Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore fruit and vegetable (FV) procurement disparity across income groups.
Design/methodology/approach
This study uses mean comparison and quintile regression to explain FVs variations.
Findings
Households from the highest income quantile spend more than two times on FVs than households from the lowest quantile; however, this expenditure disparity is largely mitigated in terms of purchase quantity. This paper presents evidence that, rather than quantity discounts or income neighborhood, the type of store (traditional markets vs supermarkets) plays a relevant role in explaining the smaller gap in terms of purchase quantity.
Research limitations/implications
Traditional markets help low-income households access low-cost FVs.
Social implications
The authors generate evidence to show that traditional markets play a relevant role to supply affordable FV to low-income households.
Originality/value
The paper used a high-quality and uncommon data set. It is a topic of high social impact.
Subject
Food Science,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
Reference58 articles.
1. Nutrition transition in Chile: determinants and consequences;Public Health Nutrition,2002
2. Consumo aparente de frutas, hortalizas y alimentos ultraprocesados en la población chilena;Revista Chilena de Nutrición,2016
3. Disparities in neighborhood food environments: implications of measurement strategies;Economic Geography,2010
4. Do the poor pay more for food? Evidence from the United Kingdom;American Journal of Agricultural Economics,2010
5. Peer reviewed: a systematic review of food deserts, 1966-2007;Preventing Chronic Disease,2009
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献