Background/Objectives: In FY 2024, 12.3% of the U.S. population was enrolled in the Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP, the principal food and nutrition program of the U.S. government. Herein, we analyze the cost of the Harvard (HHEP), Mediterranean (MED) and Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) eating patterns (EPs) to ascertain if they are affordable with the maximum allowable SNAP benefit. Methods: We utilize the 2021 Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) framework to analyze the cost of each of these alternative EPs across 15 age/sex groups. Results: We find that the MED and DASH EPs’ costs typically exceed the daily maximum SNAP benefit for those consuming more than 2100 calories. Conclusions: Our result suggests that reliance on fluid milk, allowance of more refined grains, starchy vegetables, red meat, added sugar and sodium and indifference toward food quality and freshness when calculating the maximum SNAP benefit reduces its cost in comparison to diets less reliant on fluid milk and more reliant on whole grains, fish, nuts, and fresh fruits and vegetables, a commonality shared by the HHEP, MED and DASH EPs. Health-centered alternative diets such as MED and DASH cannot be purchased with maximum allowable allocations of SNAP benefits, meaning that a poverty tax is placed on SNAP beneficiaries.

Our study investigates the application process for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and barriers to successful SNAP participation among potentially eligible households. We know that only 84 percent of eligible individuals in the United States participated in SNAP prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objective is to understand continued barriers to SNAP participation among eligible applicants by analyzing Indiana households that have formally engaged in the SNAP application process. We examine census-tract-level data from Indiana's administrator of SNAP benefits, Family and Social Services Administration (FSSA), in combination with census-tract-level socioeconomic data from 2017 to 2019. We use existing methodologies in micro- and macro-level socioeconomic analysis of SNAP participation to examine not only the terminal participation rate (approved applications) but also the dynamics of the application process that starts with a larger pool of applicants (submitted applications) and may end with a non-participation case status (denied applications). Our linear and quantile regression analyses also seek to understand these socioeconomic factors as predictors of the response distribution of SNAP case status across communities with different rates of application submissions and denials. Our analysis of Indiana SNAP applications supports anecdotal findings that one of the most difficult hurdles in the application process is timely navigation of the paperwork and interview requirements with evidence of increased time in the application process for communities with high SNAP denial rates. We also find that broader socioeconomic trends in a community are associated with application submission rates while applicants' personal circumstances better predict denial rates.

Producers in the U.S., particularly small-scale farmers and specialty crop growers, are unable to maintain their livelihoods with farming alone. This issue is convoluted by low farm gate prices stemming from the unequal distribution of market share and political support within the U.S. food supply chain. As a result, many farm activists and scholars have recommended a revitalization of parity pricing within U.S. policy. Parity pricing once served to set price floors considered to represent “fair” farm gate prices determined by the farm gate price and purchasing power of commodities during the parity period of 1910–1914. In this paper, we evaluate whether parity did exist during the set period of 1910–1914, showing farm incomes and non-farm incomes were not significantly different from one another during the parity period. We then explore the extent to which parity prices correspond to farm-gate prices, transfer terminal prices, and retail prices for a select group of twelve specialty crops. We show that farm gate prices are significantly lower than parity prices, do not necessarily translate into low prices for consumers, and do not consistently correlate with production costs. Lastly, we display the temporal correspondence between the end of parity pricing and declines in farm income. Our analysis contributes important evidence of the inequalities within production, payment, and pricing structures of specialty crops in the U.S. As such, we provide a critique of parity pricing arguing that parity pricing alone will not be sufficient to solve the complex and deeply rooted issues underpinning low farm gate prices and injustices within the U.S. food system. We conclude with a discussion of the impacts of low farm gate prices and areas for policy interventions.

We investigated the adequacy of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for Indiana households. Methods included focus groups, interviews, and a statewide survey of 652 households. SNAP benefit-level increases over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic increased their adequacy overall yet were still inadequate for some households. As of June 2022, Indiana households reported their SNAP benefits lasting 13 days a month. The inadequacy of SNAP benefits reveals that some participating households still experience food insecurity, which has adverse public health implications.

Older adults and those living in rural areas face unique challenges to health and food security which were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examine the interrelationships among food security, physical health, and loneliness among rural older adults before the onset of and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using data from a cross-sectional household survey of older adults in rural Indiana, administered May 2020 through July 2020, our results show a higher prevalence of food insecurity, poorer physical health, and increased loneliness after the onset of the pandemic. Path analyses confirmed the interrelationship between food security, health, and the absence of loneliness before and after the onset of COVID-19. Loneliness emerged as a major pathway through which the pandemic impacted quality of life, particularly affecting older women and physical health. Policy initiatives should consider the unique experiences and challenges associated with rural life among older adults and create food security initiatives that incorporate socialization while also considering the challenges associated with poor physical health in older age. Furthermore, our analysis shows that those who are vulnerable to food security, poor health, and loneliness in the absence of a global pandemic remain vulnerable during a pandemic.

The Thrifty Food Plan emerged from the Economy Food Plan in 1975 as a mathematical program that represented a nutritious diet for low-income Americans. Calculated last in 2021 by the US Department of Agriculture's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, the Thrifty Food Plan determines the maximum amount of food assistance for households participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Drawing on national archives, interviews, congressional discourse analysis, literature review, and mathematical modeling, this paper traces a genealogy of the Thrifty Food Plan from 1975 to the present along six themes. This genealogy tells a story of changing consumption patterns, dietary standards, and the ways in which the USDA defines food, people, and the basic food needs of the poorest Americans. This paper highlights avenues for further research into the various aspects of the Thrifty Food Plan that can elucidate the historical framing of hunger and poverty in the United States.

This paper is among a handful of studies on food access that focus on the public transportation system. Starting from a stratified sample of households, we use GIS and specifically, network analysis, to measure household access to healthy food outlets via public transportation. We find that the complexities of public transit systems necessitates place-based, household-level analysis of healthy food access. Our study provides an example of this and lessons for incorporating public transportation into healthy food access research.

To explore how older adults in rural communities navigate food insecurity, ten focus groups were held in Indiana, USA with 65 discussants. Recordings underwent inductive qualitative data analysis. Driving and transport remain a barrier to rural food access. Living alone is another contributor to food insecurity, while older adults' social networks are protective. Congregate meal sites are critical to maintaining nutrition and are underfunded; one-third of this region's meal sites closed in 2019. These must be maintained and expanded. Transportation to food outlets is needed. Mechanisms that reinforce older adults' social networks can build upon an existing asset.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted many aspects of our lives. Older adults, those with less income or fewer resources, and those living in rural parts of the United States are potentially more vulnerable. To understand the negative impact of COVID-19 on perceived food security, physical and mental health, and loneliness in a sample of older, rural, low-income adults in the United States, we use results from a mailed survey in which residents of four Indiana counties contrasted their status during the early period of the pandemic to their typical pre-pandemic status. We test for significant changes in status and what predicts negative impacts to food security, health, and loneliness. We asked respondents to report on both pre-pandemic and since-pandemic experiences in the instrument, which was administered after the pandemic had begun, in May 2020. We measure food security using the U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module (six-item short form; HFSSM), physical and mental health using the Centers for Disease Control's Healthy Days Measures (HRQOL-4), and loneliness using the UCLA Revised Loneliness Scale. A binomial test identified significant declines in status for all three measures. Logistic regressions identified factors associated with each of the measures worsening. Fear of going to the store or food pantry was associated with all three measures. Decreased store hours and closed food pantries were associated with lower food security. More education, fewer years of age, being female, decreased income, and stockpiling were associated with more reported days of poor physical or mental health. Fewer years of age, lack of transportation, and eating less often with others were associated with perceived increased loneliness. The pandemic had a negative impact on respondents' food security, unhealthy days, and loneliness, but different factors were associated with each measure for this population. Our findings provide insight for targeted recovery efforts.

Abstract Non-Technical Summary In this paper, we focus on the disruption that the current pandemic has created within the US industrial food system. We suggest that the pandemic has provided an opening for small producers. Attending to small-scale responses to the pandemic can guide policy and public investments towards a more just and sustainable future for food. Technical Summary Building on the IPES-Food Communique of April 2020, we examine the many ways in which the US industrial food system faltered during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Using Regime Theory as a guide, we suggest that such a catastrophic crisis may create significant opportunities for an emergent food regime. Drawing from our research and participant observation in the US Midwest, we examine changes in the food system occasioned by the pandemic that foreshadow a new food regime. We suggest several blockages and risks to this new regime and suggest policies that would make transition smoother to a more just and sustainable food system. Social Media Summary (120 characters) What will food be like after the pandemic? This new study outlines an alternative food system emerging in the American Midwest.

Geographical indications (GIs) have been used globally to denote quality of a product related to geography, raw materials, particular skills, or other processing techniques. In recent years, agencies such as FAO have been encouraging further development of GIs around food and agricultural products to support sustainable development. Considering the pressing need for more sustainable food systems, we ask: Are current GI schemes working to promote sustainability in food systems, and if so, how? We examine this question with analysis of current GIs for agricultural crops in Italy. We developed a Java-based application to compile, read, index, and search the corpus of files retrieved from the eAmbrosia database, which houses GI applications and registrations for agricultural products. We find several examples of GIs mandating and protecting sustainable modes of production. We conclude with a discussion of this geographic scheme in Italy, implications for sustainable development, and considerations for U.S. food systems.

The Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) determines maximum entitlements (i.e., food stamp allotments) for participants of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP); it was last modified in 2006 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture?s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP). The TFP is a low-cost diet generated from a geometric program that incorporates data on current consumption patterns, federal nutritional and dietary guidelines, nutrient profiles of food groups, food prices, and predetermined budgets for seventeen age?sex groups. Scholars have previously critiqued the TFP for excluding labor time, underestimating household food waste, and ignoring geographical variation in food prices. In this article, I apply literatures from critical food studies and political economy of food to further deconstruct the TFP data and geometric program. I argue that the TFP reifies an industrial neoliberal capitalist valuation of food via federal dietary guidelines and relative price data. Moreover, the CNPP?s use of current consumption data as a proxy for palatability works to naturalize and depoliticize the structural and social inequalities of national and global food systems. Finally, a critical evaluation of the TFP mathematics reveals an unstable geometric program that requires multiple subjective manipulations to solve. This analysis shows that the TFP calculation reproduces a food budget insufficient for SNAP households to procure nutritious, culturally appropriate diets, essentially doing work to perpetuate hunger and poverty in the United States. I offer recommendations for changing this national valuation of food and nutrition assistance. Key Words: EBT, food justice, food security, food stamps, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.????????TFP????????????????SNAP??????????????????????????????? 2006 ??????????????????CNPP????TFP ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????TFP?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????TFP??????????????TFP ????????????????????????????????????????CNPP ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? TFP ???????????????????????????????????????????TFP ?????????????? SNAP ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????EBT????????????????????????El Plan de Ahorro Alimentario (TFP, sigla en ingl?s) determina los m?ximos derechos de subsidio (esto es, reparto de estampillas de alimentos) para los participantes en el Programa Suplementario de Ayuda para la Nutrici?n (SNAP), un programa federal; ?ste fue modificado en 2006 por el Centro para las Pol?ticas y Promoci?n de la Nutrici?n (CNPP) del Departamento de Agricultura de los EE.UU. El TFP es una dieta de bajo costo generada desde un programa geom?trico que incorpora datos sobre los actuales patrones de consumo, gu?as federales de nutrici?n y dieta, perfiles nutricionales de grupos de alimentos, precios de los alimentos y presupuestos predeterminados para grupos por sexo de los diecisiete a?os de edad. Los estudiosos de estos temas ya han criticado al TFP por excluir tiempo de trabajo y por subestimar el desperdicio de alimentos en el hogar e ignorar la variaci?n geogr?fica de los precios de los alimentos. En este art?culo, utilizamos literaturas relacionadas con estudios cr?ticos sobre los alimentos y trabajos de econom?a pol?tica de los alimentos, para deconstruir a?n m?s los datos del TFP y del programa geom?trico. Yo sostengo que el TFP reifica una valoraci?n industrial neoliberal capitalista de los alimentos v?a las gu?as diet?ticas federales y los datos de precios relativos. M?s todav?a, el uso de datos actuales sobre consumo del CNPP a manera de un proxy de comida apetitosa se orienta a naturalizar y despolitizar las desigualdades estructurales y sociales de los sistemas alimentarios nacionales y globales. Por ?ltimo, una evaluaci?n cr?tica de las matem?ticas del TFP revela el problema de un programa geom?trico inestable que exige para solucionarlo m?ltiples manipulaciones subjetivas. Este an?lisis muestra que el c?lculo del TFP reproduce un presupuesto alimentario insuficiente para procurar dietas nutritivas y culturalmente apropiadas a los hogares del SNAP, esencialmente acometiendo esfuerzos para perpetuar el hambre y la pobreza en los Estados Unidos. Presento unas recomendaciones para cambiar la valoraci?n nacional de la ayuda alimentaria y nutricional. Palabras clave: EBT, justicia alimentaria, seguridad alimentaria, estampillas de alimentos, Programa Suplementario de Ayuda para la Nutrici?n.

In this paper, we develop a new approach to mapping food access in the U.S. We compare the standard USDA approach to a method that examines differences between actual food outlet locations and optimal locations, as defined by a covering model. We find that the new approach places more weight on rural areas, in contrast to the USDA method, which places more weight on urban areas. We contend this covering model approach is superior to the USDA approach in three ways: (1) it explicitly examines what commodities are available a different categories of store, (2) it allows the comparison of real distributions with an idealised surface or set of locations, elucidating where interventions make most sense, (3) it allows flexible inclusion of target populations (i.e. households experiencing economic barriers to food access) by not setting Census Tract-level limits on definitions of low-income, and (4) it provides a flexible analytical tool that can be recalibrated in response to the demands of local policy, politics and changes in the food landscape over time. Provided adequate data and computing power, this new approach can scale to align with a region's purview and definition of healthy food access.

Families living in poverty in the United States rely on earnings, federal government programmes, the emergency food system (EFS) and a variety of informal networks to get adequate nutrition. The EFS is a large network of emergency food operations (EFOs) that serve as a supplement both for people receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits and for those requiring food aid who do not qualify for government assistance. The static view of the distribution of EFOs across 11 counties in south-central Indiana typically employed by policymakers and non-governmental organizations shows this largely rural area to be well covered. However, when examined by the time of day and day of month that EFOs in the region operate, coverage proves illusory. Here, we map and analyse the spatiotemporal availability of services offered by these EFOs and develop measures of availability of EFOs, dependent on EFO open hours, service area limitations and numbers of food-insecure individuals. This allows policymakers and non-governmental organizations to better gauge the adequacy of the EFS within a given region. Food pantries are part of the emergency food network in the United States, but they are an understudied component of food access. The Pantry Accessibility Index and Individual Accessibility Index developed here allow measurement of the spatiotemporal availability of these services to the food insecure of south-central Indiana.

The Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) determines the maximum allotment of nutrition assistance for over forty million Americans participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This research recalculates the official TFP allocations using a more straightforward model that minimizes cost subject to nutrient constraints to establish a baseline for adult females and males. We then examine three additional diet plans to evaluate their feasibility under the current SNAP benefit allotment: a diet for lactose intolerance, for persons with type 2 diabetes, and a diet for pregnant women. The first model calculates a diet plan that contains no fluid milk, taking into account that 1 in 4 Americans is lactose intolerant. The second model calculates a diet plan that is lower in carbohydrates (grains and fruits comprise less than 45% of calories), reflecting a recommended diet for a person with type 2 diabetes, approximately 10% of the U.S. population. The third model includes the Institute of Medicine’s recommended diet for pregnancy. In each case, total daily cost per individual and allocation across food groups were compared. Our Lactose Intolerance, Type 2 Diabetes, and Pregnancy model for 20-50 year old females all return minimum food costs above the TFP budget allocation. This research demonstrates how the TFP provides an unrealistic assessment of need among 20-50 year old females with relatively common dietary needs. Results indicate that equalizing the TFP budget allocations between men and women would better accommodate the heterogeneous needs of America’s poorest individuals.

The Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) is the basis of benefit allocations within the USDA's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which administers nearly $70 billion in benefits to over 42 million people annually. To produce the allocation of food within the TFP, the USDA uses a mathematical optimization model that solves for the daily apportionment across various food groups. The model is constrained by nutritional and consumption requirements to produce an "optimal" allocation. Despite the importance of the TFP, the computational solution developed by the USDA has received insufficient attention, with only a handful of articles written on the TFP optimization model. Here, we run three alternative objective functions that are simpler than the one used by USDA. Our first alternative objective function minimizes the sum of squared errors between the consumed market basket of goods and an allocated market basket of goods, the second alternative objective function minimizes the sum of the absolute value of the difference between the consumed market basket of goods and an allocated market basket of goods, and the third alternative objective function minimizes the weighted absolute deviation of allocations and actual consumption expressed as a proportion of observed consumption. A clear theoretical advantage of either of our methods is that they eliminate the need to arbitrarily set allocated consumption to nonzero values, as is the case for the logarithmic objective function used by USDA. In an operational sense, we find that our model formulations produce an allocation that fits actual consumption better than the objective function employed by the USDA.

Farmers markets have flourished in recent decades as alternative distribution outlets for small-scale, organic producers. However, one persistent challenge for farmers markets is attracting a diverse range of patrons across the wide socio-economic spectrum. This issue is even more critical when focused on individuals with a limited budget for food expenditures. Thus, we surveyed SNAP and non-SNAP users who attend a Midwestern farmers market in order to investigate motivations for attendance, local food values, and the role that financial incentives play in affecting attendance. Additionally, we compared our findings with our previous research on households who receive SNAP and do not attend the farmers market. Our results underscore that the SNAP users at the market have much in common with their non-SNAP market-going counterparts. There are also several critical differences between market-going SNAP users and the non-going SNAP users. In conclusion, while our results show financial incentives work to reduce the reproduction of economic privilege at the farmers market, additional initiatives are required to address other food access barriers and to promote food justice in this important and expanding space.