理解和比较经济援助模式以提高粮食安全和饮食质量:快速回顾。

Mary Kathryn Poole, Matthew M Lee, Sara N Bleich, Erica L Kenney
{"title":"理解和比较经济援助模式以提高粮食安全和饮食质量:快速回顾。","authors":"Mary Kathryn Poole, Matthew M Lee, Sara N Bleich, Erica L Kenney","doi":"10.1377/hlthaff.2024.01352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Food insecurity and poor nutrition afflict millions of Americans with low incomes. Three policy approaches to address these challenges are widely debated: modifying existing cash-like food assistance programs (that is, increasing benefits with or without imposing nutrition restrictions) or introducing new cash-like food assistance; incentivizing fruit and vegetable purchases; and providing unconditional cash transfers. This rapid review synthesized experimental and quasi-experimental evidence of how these approaches affect food security, diet quality, and dietary intake. Included studies evaluated modifications to cash-like food assistance benefits, nutrition incentives, and cash transfers. Increasing benefits without imposing nutrition restrictions for cash-like food assistance programs has the strongest evidence for improving food security and has mixed evidence for dietary outcomes. Adding nutrition restrictions to such benefits inconsistently improves diet quality and may reduce program participation. Nutrition incentives prompt small increases in fruit and vegetable intake but inconsistent reductions in food insecurity. More research is needed on cash transfers. As the evidence base for the optimal design of economic assistance programs evolves, continued investment in existing food assistance and nutrition incentive programs with strong evidence for effectiveness is essential.</p>","PeriodicalId":519943,"journal":{"name":"Health affairs (Project Hope)","volume":"44 4","pages":"449-457"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding And Comparing Economic Assistance Models To Improve Food Security And Diet Quality: A Rapid Review.\",\"authors\":\"Mary Kathryn Poole, Matthew M Lee, Sara N Bleich, Erica L Kenney\",\"doi\":\"10.1377/hlthaff.2024.01352\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Food insecurity and poor nutrition afflict millions of Americans with low incomes. Three policy approaches to address these challenges are widely debated: modifying existing cash-like food assistance programs (that is, increasing benefits with or without imposing nutrition restrictions) or introducing new cash-like food assistance; incentivizing fruit and vegetable purchases; and providing unconditional cash transfers. This rapid review synthesized experimental and quasi-experimental evidence of how these approaches affect food security, diet quality, and dietary intake. Included studies evaluated modifications to cash-like food assistance benefits, nutrition incentives, and cash transfers. Increasing benefits without imposing nutrition restrictions for cash-like food assistance programs has the strongest evidence for improving food security and has mixed evidence for dietary outcomes. Adding nutrition restrictions to such benefits inconsistently improves diet quality and may reduce program participation. Nutrition incentives prompt small increases in fruit and vegetable intake but inconsistent reductions in food insecurity. More research is needed on cash transfers. As the evidence base for the optimal design of economic assistance programs evolves, continued investment in existing food assistance and nutrition incentive programs with strong evidence for effectiveness is essential.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":519943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health affairs (Project Hope)\",\"volume\":\"44 4\",\"pages\":\"449-457\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health affairs (Project Hope)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2024.01352\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health affairs (Project Hope)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2024.01352","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

食品不安全和营养不良困扰着数百万低收入的美国人。应对这些挑战的三种政策方法被广泛讨论:修改现有的现金类粮食援助计划(即在有或没有施加营养限制的情况下增加福利)或引入新的现金类粮食援助;鼓励购买水果和蔬菜;并提供无条件的现金转移。这篇快速综述综合了这些方法如何影响粮食安全、饮食质量和膳食摄入的实验和准实验证据。包括评估对现金食品援助福利、营养激励和现金转移的修改的研究。在不施加营养限制的情况下增加现金食品援助项目的福利,是改善粮食安全的最有力证据,而对饮食结果的证据则好坏参半。在这些福利中增加营养限制并不一致地提高饮食质量,并可能减少计划的参与。营养激励措施促使水果和蔬菜摄入量小幅增加,但粮食不安全状况的减少并不一致。需要对现金转移进行更多的研究。随着经济援助计划优化设计的证据基础不断发展,对现有粮食援助和营养激励计划的持续投资至关重要,并有强有力的证据证明其有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Understanding And Comparing Economic Assistance Models To Improve Food Security And Diet Quality: A Rapid Review.

Food insecurity and poor nutrition afflict millions of Americans with low incomes. Three policy approaches to address these challenges are widely debated: modifying existing cash-like food assistance programs (that is, increasing benefits with or without imposing nutrition restrictions) or introducing new cash-like food assistance; incentivizing fruit and vegetable purchases; and providing unconditional cash transfers. This rapid review synthesized experimental and quasi-experimental evidence of how these approaches affect food security, diet quality, and dietary intake. Included studies evaluated modifications to cash-like food assistance benefits, nutrition incentives, and cash transfers. Increasing benefits without imposing nutrition restrictions for cash-like food assistance programs has the strongest evidence for improving food security and has mixed evidence for dietary outcomes. Adding nutrition restrictions to such benefits inconsistently improves diet quality and may reduce program participation. Nutrition incentives prompt small increases in fruit and vegetable intake but inconsistent reductions in food insecurity. More research is needed on cash transfers. As the evidence base for the optimal design of economic assistance programs evolves, continued investment in existing food assistance and nutrition incentive programs with strong evidence for effectiveness is essential.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信