Friday, November 7, 2014
Ballroom B (Convention Center)
*Names in bold indicate Presenter
Are food assistance programs contributing to the nation’s obesity epidemic? This paradox runs parallel to others like it that find associations between low socioeconomic status and obesity. Nutrition assistance programs are part of the daily lives of millions of low-income children. These programs were created to help the poor by reducing hunger and improving nutritional intake. However, the paradox of high levels of obesity among low-income youth could indicate that food overconsumption is a pressing concern today. A number of scholars have questioned whether federal nutrition programs—such as food stamps and school lunch and breakfast—are actually contributing to the obesity epidemic. Past studies have produced conflicting results, failed to control for selection bias, often relied on cross-sectional data, and have focused their analyses on participation in a single food assistance program. Based on the literature, our hypotheses predict that program participation will be associated with decreased food insecurity for all participants. We also expect to find differential effects of participation on BMI for boys and girls. For children who are participating in multiple food assistance programs, relative to SNAP alone, we expect to see an even greater increase in the probability of obesity. Our study examines the effects of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly the Food Stamp Program), the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), the School Breakfast Program (SBP), and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) on weight status over the course of childhood. To answer our research question, we will use data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) Child Development Supplement—which follows a cohort of more than 3,000 children beginning in 1997 through 2007—and state-level policy variables available through the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These data provide us with rich information on weight, program receipt, and family and individual characteristics, in addition to food security and the food environment. Additional advantages of our study include the use of panel-data estimation techniques and exogenous instrumental variables to control for selection. The results of this study have the potential to add to our understanding of the drivers of childhood obesity and provide useful guidance to policy makers on important impacts of food assistance programs. They might also provide insights into how these programs can be reformed to better meet the needs of children and families in a changing food environment.
