the distance in miles to the nearest doctor, the nearest hospital, the nearest outpatient clinic and the nearest pharmacy. We do not expect that these measures will affect the level of nutrition of the family, only the decision to participate in the Food Stamp Program. At the bottom of Table I are the average Nutrient Adequacy Ratios for the families for the
ten nutrients. On average the rural families attain more than adequate levels of all nutrients, except for calcium. Finally, only a small proportion of the sample, 8 percent, actually participates in the Food Stamp Program.
Table II shows the summary statistics for those individuals from the Food Stamp Cashout Project sample. The average age of the participants is about seventy-three years; most participants live alone, and the average educational level is seven years. Only one-third of the sample is either black or male. The average income is $342.00 per month, and the average amount of food stamps received is $17.00. The average nutrient intake amounts for the elderly are also shown in Table II. On average, the levels
of nutrients are not as high as those for the rural areas. The largest shortages are for calories and calcium, while the average level of the other nutrients is adequate or very nearly so.(14)
Tables III and IV present the results of the endogenous switching model for the Rural Income sample and the Food Stamp Cashout Project sample for representative nutrients.(15) The variable Participate is the selection bias correction for participating in the Food Stamp Program (the [Lambda]'s). For the rural families, there is no evidence of selection bias in the coefficients in
25
consistently negative effects on nutrition, and the knowledge of elementary nutrition, which has a consistently positive effect.
The decision to participate in the Food Stamp Program is
significantly increased by the number of children and decreased by the number of adults in the household. Older households and those with more health problems are more likely to participate. Those with more assets are less likely to participate.
For the sample of elderly people, the results are qualitatively
different. The decision to participate in the Food Stamp Program has a consistently positive and often significant effect on the levels of allnutrients. Further, once the effect of participation is controlled for, the effect of an increase in income (either food stamp or other) is to reduce the level of nutrients consumed. As in the results from the rural families, the more knowledge of nutrition an individual has, the higher will be the level of every nutrient. Finally, we also include variables which measure how often an elderly person gets out of the house. Out Daily and Out Weekly are dummy variables which
measure whether a person can get out every day or at least once a week. An individual who is more active or able to leave the house may find it easier to acquire and prepare food and may, therefore, be expected to have higher levels of nutrients.
TABLE II
Summary Statistics: Food Stamp Cashout Participants
Standard
Mean Deviation
Sex (1 = male) .3304 .4703
Race (1 = Black) .3426 .4745
Age Minus 65 8.1857 5.7815
Live Alone 0.8078 0.3940
Male-Alone 0.1760 0.3808
Education 6.9688 3.8279
Knowledge 2.1192 1.0672
26
Sampling weights: Sum: 1542.0179. Sum of squares: 3697.9705. Design
27
The probability of participation is lower among those who live alone and among those with more education, assets, and income. The Distance variable measures distance from the food stamp office and has, not surprisingly, a negative effect on the decision to participate.
TABLE III
Results for Selected Nutrients of Weighted Estimation Corrected for
Selection Bias: Rural Income Maintenance Participants
28
V. THE PROBABILITY OF ATTAINING A NUTRITIONALLY ADEQUATE DIET
As stated above, whether a particular variable causes the level of a nutrient to increase or decrease is not the relevant measure of whether nutritional adequacy is attained. Rather, we are interested in whether the probability of attaining an adequate diet is improved by certain variables. Tables V and VI present the effects of selected independent variables on the change in the probability of achieving an adequate level of selected nutrients.(16) Table V presents the results for the sample of rural families. The effects of the continuous variables are presented at the top of the page; the column entries measure the size and direction of the change in the probability of attaining an adequate level of a nutrient when the independent variable is changed by the amount given in parentheses. This change is a rounded value approximately equal to one standard deviation. Increasing the number of people reduces the levels of all nutrients. Income has only small effects; food stamps move the probability by a few percentage points.
TABLE IV
29
Selection Bias: Food Stamp Cashout Participants
31
Male-Alone 0.185 0.818 Education -0.039 -3.548 Knowledge 0.024 0.785 Out Daily -0.166 -1.529 Out Weekly -0.041 -0.350 Income -0.002 -5.572 Assets -0.000 -2.964 New York Demonstration 0.034 0.220 New York Comparison -0.007 -0.055 S. Carolina Demonstration -0.309 -2.576 S. Carolina Comparison -0.095 -0.806 Oregon Demonstration 0.217 1.673 Weekend 0.077 1.011 Distance -0.008 -1.864
The effects of discrete variables are computed slightly differently. For each dummy variable, the first row gives the probability if everyone in the sample has a value of the variable equal to zero. For example, if everyone were female, the probability of attaining adequate
amounts of calories equals 72.1 percent. The second row presents the probability if everyone has a value of the variable equal to one; if everyone were male, the probability would be 70.4 percent. The last row shows the effect of being male on the probability: the probability falls by 1.7 percentage points. In general the largest results are for changes in the knowledge of nutrition. For example, an increase in knowledge (measured as an increase in the number of food groups) from zero to two increases the probability of attaining an adequate level of calories from 8.8 percent to 71 percent and an additional increase to four food groups increases the probability to 91 percent.
In Table VI analogous results are presented for the elderly persons. Overall, the probability of achieving an adequate diet is relatively low. The effect of an increase in education by four years is
substantially positive. The effects of food stamp and other income are substantially negative for many of the nutrients. Living alone and not leaving the house often also have large negative effects. But again, the most dramatic effect is for knowledge of nutrition, which has effects in the range of 5 to 44 percentage points. Very large changes in income would be required to duplicate these changes; about $300 per month in income would increase the probability less than 10 percentage points.
TABLE V
Change in the Probability of Attaining an Adequate Level of Selected
33
2 0.710 0.966 0.864
4 0.907 1.000 0.976
0.193 0.034 0.112
Home Food No 0.557 0.960 0.824
Yes 0.873 0.981 0.929
0.316 0.021 0.105
Weekend No 0.716 0.964 0.872
Yes 0.641 0.977 0.824
-0.075 0.013 -0.048
Finally, Tables VII and VIII present changes in
the Nutrient Adequacy Ratios for selected nutrientswhen there are changes in the independent variables. Overall,
the Nutrient Adequacy Ratios are close to one for both groups for all nutrients. The largest increases occur when people's knowledge of nutrition increases. For the sample of elderly people, other large increases occur when individuals do not live alone or get out of the house frequently. The effects of income and food stamp income are relatively small.
VI. CONCLUSION
We have examined the effect of food stamp support and income on the nutrition of two groups of persons in the U.S., one elderly and the other rural. We find that adequate income is no guarantee of
adequate nutrition; increased income, either restricted to food stamps or otherwise, is associated with reduced nutrient intake in both data sets. There has been no clear consensus in the literature as to what this effect should have been. Recent papers have found some positive effects, but most papers have found weak effects.
34
which confirms the mixed results for education found in the literature. Whenever it can be measured the effect of prior knowledge of
nutrition is always very large. As Clarkson [1975, 56] wrote, "a more promising avenue [than increased income] for reducing malnutrition is to provide education on the value of improving nutrition as well as on the dietary value of alternative food sources (including specific combinations of food) and on methods of preparing foods."
TABLE VII
Change in the Nutrient Adequacy Ratio for Selected Nutrients: Rural
Income Maintenance Participants
Calories Protein Iron
Overall 0.975 0.996 0.987
Continuous
Age (+10) -0.005 -0.003 0.006
Children (+1) -0.002 0.001 0.000
Adults (+1) -0.014 -0.003 -0.010
Elderly (+1) -0.036 -0.009 -0.008
Education (+4) -0.005 0.000 0.000
Income (+160) 0.001 0.000 -0.000
Food Stamp Bonus (+100) 0.005 0.001 -0.003
Discrete
Sex Female 0.976 0.996 0.988
Male 0.975 0.996 0.987
0.001 0.000 -0.001
Race White 0.960 0.992 0.982
Black 0.884 0.999 0.989
35
Live Alone No 0.978 0.998 0.987
Yes 0.946 0.985 0.886
0.032 -0.013 -0.001
Knowledge 0 0.879 0.982 0.902
2 0.975 0.996 0.987
0.096 0.014 0.085
2 0.975 0.996 0.987
4 0.996 1.000 0.999
0.021 0.004 0.012
Home Food No 0.963 0.995 0.984
Yes 0.992 0.998 0.994
0.029 0.003 0.010
Weekend No 0.976 0.996 0.988
Yes 0.969 0.997 0.983
0.007 0.001 -0.005
1. The specific programs and the data are discussed in detail below.
2. This argument is supported by the theory and observations of Vickery [1977], Clarkson [1975] and Silberberg [1985].
3. A rigorous analysis of this issue is beyond the scope of this paper.
4. An extensive review of the literature is in Butler and Raymond [1995].
36
Burt and Morgan [1981], Whitfield [1982], Akin et al. [1985] and Butler, Ohls, and Posner [1985].
6. See Brown and Tieman [1986], Windham, Wye and Hansen [1982], Emmons [1986], Perkin, Crandall and McCann [1988],
Johnson, Smiciklas-Wright and Crouter [1992], Haines, Hungerford, Popkin, and Guilkey [1992], Murphy, Hudes and Viteri [1992], and Bianchetti et al. [1990].
7. The information on the Rural Income Maintenance Experiment is taken from Setzer et al. [1976].
8. Additional information on this project is contained in Blanchard et al. [1982]. Barber, Hilton, and Ohls [1982] describe the public use file. All the information in this section is drawn from these sources.
9. The nutrients are calories, protein, calcium, iron, Vitamin A, thiamine (Vitamin [B.sub.1]), riboflavin (Vitamin [B.sub.2]), niacin, Vitamin C, and phosphorous (for Rural Income program participants only).
10. A critical issue is how to determine what foods an individual has actually consumed. There are two methods, the twenty-four hour recall survey, where an interviewer asks a respondent to name every food she or he has eaten in the last twenty-four hours, and a food journal method, where the respondent writes down everything he or she eats for several days or weeks. There is some controversy in the literature over which method is appropriate. Pearl [1979] states that the twenty-four hour survey cannot be used, since it produces cross-section data and the only accurate measure of nutrient intake is a time series. However, we argue that we can use cross-section data in a regression, since an observation drawn at a particular time provides an accurate assessment of the average quality of the diet, so long as there is no autocorrelation in the random disturbances which affect nutrient intake. We have some evidence for our claim: we have two observations on the nutrient intake of some of the families in the Rural Income Maintenance Experiment. For those families from North Carolina, we computed the correlation
37
11. These are fruits and vegetables, bread and grains, meat or high-protein substitutes, and dairy products.
12. We thank an anonymous referee for this insight.
13. The [Lambda]'s are computed differently for those who do and do not participate in the Food Stamp program. Specifically, [Lambda] = [Phi]([Gamma][z.sub.i])/[Phi][Gamma][z.sub.i]) for those who
participate, and [Lambda] = -[Phi]([Gamma][z.sub.i])/[Phi](-[Gamma][z.sub.i]) for those who do not participate.
14. It should also be pointed out here, that the Recommended Dietary Allowance may overstate the amount of a nutrient actually required to maintain good health. Guthrie et al. [1972] deemed a diet adequate if only two-thirds of the Recommended Dietary Allowance is attained. In this light, the shortages of calcium and calories seem less dramatic.
15. The results for the other nutrients do not differ qualitatively from the results presented here. For a complete set of the empirical results, see Butler and Raymond [1995].
16. As stated above, these results are not qualitatively different from those for the rest of the nutrients (Butler and Raymond [1995]).
REFERENCES
Akin, John S., David K. Guilkey, Barry M. Popkin, and Karen M. Smith. "The Impact of Federal Transfer Programs on
the Nutrient Intake of Elderly Individuals." Journal of Human Resources, Summer 1985, 383-404.
Barber, Grayson, Susan Hilton, and James C. Ohls. "Documentation for Public Analysis File Containing Survey Data Collected for the SSI/Elderly Food Stamp Cashout Demonstration Evaluation." Mathematica Policy Research Study. Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute Press, 1982.
38
Benus, J., J. Kmenta, and H. Shapiro. "The Dynamics of Household Budget Allocation to Food Expenditures." Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1976, 129-38.
Bianchetti, A., R. Rozzini, C. Carabellese, O. Zanetti, and M.
Trabucchi. "Nutrient Intake, Socioeconomic Conditions, and Health Status in a Large Elderly Population." Journal of the American Geriatric Society, May 1990, 521-26.
Blanchard, Lois, J. S. Butler, Pat Doyle, Russell Jackson, James C. Ohls, and Barbara Posner. "Final Report: Food Stamp/SSI Elderly Cashout Demonstration Evaluation." Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., June 1982.
Brown, Judith E., and Patricia Tieman. "Effect of Income and WIC on the Dietary Intake of Pre-schoolers: Results of a Preliminary Study." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, September 1986, 1189-91.
Butler, J. S., James C. Ohls, and Barbara M. Posner. "The Effect of the Food Stamp Program on the Nutrient Intake of the Eligible Elderly." Journal of Human Resources, Summer 1985, 405-20.
Butler, J. S., and Jennie E. Raymond. "The Effect of the Food Stamp Program on Nutrient Intake." Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Paper No. 95-W01, 1995.
Butler, J. S., and Julie A. Schoenman. "Stigma In the Food Stamp Program: An Analysis UsIng Objective and Subjective Indicators." Working paper, Vanderbilt University, March 1986.
Clarkson, Kenneth W. Food Stamps and Nutrition. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1975.
Davis, Audrey K. "Nutritional Hazards of Retirement," in Handbook of Geriatric Nutrition, edited by Jeng Hsu and Robert Davis. Park
Ridge, N.J.: Noyes Publications, 1981, chap. 16.
39
Devaney, Barbara, and Robert Moffitt. "Dietary Effects of the Food Stamp Program." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, February 1991, 202-11.
Emmons, Lillian. "Food Procurement and the Nutritional Adequacy of Diets in Low-Income Families." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, December 1986, 1684-93.
Guthrie, Helen A. Introductory Nutrition. St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishing, 1986.
Guthrie, Helen A., J. Patrick Madden, Marion D. Yoder, and Helene Perrault Koontz. "Effects of USDA Commodity Distribution Program on Nutritive Intake." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, September 1972, 287-92.
Haines, P. S., D. W. Hungerford, B. M. Popkin, and D. K. Guilkey. "Eating Patterns and Energy and Nutrient Intakes of U.S. Women." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, June 1992, 698-704.
Heckman, James J. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection, and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models." Annals of Economic and
Social Measurement, Fall 1979, 475-92.
Holbrook, Robert, and Frank Stafford. "The Propensity to Consume Separate Types of Income: A Generalized Permanent Income Hypothesis." Econometrica, 39(1), 1971, 1-21.
Horton, Susan, and Cathy Campbell. "Wife's Employment, Food Expenditure, and Apparent NutrientIntake: Evidence from Canada." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, August 1991, 784-94.
Johnson, R. K., H. Smiciklas-Wright, and A. C. Crouter. "Effect of Maternal Employment on the Quality of Young Children's Diets: The CSFII Experience." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, February 1992, 213-14.
40
Kohrs, Mary Bess, Dorice M. Czajka-Narins, and James W.
Nordstrom. "Factors Affecting the Nutritional Status of the Elderly," in Human Nutrition: A Comprehensive Treatise, Volume 6: Nutrition, Aging, and the Elderly, edited by Hamish N. Munro and Darla E. Danford. New York: Plenum Press, 1989, 305-31.
Lane, Sylvia. "Food Distribution and Food Stamp Program Effects on Food Consumption and Nutritional 'Achievement' of Low Income Persons in Kern County, California." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, February 1978, 108-16.
Madden, J. Patrick, and Marion D. Yoder. "Program Evaluation: Food Stamps and Commodity Distribution in Rural Areas of Central Pennsylvania." Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University, College of Agriculture, Agricultural Experiment Station, University Park, Pennsylvania,
Bulletin 780, June 1972.
Murphy, S. P., Rose D. Hudes, and F. E. Viteri. "Demographic and Economic Factors Associated with Dietary Quality for Adults in the 1987-88 Nationwide Food Consumption Survey." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, November 1992, 1352-57.
O'Connor, J. Frank, J. Patrick Madden, and Allen M. Prindle. "Nutrition." Volume V, chapter 6, Rural Income Maintenance Experiment Final Report. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1976.
Pearl, Robert B. "Possible Alternative Methods for Data Collection on Food Consumption and Expenditures." Unpublished manuscript, University of Illinois, 1979.
Perkin, Judy, Lee A. Crandall, and Stephanie F. McCann. "Ethnicity and Dietary Intakes of Low-Income Mothers Served by a North Florida Family Practice Center." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, September 1988, 1081-86.
Pitt, Mark M., and Mark R. Rosenzweig. "Health
and Nutrient Consumption Across and Within Farm Households." Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1985, 212-23.
41
Experiment." Washington, D.C.: Office of Income Security Policy Research, November 1976.
Silberberg, Eugene. "Nutrition and the Demand for Tastes." Journal of Political Economy, October 1985, 881-900.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Handbook of the Nutritional Contents of Foods. (Formerly titled Agricultural Handbook No. 8.) New York: Dover Publications, 1975.
Vickery, Clair. "The Time-Poor: A New Look at Poverty." Journal of Human Resources, Winter 1977, 27-48.
Whitfield, R. A. "A Nutritional Analysis of the Food Stamp Program." American Journal of Public Health, August 1982, 793-99.
Windham, C. T., B. W. Wyse, and R. G. Hansen. "Nutrient Density of Diets in the USDA National Food Consumption Survey 1977-78: 1. Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Dietary Density." Journal of the American Dietetic Association, January 1982, 28.
J. S. Butler, Associate Professor, Vanderbilt University and Jennie E. Raymond, Associate Professor, Auburn University. This research was supported by a Small Grant from the Institute for Research on Poverty of the University of Wisconsin. The authors accept
