CONSUMER FOOD INSIGHTS - Purdue Agriculture
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Volume 1, Issue 6: June 2022
CONSUMER FOOD
INSIGHTS
Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability
College of Agriculture, Purdue University
Jayson L. Lusk and Sam Polzin
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 1 of 1903 INTRODUCTION
04 SUSTAINABLE DIETS
TABLE OF 05 FOOD VALUES
CONTENTS 06
08
FOOD EXPENDITURES
FOOD SECURITY
09 FOOD SATISFACTION
11 CONSUMER BEHAVIORS
14 CONSUMER TRUST
15 CONSUMER BELIEFS
16 FOOD POLICY
18 AD HOC QUESTIONS
19 ENDNOTES
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 2 of 19INTRODUCTION SFP INDEX
Consumer Food Insights is a monthly survey of more than 1,200 Americans from across the country
produced and run by the Center for Food Demand Analysis and Sustainability (CFDAS) at Purdue
University to track trends and changes in consumer food demand and food sustainability behaviors.1
70 /100
Visit purdue.ag/CFDAS for more details.
In this issue, we look closer at how respondents of different age cohorts have answered our survey. FOOD INSECURITY
16%
We aggregated six months of data (January - June 2022) to compare consumer behaviors across four
groups based on their birth year: Gen Z (after 1996), Millennials (1981-1996), Gen X (1965-1980), and
Boomers+ (before 1965). 2 New questions this month also ask consumers about their satisfaction with
areas of American life and their views on threats to global food security. Interested in additional in-
depth analysis? Contact cfdas@purdue.edu to learn how you can join our industry consortium.
KEY INSIGHTS FROM JUNE FOOD SPENDING
•
•
•
Sustainable Food Purchasing (SFP) Index reached its highest score yet.
Weekly food spending remains more than 15% higher than in Janaury.
Consumer food demand is more price sensitive than in previous months.
$186 /WEEK
• Consumer expectations for food price inflation continue to rise gradually.
• Food insecurity is highest among the youngest Americans (Gen Z).
FOOD HAPPINESS
88%
• The oldest Americans (Boomers+) are most likely to be happy with their diets.
• Most Americans who garden do so to reduce food costs or have better tasting food.
• Most consumers are worried about the impacts of the Russia-Ukraine war on food supplies.
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 3 of 19SUSTAINABLE DIETS
Is American food purchasing sustainable? Figure 1. Sustainable Food Purchasing Index, January - June 2022
The SFP Index has risen to its highest score since Taste 85
January but remains broadly consistent (Figure 1).
Economic 76
We see further that consumers in the Boomers+
cohort score much higher on the Taste, Economic, Security 77
and Security indicators compared to other groups Nutrition 67 Overall
(Figure 2). However, their Social and Environment
scores are just as low if not lower than the younger
cohorts. The youngest consumers (Gen Z) have the
Environment
Social
56
56
70
worst overall score, but the second youngest group
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
(Millennials), perform the best on the Environment,
SFP Index
Social, and Nutrition indicators.
Figure 2. Sustainable Food Purchasing Index by Age Cohort, January - June 2022
The Sustainable Food Purchasing (SFP) Index is a self-
Overall
reported measure of food purchasing designed to assess
how well consumer shopping habits align with healthy diets Gen Z 63
from sustainable food systems, as described by the EAT-
Lancet Commission on Food, Planet, Health. A top score of Millennials 68
100 reflects consumer food purchasing that aligns with a set
of key recommendations for better nurturing human health Gen X 68
and supporting environmental sustainability. The overall SFP
Index comprises of six components—Nutrition, Environment,
Boomers+ 71
Social, Economic, Security, and Taste—correlating with the
different strategies for achieving food systems transformation.
More information on these components and the SFP scoring
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
procedure is described on the CFDAS website.
SFP Index
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 4 of 19FOOD VALUES
What attributes do Americans most value when purchasing food?
Respondents were asked to allocate 100 points to six different attributes based on their importance when shopping for food (Figure 3).
These attributes closely reflect the components of the SFP Index. Similar to the Index, how much consumers value these sustainability
components has remained stable from month to month. Looking closer at how these food values break down across age groups, their
distributions diverge. On average, older consumers value the taste of their food more, and younger consumers value the environmental
impact and social responsibility of their food more. The oldest age group (Boomers+) also value nutrition by five more points than the
youngest group (Gen Z), while the values assigned to affordability and availability are generally comparable across generations.
Figure 3. Share of 100 Points Allocated to Food Attributes by Age Cohort, January - June 2022
Gen Z 23 21 19 14 12 11
Millenials 20 23 21 14 11 11 Affordability
Taste
Nutrition
Gen X 23 25 21 14 9 9 Availability
Environmental impact
Social responsibility
Boomers+ 23 28 24 14 6 6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Points
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 5 of 19FOOD EXPENDITURES
How much are Americans spending on their Figure 4. Weekly Household Food Expenditures, January - June 2022
food?
Food at home Food away from home
Respondents were asked to estimate their weekly $140
food spending (Figure 4). On average, consumers $120
reported spending $119/week on groceries (FAH)
$100
and $67/week on restaurants and carryout meals
(FAFH).3 Steady or falling FAH expenditures in the $80
face of high inflation may indicate consumers are $60
adjusting their purchasing in response to higher
$40
prices. Consumers estimates of annual food price
inflation for both the past 12 months and next 12 $20
months also continue to increase (Figure 5). $0
Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22
We further estimate consumer demand to be more
price sensitive (Figure 6). When we asked whether Figure 5. Consumer Estimates of Food Price Inflation January - June 2022
people would purchase a basket of brand name
Past 12 Months Next 12 Months
groceries costing $100 or generic groceries costing
10%
$85, 60% chose generic compared to 65% when the
8%
price of the generic groceries was $70. Moreover,
Figure 7 shows consumer households making less 6%
than $50,000 annually are spending the greatest 4%
share of their income on food compared to previous 2%
months. Of note, we omit food assistance dollars in 0%
Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22
these calculations.
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 6 of 19FOOD EXPENDITURES
Figure 6. Choice of Equivalent Brand Name or Generic Groceries at Two Different Price Points, May - June 2022
Generic Brand
Generic price: $85 vs. Brand price: $100 61 39
May
Generic price: $70 vs. Brand price: $100 62 38
Generic price: $85 vs. Brand price: $100 60 40
June
Generic price: $70 vs. Brand price: $100 65 35
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Figure 7. Total Food Expenditures as a Share of Income by Annual Household Income, Janaury - June 2022
Jan-22 thru May-22 Jun-22
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
Less than $25K $25K - $49k $50k - $74k $75k - $99k $100k - $150k More than $150k
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 7 of 19FOOD SECURITY
Are Americans having trouble buying food for Figure 8. Household Food Security According to USDA Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form,
their families? January - June 2022
High Low Very low
Based on responses to six standardized questions
100%
about food bought and eaten in the last 30 days,
we estimate the national rate of food insecurity to 80%
be 16%.4 Figure 8 shows this rate remains steady
60%
compared to previous months, and around 14-16%
of the country can be considered food insecure in 40%
any given month. However, significant disparities
20%
exist between age groups (Figure 9). Since January,
over 30% of Gen Z adults have experienced or are 0%
Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22
experiencing food insecurity compared to about 17-
19% of Millennial and Gen X adults and just 7% of
Boomers+. Although Gen Z reports lower incomes Figure 9. Household Food Security by Age Cohort, January - June 2022
on average, which can show up in the food security High Low Very low
calculations, this disparity is concerning at a time
when food inflation is outpacing salary growth. Gen Z 67 19 15
Millenials 81 10 9
About 30% of Gen Z households also report getting
Gen X 83 8 9
free groceries from a food pantry, church, or
other charity in the last 30 days compared to Boomers+ 93 3 4
only 8% of Boomer+ households.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 8 of 19FOOD SATISFACTION
How satisfied are Americans with their food Figure 10. American Life Satisfaction Index, June 2022
compared to other aspects of their lives?
Scientific innovation
We asked survey respondents to select three areas Religious freedom
of American life with which they are most satisfied
Job opportunities
and most dissatisfied and scored these picks on
Work-life balance
a satisfaction index. Scientific innovation, religious
freedom, and job opportunities received the three Universities/colleges
highest ratings while gas affordability was by far Healthcare
the area of greatest dissatisfaction, followed by the K-12 schools
federal government and public safety (Figure 10).
Food affordability
Of note, food affordability lands in the middle of the
pack with a neutral score of 0. Local government
News media
Survey respondents were also asked to score their
State government
own diet on a 0-10 scale, with top of the well-being
scale representing their ideal diet.5 76% of adults in Environmental quality
the Boomers+ cohort rated their diet as a 7 or above Foreign relations
compared to 55% of Gen Z adults and about 68% Public safety
of Millennial and Gen X adults (Figure 11). Similarly,
Federal government
Figure 12 shows the oldest age group is most likely
to be happy with their diets. However, while Gen Z, Gas affordability
Millennials, and Gen X have similar rates of general 0.0
-100 -50 0 50 100
happiness with their diets, Millennials report being
Satisfaction Index
“very happy” at a much higher rate.
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 9 of 19FOOD SATISFACTION
Figure 11. Diet Well-Being Rating by Age Cohort, January - June 2022 Figure 12. Diet Happiness by Age Cohort, January - June 2022
Gen Z Millenials Gen X Boomers+ Not at all happy Not very Happy Rather Happy Very Happy
100%
55 90%
24
68 28
Thriving (7-10) 32
36
68 80%
76
70%
60%
27
21
Struggling (5-6) 50%
20 60
56
17 40% 48
61
30%
18
11 20%
Suffering (0-4)
13
10%
7
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Gen Z Millenials Gen X Boomers+
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 10 of 19CONSUMER BEHAVIORS
How are Americans navigating their food environment?
Last month, we began tracking the share of people who say they currently have a food garden. This month, we see a small share of
people who were planning to garden have started (Figure 13). In addition, the top reasons people report gardening are to reduce food
costs and to have better tasting or fresher food (Figure 14). We also show that most gardeners are tending less than 20 plants and a
plurality tend less than 10 plants (Figure 15). However, the top reason people report not gardening is due to lack of space (Figure 16),
which suggests people think gardening is space intensive and/or there is a demand for accessible community space for growing food.
Figure 17 shows specific consumer food habits broken down by age cohort. Notably, we observe the two younger generations (Gen Z &
Millennials) more often choosing food purchasing that is typically promoted as more ethical or sustainable (i.e., local foods, wild-caught
fish, grass-fed beef, cage-free eggs, and organic foods). Similarly, Boomers+ are checking food labeling like GMO ingredients and place
of origin much less often than these two younger groups. We see age play out in food waste too, as adults in the Gen Z cohort are more
likely to take steps to reduce food and less likely to throw away food past the use-by date compared to Gen X and Boomers+.
Figure 13. Share of Adults Food Gardening, May - June 2022
May-22 Jun-22
26
Yes, I am growing food
28
25
No, but I plan to start
23
49
No, I don't plan to start
49
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 11 of 19CONSUMER BEHAVIORS
Figure 14. Reasons that People Food Garden, June 2022 Figure 15. # of Plants in People’s Food Gardens, June 2022
Reduce food costs 10 or less 35
25
11 - 20 28
Have better tasting or fresher food 23
21 - 30 13
Relax or be close with nature 11 31 - 40 8
41 - 50 6
Pass the time or entertain myself 9
50 or more 10
Know where my food comes from 7 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Learn how food grows 7 Figure 16. Reasons that People Don’t Food Garden, June 2022
Avoid pesticides or other
6 Not enough space 33
chemicals
No interest 26
Share or donate food 4
Not enough time 15
Have food not available at the store 4 Other 9
Don't have the mobility 8
Other 2
Don't know how 6
Sell food 1 Too expensive 4
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 12 of 19CONSUMER BEHAVIORS
Figure 17. Consumer Shopping and Eating Habits by Age Cohort, January - June 2022
Gen Z Millennials Gen X Boomers+
Chose generic foods over brand name foods 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.1
Chose local foods over non-local foods 3.2 3.3 3.1 2.9
Chose wild-caught fish over farm-raised fish 3.2 3.3 2.9 2.5
Chose grass-fed beef over conventional beef 3.2 3.2 3.0 2.7
Chose cage-free eggs over conventional eggs 3.2 3.2 2.8 2.3
Chose organic foods over non-organic foods 3.1 3.0 2.6 2.0
Chose plant-based proteins over animal proteins 3.0 3.2 2.8 2.3
Mean
Checked the use-by/sell-by date at the store 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.1 Score
Checked the nutrition label before buying new foods 3.4 3.6 3.4 3.4 5 Always
Checked for natural or clean labels 3.2 3.4 3.1 2.6 4 Often
Checked where my food originated 3.2 3.3 2.9 2.6 3 Sometimes
Checked for food recalls 3.1 3.2 2.9 2.7 2 Rarely
Checked how my food was produced 3.1 3.2 2.9 2.4 1 Never
Checked for GMO ingredients 2.9 3.2 2.9 2.4
Took steps to reduce food waste at home 3.7 3.5 3.3 2.9
Recycled food packaging 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.5
Threw away food past the use-by date 3.3 3.7 3.8 3.9
Composted food scraps 2.9 2.8 2.5 1.9
Ate fruits and vegetables without washing them 2.7 2.7 2.4 1.9
Ate rare or undercooked meat 2.6 2.6 2.0 1.4
Ate raw dough or batter 2.3 2.5 2.0 1.5
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 13 of 19CONSUMER TRUST
Who do Americans trust to inform them about Figure 18. Trustworthiness Index of Food-related Information Sources by Age Cohort,
healthy and sustainable food? January - June 2022
Gen Z Millenials Gen X Boomers+
We asked survey respondents to select their five
most trusted and five least trust sources of food-
PCP
related information and scored these sources on a
trustworthiness index. When we disaggregate this FDA
index by age group, significant differences in trust
emerge (Figure 18). Specifically, older consumers USDA
(Gen X & Boomers+) trust primary care phsyicians
(PCP), Department of Agriculture (USDA), and DGA
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) much more
Friends
than younger consumers (Gen Z & Millennials). The
Boomers+ cohort also most distrusts both news
NYT
media, such as the New York Times (NYT) and
CNN, and food companies, such as McDonald’s, Nestle
Tyson, and Nestle, while Millennials generally least
distrust these entities. Tyson
CNN
Trust in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) dropped
over 20% again from last month, which corresponds McDonald's
with the agency continuing to be in the news for
-100 -50 0 50 100
a number of controversial decisions. Trustworthiness Index
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 14 of 19CONSUMER BELIEFS
What do Americans believe about their food and food system?
We observe differences in the beliefs that consumers from different age groups have about their food (Figure 19). Some of the largest
differences relate to health claims. Millennials are most likely to agree that (1) organic food is more nutritious than non-organic, (2) gluten-
free food is healthier for you, and (3) plant-based milk is healthier than dairy milk, while Boomers+ are most likely to disagree. Millennials
are also the only group from which a majority agrees that agriculture is a large contributor to climate change. However, majorities from
every group agree that climate change will impact food prices. Agreement is more muddled across ages on whether genetically modified
food is safe, despite leading scientific bodies concluding GMOs are no riskier than foods produced through conventional breeding.
34 27 37 37 35
29 and Nutrition by Age Cohort, March - June 2022 1310 23
29 67
59
Figure 19. Consumer Agreement with Claims about Food
Strongly/somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Strongly/somewhat agree
Gen Z 15 29 56 20 33 47 11 46 42
Millennials 8 24 67 14 25 60 10 31 59
Gen X 9 28 63 22 32 47 12 42 46
Boomers+ 8 33 59 35 34 31 16 49 35
Local food is better for the environment Organic food is more nutritious than non-organic Grass-fed beef tastes better than grain-fed beef
Gen Z 21 27 52 31 33 36 21 47 32
Millennials 16 29 55 30 27 43 19 33 48
Gen X 19 31 50 32 35 34 21 40 39
Boomers+ 24 29 47 27 37 36 33 44 23
Eating less meat is better for the environment Genetically modified food is safe to eat Gluten-free food is healthier for you
Gen Z 9 27 64 16 39 46 16 36 47
Millennials 7 20 72 18 32 50 11 31 59
Gen X 9 27 64 25 39 35 20 36 44
Boomers+ 15 21 64 43 37 19 26 33 41
Climate change will impact food prices Plant-based milk is healthier than dairy milk Agriculture is a large contributor to climate change
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 15 of 19FOOD POLICY
Where do Americans stand on food policy?
Most of the surveyed policies remain widely popular, but certain policy preferences correlate with age demographics (Figure 20).
For example, the oldest consumers (Boomers+) are much less likely to favor some taxes, such as a fee on carbon emissions, and
regulations, such as stricter zoning for fast food establishments. They are also more conservative with regards to spending on programs
like SNAP but have the highest support for increasing funding to agricultural research and conservation programs. The youngest group
(Gen Z) tends to be fairly progressive, for example supporting citizenship for undocumented farmworkers at the highest rate, although
Millennials and Gen X show just as much support, if not more, for policies like regulating confined animal feeding operations and taxing
sugar-sweetened beverages. Thus, support for many of these food policies does not track perfectly onto the age cohort of the consumer.
Policy Questions:
Increase agricultural research funding to develop crops more resistant to heat, drought, and flooding through plant breeding and biotechnologies.
Increase conservation program funding to pay farmers and ranchers to adopt climate-smart practices and help improve environmental outcomes.
Impose new regulations on the environmental claims food companies can make about their products, such as claims about water, soil, and air pollution.
Permanently extend and expand pandemic-related changes to SNAP that increase benefits and lower barriers to participation.
Prohibit marketing on TV, via online video streams, etc. of unhealthy food and beverage products such as junk foods and sodas to children.
Place moratorium on new and expanding CAFOs, phase out the largest CAFOs, and pay farmers to transition out of operating CAFOs.
Enable undocumented farmworkers and their immediate family members to obtain lawful immigration status and a pathway to citizenship.
Impose a fee on all food producers according to the carbon footprint of their products unless they take clear action to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.
Implement zoning regulations to restrict the number of fast food outlets and drive-through facilities near schools, parks, hospitals, and other public areas.
Increase the prices of drinks with added sugar by 25%. Examples of affected beverages include carbonated soft drinks (soda), sports drinks, and energy drinks.
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 16 of 19FOOD POLICY
Figure 20. Favorable Support for Food and Agriculture Policies by Age Cohort, January - June 2022
Gen Z Millenials Gen X Boomers+ Gen Z Millenials Gen X Boomers+
76 61
Increase agricultural 82 68
Regulate CAFOs
research funding 81 63
86 57
76 Citizenship for 73
Increase conservation 80 undocumented 67
program funding 79 farmworkers 64
81 56
73 65
Regulate 75 63
72 Carbon emissions tax
environmental claims 59
68 54
71 50
Expand SNAP 74 56
70 Fast food zoning laws 48
benefits
57 38
57 42
Child advertising ban 64 Sugar-sweetened 49
on junk foods 63 beverage tax 46
62 40
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 17 of 19AD HOC QUESTIONS
Are Americans feelings the effects of global Figure 21. Worried about Russia-Ukraine War Affecting Global Food Supplies?, June 2022
food supply disruptions abroad?
Very/somewhat worried
70 19 12 Neither worried/unworried
A large majority of Americans are worried about
the effects of the Russia-Ukraine war on global 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Very/somewhat unworried
food supplies (Figure 21). A majority also reports
Figure 22. Has Russia-Ukraine War Impacted the Price or Availability of your Food?, June 2022
observing food price or availability impacts as a
result of the war (Figure 22). Though Americans
58 Yes
will tend to report being worried when asked their No/Don't know
feelings on any major problem, these results show 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
a significant share of consumers are engaged with
the effects of the war in Europe. Figure 23. Policy Areas the U.S. Should Prioritize to Ensure Global Food Security, June 2022
Notably, only a quarter of Americans say resolving Increase U.S. agricultural production 51
the Russia-Ukraine war should be a policy priority Increase supply chain resilience 45
for protecting global food security (Figure 23). A Enhance food processing capacities 29
majority think the U.S. should focus on increasing Address climate change effects 28
its agricultural production, followed by improving Improve water resource management 25
supply chain resilience. Addressing trade relations, Resolve Russia-Ukraine war 25
COVID-19 disruptions, and carbon emissions are Improve energy security 19
Improve international trade relations 18
all at the bottom of the priority list. If you would like
Address COVID-19 disruptions 17
to know how American consumers are reacting to
Reduce carbon emissions 14
other food system events, you can send suggestions
to us at cfdas@purdue.edu. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
*Results total over 100% because respondents could choose up to 3 options.
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 18 of 19ENDNOTES
1 Data were collected from an online panel maintained by the firm Dynata over a two-day period from June 20-21, 2022. The eligible
population included U.S. adults ages 18+. A weighting method called iterative proportional fitting—or raking—was applied to ensure
a demographically balanced sample by age, sex, race, census region, income, and SNAP participation. Every respondent from the
previous month was re-contacted and asked to take the survey again. About 31% of May’s sample participated this month, thus the rest
of the sample was filled in with a new pool of respondents. Data collection for every survey begins on the third Monday of each month,
unless otherwise dictated by holidays or extenuating circumstances.
2 Sample sizes: Gen Z (n=450), Millennials (n=1,964), Gen X (n=1,894), and Boomers+ (n=3,211).
3 Food at home (FAH) refers to food sales meant for home or off-site consumption and the value of donations and non-market acquisitions,
which is acquired from outlets such as grocery stores, convenience stores, direct sales, etc. Food away from home (FAFH) refers to
food sales meant for immediate consumption, federal food programs, and food furnished as an ancillary activity, which is acquired from
outlets such as restaurants, bars, schools, etc.
4 High or marginal food security (i.e., food secure): 0-1 reported indications of food-access problems; little or no indication of change in
diet or food intake. Respondents who reported an annual household income above 185% of the Federal poverty line were also screened
as having high food security. This determination was made according to research by Ahn et al. (2020), which demonstrates that using
a modified income-based screening procedure for internet surveys better approximates the government estimates of food insecurity.
Low food security (i.e., food insecure): 2-4 reported indications of reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet; little or no indication
of reduced food intake. Low food security (i.e., food insecure): 2-4 reported indications of reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet;
little or no indication of reduced food intake.
5 This scale is based on the Cantril Scale used in Gallup’s World Poll to assess well-being and happiness around the world. Thus, we
use the same validated conceptual labels—thriving, struggling, and suffering—to group responses.
CENTER FOR FOOD DEMAND ANALYSIS AND SUSTAINABILITY
purdue.ag/CFDAS
Questions? Contact spolzin@purdue.edu
page 19 of 19You can also read
