IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea13/149816.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Will Reducing the Calorie Content of School Lunches Affect Participation? Evidence from a Choice Experiment with Suburban Parents

Author

Listed:
  • Pham, Matthew V.
  • Roe, Brian E.

Abstract

Policymakers and school district officials hope to reduce childhood obesity by improving the nutrition of school lunches. The Healthy, Hungry-Free Kids Act of 2010 requires that the calorie content of lunches served as part of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) must fall within ranges that are lower than previously required. This study explores whether the calorie reductions required as part of the new regulation will affect household’s perception of or demand for NSLP lunches. To answer this question, we implement a choice experiment via an online survey to parents of school-aged children from a suburban Ohio school district. In the choice experiment, parents are shown a weekly menu where each meal’s content, calorie level, and price are randomly assigned. They are asked to rate the meal in terms of the meal’s perceived healthfulness and in terms of the likelihood their child would eat the meal (palatability). Parents are then shown meal price and indicate whether their child would purchase the meal. We model the purchase decision as a function of the perceived health rating, perceived palatability rating, lunch price, total meal calorie content, and the household’s current lunch purchase frequency using a random-effects probit model. Meals that were perceived to be healthier and more palatable were more likely to be chosen for purchase from the menu. Total meal calorie content was not a direct factor behind lunch purchases. However, it was a driver of perceived health in the first-stage regression. Specifically, higher calories had a significant, negative effect on the health rating for two of the three income groups, suggesting that regulations that the lower calorie content of school lunches will have a small, positive effect on lunch sales for this sample.

Suggested Citation

  • Pham, Matthew V. & Roe, Brian E., 2013. "Will Reducing the Calorie Content of School Lunches Affect Participation? Evidence from a Choice Experiment with Suburban Parents," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149816, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:149816
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.149816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/149816/files/2013%20AAEA%20Paper%20Final%20MP.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.149816?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2008. "Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 661-677, August.
    2. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    3. John S. Akin & David K. Guilkey & Barry M. Popkin & James H. Wyckoff, 1983. "The Demand for School Lunches: An Analysis of Individual Participation in the School Lunch Program," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 18(2), pages 213-230.
    4. Asirvatham, Jebaraj & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Thomsen, Michael R., 2012. "Peer-Effects In Obesity Among Public School Children: A Grade-Level Analysis," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 122732, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Glenn Harrison, 2006. "Experimental Evidence on Alternative Environmental Valuation Methods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(1), pages 125-162, May.
    6. Just, David R. & Mancino, Lisa & Wansink, Brian, 2007. "Could Behavioral Economics Help Improve Diet Quality for Nutrition Assistance Program Participants?," Economic Research Report 6391, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    7. Just, David R. & Wansink, Brian & Mancino, Lisa & Guthrie, Joanne F., 2008. "Behavioral Economic Concepts To Encourage Healthy Eating in School Cafeterias: Experiments and Lessons From College Students," Economic Research Report 56489, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. repec:mpr:mprres:6158 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Elizabeth M. Condon & Mary Kay Crepinsek & Mary Kay Fox, "undated". "School Meals: Types of Foods Offered to and Consumed by Children at Lunch and Breakfast," Mathematica Policy Research Reports fe80b888d7a14c02917106e63, Mathematica Policy Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frode Alfnes & Chengyan Yue & Helen H. Jensen, 2010. "Cognitive dissonance as a means of reducing hypothetical bias," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(2), pages 147-163, June.
    2. Kirsten, Johann & Vermeulen, Hes & van Zyl, Karlien & du Rand, Gerrie & du Plessis, Henrietta & Weissnar, Tessa, 2017. "Do South African Consumers have an Appetite for an Origin-based Certification System for Meat Products? A Synthesis of Studies on Perceptions, Preferences and Experiments," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 8(01), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Kees Vringer & Eline van der Heijden & Daan van Soest & Herman Vollebergh & Frank Dietz, 2017. "Sustainable Consumption Dilemmas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-21, June.
    4. Mamine, Fateh & Fares, M'hand & Minviel, Jean Joseph, 2020. "Contract Design for Adoption of Agrienvironmental Practices: A Meta-analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    5. Jacquemet, Nicolas & Joule, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane & Shogren, Jason F., 2013. "Preference elicitation under oath," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 110-132.
    6. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    7. Rajo, Lindelly A. & Michelle S, Segovia & Arias, Fredi & Marco A., Palma, . "Willingness-to-Pay for an Educational Label: The Zamorano University Brand," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 19(01), pages 1-14.
    8. Stefani, Gianluca & Scarpa, Riccardo & Lombardi, Ginevra V., 2014. "An addendum to: a meta-analysis of hypothethical bias in stated preference valuation," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 3(2), pages 1-10, August.
    9. Scott, Anthony & Witt, Julia, 2020. "Loss aversion, reference dependence and diminishing sensitivity in choice experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    10. Jie He & Jérôme Dupras & Thomas G. Poder, 2018. "Payment and Provision Consequentiality in Voluntary Contribution Mechanism: Single or Double “Knife-Edge” Evidence?," Cahiers de recherche 18-02, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    11. Mark A. Andor & Manuel Frondel & Colin Vance, 2017. "Germany’s Energiewende: A Tale of Increasing Costs and Decreasing Willingness-To-Pay," The Energy Journal, , vol. 38(1_suppl), pages 211-228, June.
    12. Henrik Andersson & Mikael Svensson, 2008. "Cognitive ability and scale bias in the contingent valuation method," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(4), pages 481-495, April.
    13. Mark A. Andor, Manuel Frondel, and Colin Vance, 2017. "Germanys Energiewende: A Tale of Increasing Costs and Decreasing Willingness-To-Pay," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(KAPSARC S).
    14. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    15. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    16. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    17. Crastes dit Sourd, Romain & Zawojska, Ewa & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Louviere, Jordan, 2018. "Mitigating strategic misrepresentation of values in open-ended stated preference surveys by using negative reinforcement," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 153-166.
    18. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Andersson, Henrik & Hultkrantz, Lars & Lindberg, Gunnar & Nilsson, Jan-Eric, 2017. "The role of economic analysis for investment priorities in Sweden’s transport sector," Working papers in Transport Economics 2017:12, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI), revised 23 May 2018.
    20. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:149816. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.