Comparative Analysis of Why Certain Food Enters the Home
Understanding the underlying issues that determine what groceries parents buy
A research proposal submitted to the Urban Studies and Planning Program
University of California at San Diego
Brittany Montgomery
USP 187 Section
bdmontgo@ucsd.edu
February 22, 2011
Abstract
Obesity is a central public health issue because it affects the community as a whole. Childhood
obesity has become a high priority in America and has been found to be more prevalent in
African American and Latino communities. As a result, there has been an abundance of research
on what children are eating in their communities such as schools and local restaurants. There has
been little correlation between the rate of obesity and the factors listed above. This research
examines what the children are eating in the home in order to see how this food influences their
weight. Findings from this research show that children influence the type of food in their home
by expressing likes and dislikes in higher income areas and that price influences the type of food
that is purchased in lower income areas.
Key Terms: Social Justice, Sustainability, Food, Community, Social Equity
Introduction
America has been affected by numbers of epidemics such as smallpox, yellow fever,
influenza, etc. These epidemics were detrimental to Americas’ health as they caused sickness
and millions of deaths. Despite the number of deaths America encountered, these epidemics
helped to advance our lifestyle. Through the development of technology along with human
development, preventative aids were established to assure good public health in the human
society. This generated what we considered to be an overall healthy community. Even though
America is well advanced, it has recently become an unhealthy community as the rise of the
epidemic of obesity continues to persist.
Obesity is extremely complex as it involves almost every organ in the body; this means
that the cause of death is never obesity but rather diseases like heart disease or diabetes and
therefore the prevention of obesity is a public health issue. This epidemic is a detrimental effect
on our community as it affects people “across all socioeconomic strata, and among all ethnic
groups—though specific subgroups, including African Americans, Hispanics, and American
Indians, are disproportionately affected” (Liverman, 2005). There are many underlying issues
that perpetuate the spread of obesity. Contrary to popular belief, food and the amount of physical
activity are not the only factors that lead to obesity. Childhood obesity is perpetuated from
generation to generation. Children who are obese are likely to become obese adults with this
statistic increasing if they have one parent that is obese. This proves that obese parents raise
obese children and this cycle needs to end (Schneider, 2011).
Childhood Obesity is on the rise in America almost tripling over the last 30 years (CDC,
2008). There are a lot of factors that play a role in childhood obesity, many of which are out of
the child’s control. The environment, such as living in a safe neighborhood, genetics, the lunch
Montgomery
2
program at school, and the groceries in the house are a few factors, out of the child’s control, that
contribute to childhood obesity. The socioeconomic status of the child’s family is one pertinent
factor that heavily affects the rate of childhood obesity. Most factors that result in childhood
obesity are directly affected by the socioeconomic status of the family. Studies have shown that
low-income women are at a higher risk of obesity and with the high percentage of single mother
households, this epidemic while continue to increase as obese parents raise obese children.
(Kumanyika, 1993)
Health is generally perceived by the body image alone. Small people are perceived as
being healthy while larger people seem to be unhealthy; but what factors decide whether a
person is small or large? Many factors determine the outcome of a person’s health and “the most
important predictor of health is socioeconomic status (SES), a concept that includes income,
education, and occupational status” (Schneider, 2011). A person’s SES sets the foundation of
their lifestyle. This one factor determines where a person lives, which determine the resources
they are afforded. This also affects the education of a person. After you have reached the high
school level, education becomes voluntary. Does this person with a low socioeconomic status
have the funds to educate him or herself? Education is also a predictor of health, which is
directly affected by the socioeconomic status. People with higher levels of education are
generally healthier than those with a lower level of education (Unnatural Causes, 2008).
The fight against childhood obesity has become a national health priority. There is a
campaign called Let’s Move which mainly focuses on educating the parents and children on a
healthy eating lifestyle and also improving the quality of food in school lunch programs while
increasing the children’s amount of physical activity. Michelle Obama is the spearhead of this
campaign and she voiced the concern that this issue of childhood obesity is not the blame of the
Montgomery
3
child by stating “our kids didn’t do this to themselves. Our kids don’t decide what’s served in the
school cafeteria or whether there’s time for gym class or recess…and no matter how much they
beg for fast food and candy, our kids shouldn’t be the ones calling the shots at dinnertime”
(Rowen, 2010). Childhood obesity is mainly an issue of the parent, not the child. This epidemic
is generally affected by the parent’s socioeconomic status. The parent falls victim to certain
factors like the lack of education on healthy eating, not being able to afford healthy food, etc.
which determines the child’s food consumption. I have analyzed the specific foods that are in the
homes of two different communities by having the parents rank categories that assist them in
buying certain groceries. One community being in the La Jolla community, and the other being
Southeast San Diego, a community stricken with poverty. This comparison has allowed me to
gain knowledge as to why these parents are purchasing/ not purchasing certain food.
Conceptual Framework/Literature Review
There has been a vast amount of research on childhood obesity. This epidemic is on the
rise and is negatively affecting minorities such as African Americans and Latinos as well as
America. Kumanyika (1993) provides data that shows non-Hispanic whites being affected by
obesity at the ratio of 1:4 while minority populations are affected at three times that rate.
Research is aiming to find the cause of obesity in order to put an end to this devastating
epidemic, why are our children getting bigger? Some research has taken into consideration the
indirect causes of obesity such as socioeconomic status but it is evident that most of the research
on childhood obesity is considering the direct causes such as environment, diet and physical
activity. The diet and physical activity of a child are definitely a considerable affect in whether
Montgomery
4
or not a child is obese. However, there are multiple underlying issues that determine the diet of a
child and the amount of physical activity they receive.
Kipke (2007) has suggested that the food availability within walking distance of a school
has a direct impact on the child’s diet. This impact depends solely on the parent. If the children
have access to these local establishments that are filled with unhealthy food it is because their
parents gave them money to do so. Wang (2007) refers to this as “pocket money”. Generally,
children do not purchase their own food. Walking past certain food establishments, or even
riding past them on the way home from school, may provoke the desire to want those specific
meals for dinner but the parent has total control over providing their child with that food or not.
This raises the question of why parents are allowing their children to eat such unhealthy food.
The underlying issue of why parents are allowing such eating behavior is the problem, not the
food establishment itself.
Burdette and Whitaker, 2004, did a study comparing the proximity of playgrounds and
fast food locations to the homes of children. They found no correlation between the distance of a
playground and the distance of a fast food location to childhood obesity. Burdette and Whitaker
hypothesized that children who lived closer to fast food locations and farther from playgrounds
would be bigger than children that lived close to a playground and farther from fast food
locations. The hypothesis proved to be false as there was no correlation. Another study, by
Burdette and Whitaker (2003) also found no correlation between the amount of television
watched and the amount of outdoor playtime. They hypothesized that children who watched
more television and spent less time outdoors would have a higher Body Mass Index than children
who watched less television and spent more time outdoors. This proves that physical activity has
Montgomery
5
little affect on the weight of a child. The metabolism of children is extremely varied and this
could be the reason why these studies have not been finding any sort of correlation.
Lopez and Hynes (2006) did a review on obesity, physical activity, and the urban
environment. They found that there is a paradox of obesity being more prevalent in inner-city
residents than among suburbanites. This proves to be a paradox because researchers agree that
sidewalks, and mixed land uses such as parks and playgrounds, public transit and gridded street
patterns would promote physical activity. All of these entities are prevalent in inner cities and so
is obesity where as obesity is less prevalent in suburban areas that lack the entities that promote
physical activity. Despite the danger of inner city neighborhoods studies have shown that
children who live in these neighborhoods do walk to school. Wang, 2007, did a study that
tracked risk factors of obesity in low socioeconomic neighborhoods in Chicago. He found that
12% of the parents considered their neighborhood unsafe and that 62% of the children walked to
and from school even though America has listed these specific neighborhoods to be unsafe. This
contrasted the idea that “unsafe” neighborhoods limit the physical activity of children living
there (Wang, 2007). Despite the amount of physical activity, obesity is still prevalent in these
communities with no correlation of physical activity.
Wang also looked at the “pocket money” given to the children by their parents. This
factor could result in rates of obesity, as children are prone to purchasing candy and unhealthy
snacks when given the opportunity. Wang found a lower prevalence of childhood obesity in
children that received pocket money versus the ones that did not (Wang, 2007). This proves to
be very interesting, as Wang’s study has proven two important factors that show no correlation to
obesity; physical activity and independently purchased food by the children. Both of these
Montgomery
6
factors could extremely increase the weight of a child but in these studies they constantly show
no correlation.
I have noticed that most studies consider the food that children eat outside of the home.
My question would be what are they eating inside of the home. When food is inside of the home,
children have total access to it whenever they are at home, whether is bought for the child or the
parent. Because children have total access to food that is present in the home, the parent’s eating
habits directly affect the child’s health as well as there own. Studies have shown that children are
spending much more time in the house than ever before (Schneider, 2011). Whether it is because
of a safety issue or television or even video games, children are home near food everyday. Why
isn’t this food factored into the epidemic of obesity?
Community gardens have been considered as a solution to fresh fruit and vegetables in
low-income communities. This research illustrates that if there were more fruit and vegetables,
low-income communities would be healthier. Is this true? Will the access to more fruits and
vegetables deny access to other unhealthy food? Will parents find time to cook vegetables from
the community garden if they don’t cook now? I do not believe this epidemic of childhood
obesity is an access issue. However, I do understand the disproportionate amount of fresh food in
these communities represented by the “grocery gap” but I believe this issue is much more deeper
than access. There are multiple studies that provide statistics showing the extremely low amounts
of quality fresh produce in minority communities and I have yet to find a study that focuses on
the access to quality food that is found in the community. These studies often times look at the
produce that is present in the store and examine the quality of the fruit and vegetables without
considering the idea of the condition of these items when they came into the store. I would
examine the condition and quality of the food when being stocked instead of examining this food
Montgomery
7
after its been sitting in the produce section for days. This brings me to the question of why food
sits in the produce section for so long in minority communities. Are they not purchasing this type
of food? Is this food too expensive? Do their children not eat this type of food? Does this food
become low in quality because of the mediocre condition it was in when it came to the store?
Questions like these have yet to be examined when looking at the rate of childhood obesity.
Research Design and Methods
I am analyzing what children eat in the home in order to better understand the epidemic
of obesity. Analysis of children’s physical activity have been researched and also the food that
children consume via lunch programs and fast food chains but there are not many analyses on
what children are consuming in the home. I used an observation, a store analysis, and a survey
in order to conduct my research. My research was conducted in two cities in San Diego County.
I chose to visit La Jolla and Southeast San Diego. These cities were chosen because they are
known to have contrasting characteristics when concerning their residents. For example, La Jolla
is known as an affluent community while Southeast San Diego has been labeled as a poverty
stricken community. This means that the residents in both of these cities have varying incomes
with the incomes in La Jolla being higher than those in Southeast San Diego. It is important to
analyze the difference in food consumption based on the difference of income. This is important
because it shows how the income affects the type of food that is eaten in the household. These
cities are not comparable in terms of income or resources and that is why I chose to compare
these two contrasting cities. Certain resources are not afforded to those living in Southeast San
Diego while people living in La Jolla have an abundance of resources afforded to them. These
resources include but are not limited to banks, hospitals, and grocery stores. I have decided to
look further into grocery stores seeing how food availability affects the entire community and
Montgomery
8
Southeast San Diego is known to have low quality stores. Southeast San Diego has been affected
by the lack of food availability in a negative way among other things that affect the way they
grocery shop.
When I first walked into the store in La Jolla, Vons 7544 Girard Avenue CA 92037, I
was in the produce section and I saw promotions for specific fruit that they had to offer. On the
contrary, when I entered the store in Southeast San Diego, Food 4 Less 312 Euclid Avenue San
Diego, CA 92114-3501, I walked into promotions about chips and snacks such as cookies and
also promotions advertising diapers and detergent. Why is this? Why is it important to have those
items at the front of the store? Are these the items that are purchased the most in these
communities?
Throughout my observation while in the grocery store I noticed that shoppers with larger
amounts of grocery had fewer fresh items such as produce. The shoppers that contained a lot of
produce in their baskets seem to have few to no boxes in their baskets whereas the shoppers
without much produce had a lot of boxes in their baskets with items such as cereal, and boxed
meals. When you purchase produce such as fruits and vegetables, do they influence other
purchases you make? This seems to be evident based off my observation inside these grocery
stores.
I also noticed that when children were present the child usually had some type of food in
their hand eating it while the parent shopped. In most cases the child had juice. While observing
in Southeast San Diego, I noticed that the children that were present were younger than the
children that were present in La Jolla. Often times in La Jolla there were no children present at
all. This could be why I received more participants while in La Jolla and more rejections while in
Southeast San Diego.
Montgomery
9
I noticed that when I was observing inside the Vons in La Jolla, the store was always less
crowded than the Food 4 Less I observed in Southeast San Diego. Studies show that low-income
families eat more fast food then higher income families so this is very ironic that the grocery
store in Southeast San Diego was always more crowded than the store in La Jolla. When
choosing my selected area, I had a hard time finding a grocery store because there were not many
comparable stores in these two cities. In Southeast San Diego there are a lot of stores
independently owned thus I could not compare those stores to franchises. (See Appendix 2) As
far as franchised stores such as Ralphs, Vons, etc. it was hard to locate those in Southeast San
Diego. They are lacking grocery stores of a particular status and that is why it seemed so
crowded in the one decent grocery store I observed. Food 4 Less is the only franchised store
located in the area I observed in Southeast San Diego. A lot of people are forced to shop at this
one grocery store because there are not many comparable stores in close distances. Food 4 Less
is also located near public transit, which makes it more desirable for those lacking transportation.
While observing the grocery store and the area nearby I noticed that some people use
personal carts in order to transport their groceries on public transportation. When depending on
public transportation you cannot just decide to travel to any particular grocery store frequently
but instead you are forced to either eat fast food, shop at the nearby stores or shop at the stores
that are along the transit line. It is evident that the store I observed was so crowded because of
the lack of comparable stores in that area.
As listed in appendix 2, there were multiple franchised grocery stores available to the
residents in La Jolla. These stores consist of Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s, Ralphs, and Vons all
within short distances from each other and from the neighborhood homes. These stores also had
transit stops nearby but I did not notice anyone using public transportation as a means to grocery
Montgomery
10
shop. One thing that Southeast San Diego did have that La Jolla did not was an abundance of
independently owned stores. Independently own stores are a positive attribute for communities
as they give each community its own characteristic and charm. However, the amount of
characteristic and charm that is given to the community depends on the quality of the
independently owned store. Southeast San Diego had 6/7 independently owned stores whereas
La Jolla had 3/7.
I would like to further analyze the independent stores and see which stores are more
“shopable”, those in La Jolla or those in Southeast San Diego. As of now I can only analyze their
name and infer what message they send out to the city and it’s residents. Independent stores that
are located in Southeast San Diego are named “Food Land Supermarket” and “Pay-Low
Supermarket” while the independent stores in La Jolla are named “La Jolla Shores Market” and
“Jonathans of La Jolla”. The markets in La Jolla seem to be embraced by the city whereas the
markets in Southeast San Diego seem to be embraced by the cost of merchandise thus making
the La Jolla markets more desirable.
My analysis of the merchandise inside the grocery store looked at the produce section and
the fresh meat section of the stores. These areas were particularly different and varied between
the two stores. I noticed that the produce section in the store in Southeast San Diego was quite
smaller than that of the store in La Jolla. The store in La Jolla had different sections within its
produce section unlike the produce section in Southeast San Diego. When looking at the quality
of the fruits and vegetables I did not notice any difference. Everything seemed edible and there
was not any drastic difference from store to store. The only difference that I saw was the actual
selection. La Jolla had more fruits to choose from because their section was larger than that of
the Southeast San Diego store. I purchased one green apple from the two stores in order to see if
Montgomery
11
I could tell the difference in fruit. Both of the fruits were nutritious and edible but I could tell a
slight difference in texture/crispness in the apple from La Jolla. Also while I was analyzing the
produce section in both of the stores I noticed that this section seemed to be the busiest in La
Jolla whereas in Southeast San Diego the entire store seemed crowded and the produce section
was the least crowded.
The second area that I analyzed was the fresh meat section. I found similar findings in
that this section was smaller at the store in Southeast San Diego and larger and more varied in
the store in La Jolla. The seafood section in particular was very different in these two stores. It
was almost as if seafood didn’t exist in the store in Southeast San Diego and this was one of the
major sections in La Jolla. One thing that I noticed while in Southeast San Diego was that there
were “Manager Specials” of seafood in the freezer section of the store. These items appeared to
be “fresh” but were marked down and not located in the “Fresh Meat” section. I did not see any
“Manager Specials” in La Jolla. Perhaps their items are not in the store long enough to be
considered a “Manager’s Special”?
Studies show that on average grocery stores located in urban areas are smaller than those
that are located in suburban areas. This can be attributed to my grocery store analysis. I noticed
that in both sections that I observed that the sections were smaller in Southeast San Diego than
they were in La Jolla. I did not notice if the store itself was smaller but this could another reason
why the store was always crowded in Southeast San Diego.
I asked a random selection of parents walking in and out of the store to rank specific
categories that help them decide what they are purchasing at the grocery store. Before I handed
them the survey I made sure to question if they were actually parents if their kids were not
present. There were five categories and they were asked to rank them in importance with one
Montgomery
12
being the highest in importance and five being the least important. The survey is located in
appendix 1. I have coded the first and second choices in red. After ranking the categories I asked
if they were married or single and if they made over or under 40 thousand a year. This
information allowed me to form two groups. Group A, single and under 40K and Group B,
married and over 40K; both groups have 2 or more children. Other participants were not
considered in this sample. I ended up with 36 participants in this survey, 12 who fell under
Group A and 24 who fell under Group B. The five categories were Healthy, How important is
health when determining what you purchase?, Favorite, How important is your kid’s favorite
foods when purchasing grocery?, Price, How important is the price of the groceries you
purchase?, Preparation, How important is the food preparation when purchasing certain foods?,
and Duration, How important is the duration time on the food you purchase?
Within the two groups, both A and B, first and second choices seemed consistent
throughout each particular group. Group A’s first choice was price and their second was
preparation across the board. Price is something that is important to them and determines what
type of food they are able to purchase. Group B chose Healthy as their first choice and favorite
as there second across the board. Price was not a concern with this group, which gives them
greater access to food because they do not have to worry about the price and whether or not they
can afford certain foods or not. I hypothesized that “duration” would be a top concern for some
parents that are not able to grocery shop as much as others but this category was the least
important for both groups.
I visited the stores on Saturday Mornings and Wednesday’s late afternoon. I noticed that
the Group A was only present in the store on Saturdays and Group B was evenly distributed
Montgomery
13
throughout both of the days. Group A was the single parent household and I believe their lack of
presence in the store during the weekdays was due to work.
Conclusion
My concern with current research is that they are not looking deeply enough at the reason
low-income communities actually eat the way they eat. Community Gardens are very persistent
in today’s research, are they actually going to help? People are still going to eat the way they eat
because this problem is not an access issue; it is not the lack of fresh fruit or the presence of fast
food. The childhood obesity issue is not primarily an issue of food access. This issue is much
more deep than an access issue as these communities have access to healthy food but they are
just disproportioned in their community. The issue lies deeper than that; the issue is a practicality
issue. Findings from my research show that grocery shopping is quite different in communities
with different household incomes. In lower income areas they tend to have limited access to
food due to the lack of quality stores forcing them to all shop at the same store. Transportation is
also a concern for the lower income areas and this also dictates where they shop. Price was the
number one indicator of why parents purchase certain foods for their children. This means that
parents are not able to heavily consider healthy foods for their children if the price is not in their
budget. On the contrary, healthy was the number one indicator for the higher income area. They
purchased food based on the nutrition and did not factor price into their first or second choice
when purchasing grocery.
I hypothesized that parents in the lower income areas would purchase foods that their
children like because they did not necessarily have the privilege to purchase foods that their
children potentially would not eat, potentially wasting food and their money. This hypothesis
was proven wrong in my study. I found the opposite. Favorite was the second choice chosen by
Montgomery
14
the higher income participants. These parents thought it was important to purchase their
children’s favorite foods and also thought it was important to purchase healthy food. Perhaps
their children’s favorite food is also healthy food? Ultimately, through my research, I found that
parents in low-income communities grocery shop based on price being their number one
indicator while parents in middle class communities grocery shop based on health being their
number one indicator. Middle class parents were not particularly concerned with price as an
indicator for grocery shopping. This grants them flexibility within the specific choices of grocery
they choose to purchase. This however, is not the case with low-income parents, as stated above,
they pay close attention to the price of food and this is a very important indicator when it comes
to grocery shopping for them. Health was not an indicator at all when it came to low-income
parents coming in mostly 3rd ranking as shown in appendix 1. This presents a problem and could
be related to the high rate of obesity in low-income communities. These parents are purchasing
what they can afford whether it’s healthy or not. Food is a necessity and one can only consume
what they can afford so the health factor is easily overlooked when you are trying to feed your
family on a budget. Are prices the reason child obesity has become an epidemic in America?
Montgomery
15
Bibliography
Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New
York: New, 2010. Print.
Block, Jason P., Richard A. Scribner, and Karen B. DeSalvo. "Fast Food, Race/ Ethnicity, and
Income." American Journal of Preventive Medicine (2004). Print.
Burdette, Hillary L., and Robert Catherine Whitaker. "A National Study of Neighborhood Safety,
Outdoor Play, Television Viewing, and Obesity in Preschool Children." Pediatrics |
Official Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Sept. 2003. Web.
<http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/>.
Burdette, Hillary L., and Robert Catherine Whitaker. "Neighborhood Playgrounds, Fast Food
Restaurants, and Crime: Relationships to Overweight in Low-income Preschool
Children." Preventive Medicine 38 (2004): 57-63. Print.
Chakraborty, Jayajit, and M. Martin Bosman. Spatial and Environmental Injustice in an
American Metropolis: a Study of Tampa Bay, Florida. Amherst, NY: Cambria, 2010.
Print.
Kipke, Michele D. "Food and Park Environments: Neighborhood-level Risks for Childhood
Obesity in East Los Angeles." Journal of Adolescent Health 40 (2007): 325-33. Print.
Lebacqz, Karen. Six Theories of Justice: Perspectives from Philosophical and Theological
Ethics. Minneapolis: Augsburg Pub. House, 1986. Print.
Liverman, Catharyn T., Jeffrey Koplan, and Vivica I. Kraak. Preventing Childhood Obesity
Health in the Balance. Washington, D.C.: National Academies, 2005. Print
Montgomery
16
Cotterill, R.W. and A.W. Franklin. 1995. The Urban Grocery Store Gap. Food Marketing Policy
Center Dept. of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Conn.
Rowen, Lisa. "Childhood Obesity: Words from the First Lady." Bariatric Nursing and Surgical
Patient Care (2010). Print.
Schneider, Mary-Jane. Introduction to Public Health. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett, 2011.
Print.
Ferguson, Bruce and Barbara Abell. "The Urban Grocery Store Gap." Commentary. Winter
1998, pp. 6-14.
UNNATURAL CAUSES | CALIFORNIA NEWSREEL. Web. 21 Oct. 2010.
<http://www.unnaturalcauses.org/>.
Montgomery
17
Appendix 1
Red= majority of first and second choices
G: A
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
HEALTHY
3
4
3
5
3
4
3
4
3
3
2
5
FAVORITE
4
3
5
4
4
3
4
3
4
4
5
4
PRICE
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
PREPARATION
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
DURATION
5
5
4
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
3
G: B
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
HEALTHY
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
FAVORITE
5
2
1
3
2
1
2
3
5
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
5
1
2
3
3
2
PRICE
3
3
4
2
3
4
5
5
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
3
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
3
PREPARATION
4
4
5
5
4
3
3
2
3
4
5
3
3
4
3
4
3
5
4
5
3
2
5
5
DURATION
2
5
3
4
5
5
4
4
2
5
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
2
3
5
5
2
4
Montgomery
18