The Farm Bill and Public Health - American Public Health Association

American Public Health Association
JUNE 2012
The Farm Bill
and Public Health:
A Primer for Public
Health Professionals
Patricia Elliott, JD, MPH; and Amanda Raziano, MPH
T
he Farm Bill impacts public health through the nutrition assistance programs it authorizes,
as well as through programs that impact the cost and availability of foods we eat and the
environments in which we live. The “Farm Bill” is a term used to describe a major piece of
federal legislation that governs national food and agriculture policies. Congress reauthorizes
a new version of the Farm Bill roughly every five to seven years. The Farm Bill was last authorized in 2008
and the national debate over priorities for the 2012 Farm Bill has already begun. The Farm Bill reauthorization is an opportunity to support a healthier, more sustainable food system for the U.S.; increase demand for
healthy foods; and improve the nation’s public health and communities in the process. Given the importance
of the Farm Bill for public health, this primer is intended to provide a summary of the major components
of the Farm Bill and their connections to public health.
800 I Street, NW • Washington, DC 20001-3710 • 202-777-APHA • fax: 202-777-2534 • www.apha.org
There are four principal ways in which the
collection of programs authorized by the Farm
Bill impact public health:
„„ PROVIDING FOOD AND NUTRITION
ASSISTANCE—The Farm Bill is foremost a
CONTENTS
Farm Bill History and
Overview .............................................. 2
Providing Food and Nutrition
Assistance............................................. 4
Producing Healthy, Affordable
Foods....................................................... 8
Increasing Access to Healthy
Foods.....................................................11
Fostering Sustainable Food
Systems................................................15
Creating a Farm Bill for Public
Health...................................................17
nutrition bill; nutrition assistance programs
comprise 65% of the Bill’s funding. The Bill
authorizes and funds a number of key food
assistance and nutrition support programs,
including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP—formerly the
food stamp program), for the most vulnerable Americans: people with low-incomes,
children, and elderly. These programs, combined with programs governed by other laws
(e.g., school lunch programs, child nutrition
programs), comprise the nation’s safety net
for vulnerable individuals—a safety net that
has been vital during the recent economic
downturn.
„„ PRODUCING HEALTHY, AFFORDABLE
FOODS—Farm Bill policies including crop
subsidies, crop insurance, conservation, government distribution of foods, and support
for market promotion, play a crucial role
in shaping domestic agricultural production, thereby influencing the kinds and costs
of foods available in our communities. The
Farm Bill offers an opportunity to further
improve nutrition and reduce obesity through
increased production of healthy and affordable foods.
„„ INCREASING ACCESS TO HEALTHY
FOODS—Federal farm policies reflected in
the Farm Bill directly and indirectly influence
how we access our food in urban, suburban,
and rural communities alike. The 2008 Farm
Bill contained several critical measures that
have begun to remake the food system to
improve regional food systems, support local
economies and increase access to healthy food
choices in all communities.
„„ FOSTERING SUSTAINABLE FOOD
SYSTEMS—The Farm Bill includes provi-
sions that affect the environmental sustainability and environmental health impacts of
agricultural practices, through conservation
programs that help minimize negative environmental health impacts.
This primer is divided into six sections:
†† Farm Bill History and Overview—This sec-
tion provides a brief history of the Farm Bill
and its original intent and an introduction to
the structure and funding of the most recent
law (2008 Farm Bill).
2
†† Providing Food and Nutrition Assistance—
This section describes food insecurity and the
central role that Farm Bill nutrition programs
and initiatives play in addressing hunger and
nutrition in the U.S.
†† Producing Healthy, Affordable Foods—This
section discusses key issues related to the food
we produce: federal policies governing commodity crops and specialty crops, the role of
federal crop insurance, and changing trends in
the foods available for consumers.
†† Increasing Access to Healthy Foods—This
section reviews the challenges that some
communities face in accessing healthy, affordable foods and highlights Farm Bill initiatives designed to increase the demand for
and availability of these foods and improve
consumers’ understanding of the importance
of healthy eating.
†† Fostering Sustainable Food Systems—This
section highlights changes in the U.S. food
system and their human health and environmental impacts.
†† Creating a Public Health Farm Bill—This
section summarizes the four key ways in
which the Farm Bill can improve the public’s
health and how Farm Bill programs can be
further improved.
Farm Bill History
and Overview
History of the Farm Bill
Today’s Farm Bill has its origins in the Great
Depression and the Dust Bowl of the 1930s, a
period that saw overproduction of crops, collapsing agriculture prices, and high levels of
unemployment across the country. Gross farm
income declined 52% between 1929 and 1932,
and by 1933 the unemployment rate in urban
areas had reached 30%.2
In response to these pressures, the government
enacted a series of laws and programs beginning in the 1930s to pay farmers to reduce crop
production levels and create a vehicle to feed the
poor with surplus commodities.2,3 The intent of
these early federal initiatives was twofold: to support failing rural economies and to address the
needs of thousands of unemployed individuals in
both rural and urban areas. To support farmers,
the government limited planting of specified
crops, supported soil conservation practices and
limited the supply of crops to ensure that prices
did not fall below a set level.2 The government
also established a grain reserve system, purchasing surplus wheat and other commodities to
remove the excess supply and stabilize prices in
the market; these surplus items were then processed and provided to the hungry.4 Commodity
purchases of surplus farm products and distribution of these products to pregnant women,
children, and the elderly, as well as to food banks,
schools, and other institutions, continue to be
authorized through the Farm Bill today.
In addition to these farming support and food
distribution programs, the Department of Agriculture also initiated food assistance programs,
known as food stamps. Program participants
received two kinds of food stamps: those allowing them to buy any foods they wished and
supplemental food stamps that allowed them to
buy discounted surplus food items offered by
the government.5 The early food stamp program
began in 1939 and ended in 1943, but it became
the precedent for current federal food programs,
which were first congressionally authorized by
the Food Stamp Act of 1964.3,5,6
The first legislation designated as the “Farm
Bill” passed as the “Food and Agriculture Act
of 1965.”96 Since then, many policies and laws
have been consolidated or modified through the
Farm Bill. It has evolved and continues to expand on the policy approaches used to support
rural economies, farmers, and consumers in all
types of communities, including making direct
government payments to farmers and consumers. In addition to food and nutrition assistance
programs, commodity programs, and crop insurance, the Farm Bill now addresses issues such as
food safety, trade and foreign aid, conservation,
organic agriculture, horticulture, energy, and
research.
Farm Bill Overview
Congress debates and reauthorizes the nation’s major agricultural policies in the Farm
Bill approximately every five to seven years.7
The most recent version of the bill was passed
in 2008, as the Food, Conservation, and Energy
Act.1 The 2008 legislation creates an umbrella
structure that encompasses 15 sections (called
titles) addressing a wide and disparate array of
agriculture, nutrition, and other programs. Table
1 provides a brief description of each of the
2008 Farm Bill titles. Collectively, the programs
represented in the Farm Bill directly and indirectly impact the types of crops grown, nutrition research, control of animal diseases, waste
generated, labor needed, and chemicals used
to produce our food—all of which ultimately
affect the public’s health. A number of the titles
Table 1
The 2008 Farm Bill: Titles and Respective Programs and Policies
Title I, Commodities: Income support to growers of selected commodities, including wheat, feed grains, cotton, rice,
oilseeds, peanuts, sugar, and dairy. Support is largely through direct payments, countercyclical payments, and marketing
loans. Other support mechanisms include government purchases for dairy and marketing quotas and import barriers for
sugar.
Title II, Conservation: Environmental stewardship of farmlands and improved management practices through land
retirement and working lands programs, among other programs geared to farmland conservation, preservation, and
resource protection.
Title III, Agricultural Trade and Food Aid: U.S. agriculture export and international food assistance programs and various
World Trade Organization (WTO) obligations.
Title IV, Nutrition: Domestic food and nutrition and commodity distribution programs, such as food stamps and
supplemental nutrition assistance.
Title V, Farm Credit: Federal direct and guaranteed farm loan programs. Also specifies loan eligibility rules and other
policies.
Title VI, Rural Development: Business and community programs for planning, feasibility assessments, and coordination
activities with other local, state, and federal programs, including rural broadband access.
Title VII, Research: Agricultural research and extension programs, including biosecurity and response, biotechnology, and
organic production.
Title VIII, Forestry: USDA Forest Service programs, including forestry management, enhancement, and agroforestry
programs.
Title IX, Energy: Bioenergy programs and grants for procurement of biobased products to support development of
biorefineries and assist eligible farmers, ranchers, and rural small businesses in purchasing renewable energy systems, as
well as user education programs.
Title X, Horticulture and Organic Agriculture: A new Farm Bill title covering fruits, vegetables, and specialty crops and
organic agriculture.
Title XI, Livestock: A new Farm Bill title covering livestock and poultry production, including provisions that amend existing
laws governing livestock and poultry marketing and competition, country-of-origin labeling requirements for retailers, and
meat and poultry state inspections.
Title XII, Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance: A new Farm Bill title covering crop insurance and assistance
previously included in the Miscellaneous title (not including the supplemental disaster assistance provisions in the Trade
and Tax Provisions title).
Title XIII, Commodity Futures: A new Farm Bill title covering reauthorization of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (CFTC) and other changes to current law.
Title XIV, Miscellaneous: Other types of farm programs and assistance not covered in other bill titles, including provisions
to assist limited-resource and socially disadvantaged farmers, agricultural security, and other provisions.
Title XV, Trade and Tax Provisions: A new title covering tax-related provisions intended to offset spending initiatives for
some programs, including those in the Nutrition, Conservation, and Energy titles. The title also contains other provisions,
including the new supplemental disaster assistance and disaster relief trust fund.
Source: Johnson et al.8
are discussed in depth throughout this primer.
In addition to food assistance and nutrition
programs that ensure a safer food supply and
decrease food insecurity, the Farm Bill also addresses organic farming, food safety inspections,
and control and eradication of animal diseases.
Farm Bill Funding
When the 2008 Farm Bill was enacted, the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated
the bill’s total cost at $284 billion over five years
(FY2008–FY2012) and $604 billion over 10
3
While the bulk of Farm Bill spending goes to support Nutrition title programs, this reflects the great need
for food assistance in the U.S. Federal nutrition programs funded by the Farm Bill have seen historic
increases in the number of participants due to the prolonged economic downturn in the U.S. and expanded
eligibility. The federal nutrition programs are a vital part of the safety net for America’s most vulnerable
populations and reduce the food insecurity of low-income households, especially those with children.10
years (FY2008–FY2017).8 More than 95% of
the funding supports four titles: nutrition (65%),
commodity crop support payments (15%), conservation (8%), and crop insurance (8%). Figure
1 shows the distribution of the Farm Bill 2008
funding.8 Disaster assistance and other programs,
including trade, horticulture and livestock production, rural development, research, forestry, and
energy, make up the remaining 5%.8
While the bulk of Farm Bill spending goes to
support Nutrition title programs, this reflects the
great need for food assistance in the U.S. Federal
nutrition programs funded by the Farm Bill have
seen historic increases in the number of participants due to the prolonged economic downturn
in the U.S. and expanded eligibility. The federal
nutrition programs are a vital part of the safety
net for America’s most vulnerable populations
and reduce the food insecurity of low-income
households, especially those with children.10
Recent CBO estimates for FY2010–FY2012
and actual expenditures for FY2008–FY2009
indicate that five-year spending on most major
Farm Bill programs will likely be above that
estimated by CBO in 2008.9 CBO further estimated that spending for domestic food assistance
programs and crop insurance will be significantly
greater than previously anticipated due to the
economic recession beginning in 2009, the
expansion of eligibility criteria and additional
funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and increased crop prices (for crop
insurance).9
Providing Food and
Nutrition Assistance
Despite its name, which focuses attention on
agricultural issues, the Farm Bill is the nation’s
largest source of food assistance funding for
needy families. The Farm Bill’s food and nutrition assistance programs are therefore a crucial
contributor to public health, especially among
the nation’s low-income populations.
Public health professionals are keenly aware of
the chronic health problems associated with poor
nutrition and unhealthy diets. Chronically malnourished children do more poorly in school, are
at risk for learning problems and developmental
delays, and exhibit more behavioral problems in
school.12 Food-insecure adults may need more
time off from work for health reasons and are
at increased risk of diabetes, hypertension and
other chronic diseases; food insecurity is associated with increased mental health problems as
well.13,14 Food assistance programs, such as those
authorized in the Farm Bill, help reduce these
impacts and improve the public’s health.
This section describes the ongoing problem of
food insecurity in the U.S. and the vital role that
the Farm Bill’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and other food assistance programs play in providing basic food and
nutrition assistance to large segments of the U.S.
population. It also describes how the size and
scope of the Nutrition title offers an opportunity
to drive agriculture policies that promote healthy
food choices and better health for all Americans.
Food Insecurity in the U.S.
NOTE: Figures total to $289B, but 2008 Farm Bill budget includes offsets for a total outlay of $284B.
Source: Congressional Research Service (2008)8
4
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
defines food security as “access by all people at
all times to enough nutritious food for an active,
healthy life.”15 Food insecurity occurs when a
person is unable to access food sufficient in quality or quantity, and it can result in disrupted eating patterns and reduced intake of food.15 More
than 14% of U.S. households—over 50 million
people—were food insecure in 2010, the most
recent year for which data are available.15 This
percentage was unchanged from 2009, when the
level of food insecurity was the highest since the
federal government began recording food insecurity data in 1995.16
Food insecurity is particularly prevalent in
low-income households. In 2010, more than 40%
of households with incomes below the federal
poverty line of $22,113 for a family of four were
food insecure.16 Low-income households can
face budget constraints due to low wages, inadequate public income support, high housing and
energy costs, unemployment, underemployment,
or health problems, which can result in hunger
and food insecurity.17 Paradoxically, food-insecure
households may also be at high risk for obesity
(see Box 1).
Federal Nutrition Programs
The federal government addresses food
insecurity through a suite of food and nutrition assistance programs, authorized through the
Farm Bill and various other laws. To date there
are more than two dozen USDA programs that
provide food assistance or meals to low-income
individuals and families. Among the programs
authorized in Title IV of the 2008 Farm Bill
are SNAP (formerly the Food Stamp program),
commodity distribution programs, fruit and
vegetable promotion programs, and nutrition
education programs. Other important nutrition
programs, such as Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children
(WIC) and the National School Lunch Program
(NSLP), are authorized through the Child Nutrition Act or other laws. All of these programs
are designed to protect nutritionally vulnerable
individuals20 and also to increase the demand
for healthy foods. Only recently, however, have
these programs focused on providing foods that
meet the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. For
example, in 2012 the USDA, for the first time,
established a rule that aligns school lunch and
breakfast programs offerings with the Dietary
Guidelines for Americans, as recommended by
the Institute of Medicine.97,98
These food assistance programs are a vital
component of the nation’s safety net for nutritionally vulnerable individuals. More than 59%
of all food-insecure households participate in
one or more of the three largest federal food assistance programs: SNAP, NSLP, and WIC.18 The
current economic downturn greatly increased
the demand for food assistance programs. Federal
food assistance programs served one in four
persons in 2010.19 The USDA reports that federal
expenditures for food and nutrition assistance
programs totaled nearly $95 billion in FY2010, a
20% increase over the prior fiscal year.22,23 2010
was the 10th consecutive year in which food and
nutrition program expenditures exceeded the
previous historical record.22 While some of the
cost increase is attributed to increased benefits in
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,
the overall number of participants has continued
to grow as well.9,19,22
The following sections describe in more detail
the federal nutrition assistance programs authorized through the Farm Bill.
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program Overview
SNAP is the largest and oldest of the nation’s
food programs.5,24 With an estimated 2012 budget
of $85 billion, SNAP provides eligible low-income households with monthly benefits that can
be used to purchase food from approved retailers.99 Written into law as the Food Stamp Act of
1964, it was first reauthorized as part of the Farm
Bill in 2002. In an effort to fight the perceived
stigma of using food stamps, the 2008 Farm Bill
changed the name of the federal food stamp program to SNAP and renamed the Food Stamp Act
of 1977 the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008.5, 100
In 2011, SNAP served nearly 45 million Americans.25 SNAP enrollment levels are at historic
highs—more than one in seven Americans rely
on SNAP for their food needs.19
BOX 1: HUNGEROBESITY PARADOX
W
hile food insecurity can lead to
health problems
due to underweight, it can also
lead to obesity. Obesity and
overweight affect all ages and
segments of the U.S. population; however, members of
low-income and food-insecure
households are at increased
risk for obesity and overweight
due to limited financial resources to buy healthy foods
and lack of access to healthy
foods and safe places to
exercise within their immediate
SNAP Eligibility and Benefits
neighborhood or community.17
SNAP/food stamp eligibility requirements
and benefit amounts have changed frequently
throughout the history of the program.5 Benefits
eligibility is based on factors such as household
size, income, and assets. The eligibility requirements have been modified over time through
changes in the income thresholds, deductions
for expenses such as housing and childcare, and
calculation of assets (e.g. stocks, bonds, or vehicle
value). For example, based on 2008 Farm Bill
eligibility requirements, a family of three could
make no more than $22,330, report less than
$17,172 in taxable income, and no more than
$2,000 in personal assets.100 In the 2008 Farm
Bill, benefits were augmented for most households due to an increase in the minimum benefit
and standard deduction and elimination of the
cap on the deduction for child care expenses.100
On average, households received $272 in monthly
Cycles of food deprivation and
overeating can lead to metabolic changes over time that
promote fat storage and weight
gain.17 When healthy foods are
available in low income areas,
they often tend to be more expensive and of poorer quality.
Foods high in refined grains,
added sugars, and fats, which
contribute to obesity, tend to
be generally less expensive
and more readily available in
low-income communities.17
5
SNAP benefits in 2009; the maximum benefit
for a family of four was $588 during the first half
of that year.27
Administration of SNAP
Although SNAP is a federal program, state and
local programs are responsible for determining
eligibility and benefits and monitoring delivery
of benefits. USDA Food Nutrition Service field
offices license and monitor retailers, including
farmers’ markets, which accept SNAP benefits.
All SNAP benefits are provided via electronic
benefit transfer (EBT) cards, which can be
used at approved retail food stores and farmers’ markets. Initiatives to expand the number of
farmers’ markets and other fresh produce retailers
that accept EBT cards are an important means
of increasing access to fresh fruits and vegetables
among SNAP participants.
Eligible Foods
T
he fact that SNAP
benefits can be used
for soft drinks, candy,
cookies and other foods that
have limited nutritional benefits
is a point of controversy. Many
public health advocates concerned with rising obesity rates
have argued that foods with
little nutritional value should
not be eligible for purchase
with SNAP benefits.101,102 The
USDA reports that because the
list of eligible foods is defined
in federal law, any changes to
the eligible foods would require
congressional action.28
6
The types of foods eligible for purchase with
SNAP benefits have changed over time. Currently, SNAP benefits can be used to purchase
all foods and food products other than alcohol
or tobacco products, items that are not intended
for human consumption (e.g., paper products,
pet foods), foods sold hot at the point of sale, and
vitamins and supplements.28 Seeds and plants
that produce food for the household to eat may
also be purchased with SNAP benefits. Of note,
as described by the USDA, “Soft drinks, candy,
cookies, snack crackers, and ice cream are food
items and are therefore eligible items.”28 Most
SNAP benefits—86% in FY2009—are redeemed
at supermarkets across the U.S.29 In some areas,
however, qualified homeless, elderly, or disabled
people who are not able to prepare food on their
own, may use their SNAP benefits for low-cost
meals at authorized restaurants.28
The fact that SNAP benefits can be used
for soft drinks, candy, cookies and other foods
that have limited nutritional benefits is a point
of controversy. Many public health advocates
concerned with rising obesity rates have argued
that foods with little nutritional value should not
be eligible for purchase with SNAP benefits.101,102
The USDA reports that because the list of eligible foods is defined in federal law, any changes
to the eligible foods would require congressional action.28 Bills to restrict certain foods from
SNAP benefit redemption have been introduced
in state legislatures as well, including recent bills
in Florida and Texas30,31 and a Vermont resolution,
urging USDA to give states authority to define
eligible foods.32
In addition, there are concerns about the logistics of implementing limits on the foods that can
be purchased with SNAP benefits. The USDA
notes that when Congress has considered placing
limits on eligible foods, it has concluded that
designating foods as “luxury or non-nutritious
would be administratively costly and burdensome.”28 In March 2007, the USDA issued a
report, “Implications of Restricting the Use of
Food Stamp Benefits,” that reached a similar conclusion.33 Some states and localities have applied
for permission to conduct pilot SNAP programs
in their jurisdictions that would disallow the use
of SNAP benefits to purchase sugar-sweetened
beverages or other “junk foods.”34 In 2011, the
USDA denied New York City’s request to conduct a pilot project that would limit the ability
of SNAP participants to purchase high-sugarcontent beverages, including non-diet soda.35 The
denial was based on the logistical complexity
involved in determining which beverages could
or could not be purchased using SNAP benefits
and the difficulty in gauging the program’s effectiveness with respect to reducing obesity.35 An
alternative strategy to increase SNAP purchases
of healthy foods is to require SNAP vendors to
comply with specific guidelines regarding the
availability of healthy foods.
Other Food and Nutrition Assistance
Programs in the Farm Bill
In addition to SNAP, the 2008 Farm Bill
included a number of other food and nutrition
assistance programs that contribute to the nation’s
food safety net.
„„ The Emergency Food Assistance Program
(TEFAP)—TEFAP helps supplement the
diets of low-income individuals, including the
elderly, by providing them with emergency
food and nutrition assistance.36 The USDA
buys, processes, and packages commodity
foods and makes them available to the states
to distribute via local food agencies, including
food banks, soup kitchens, and food pantries
that directly serve the public.37 Mandatory
funding for TEFAP is $250 million, plus any
adjustments for inflation.
„„ Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP)—
FFVP operates in selected low-income elementary schools in all 50 states, the District of
Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands and is primarily administered through
state departments of education.38,39 The program helps schools provide children with free
fresh fruits and vegetables for mealtimes and
as snacks.39 Funding in 2012 is estimated at
$163.5 million dollars (this amount increased
each year beginning in 2009, from $40M $150M). Beginning in 2012, the amount is
adjusted by inflation.
„„ Healthy Incentives Pilot Project (HIP)—The
2008 Farm Bill authorized $20 million for
pilot projects to determine whether financial incentives provided to SNAP participants
increase the purchase of fruits, vegetables, and
other healthful foods.40 For every dollar project participants spend on fruits and vegetables
using their SNAP electronic benefit transfer
cards, 30 cents will be added to their benefit
balance to subsidize the cost by almost one
third.40 HIP is an effort to explore a new and
innovative approach to empower low-income
Americans to consume diets that include more
fruits and vegetables, whole grains, and other
healthful foods.40 A pilot, in Hampden County,
Massachusetts, began in November 2011 and
will be evaluated in 2013.40
„„ Hunger-Free Communities Initiative—The
2008 Farm Bill authorized $5 million for new
Hunger-Free Communities grants to food-insecure communities in the U.S. Large numbers
of households in these communities have difficulty providing enough food for all members due to a lack of resources.42 In February
2011, the USDA awarded research, planning,
and implementation grants to 14 communities
in eight states to promote coordination and
partnerships among public, private, and nonprofit partners to maximize enrollment, help
eligible households make full use of benefits
and better understand the reasons for food
insecurity.42
„„ Whole Grain Pilot Project—The 2008 Food
Bill instructed the USDA to establish a pilot
project to purchase whole grains and wholegrain products for use in school meal programs. It authorized $4 million to fund the
project.
„„ Nutrition Monitoring—The 2008 Food Bill
required the USDA and the Department of
Health and Human Services to jointly monitor, conduct research on, and disseminate to
the public information on diet, nutrition,
physical activity, and related issues.
The programs and initiatives described above
are designed to increase access to and demand for
nutritious foods among those with low incomes.
USDA expenditures on food assistance and nutrition programs increasingly work to support the
Dietary Guidelines for Americans and, through
initiatives such as SNAP education programs
T
he Farm Bill includes measures that ensure individuals, schools, and other
institutions have access to nutritious, affordable foods and that bolster
local producers’ ability to produce, promote, and market nutritious foods.
and other efforts, enhance the ability of program
recipients to purchase, prepare, and consume
healthy foods. The Farm Bill includes measures that ensure individuals, schools, and other
institutions have access to nutritious, affordable
foods and that bolster local producers’ ability to
produce, promote, and market nutritious foods.
The historical safety net of federal food assistance programs, such as SNAP, TEFAP, and fruit
and vegetable programs, has worked to reduce
food insecurity even during times of economic
hardship and provided an economic stimulus to
local communities and agriculture producers.43,44
USDA’s continuous efforts to monitor the nutrition and dietary habits of Americans through the
Agriculture Research Service and the National
Institute of Food and Agriculture, is essential
to informing Dietary Guidelines and food and
nutrition programs.
Nutrition programs are at the heart of the
Farm Bill, addressing recipients’ food insecurity and improving their nutritional status and
overall health.
Producing Healthy,
Affordable Foods
Today’s food system is very different than it
was even 30 years ago. Our food production
systems have become increasingly consolidated
among food growers, processors, manufacturers,
and retailers. With this consolidation has come
concerns about decreased diversity in the types
7
of crops grown in the U.S. and the safety of our
food system overall. The evolution of federal
farm policies over time has led to a food supply
system in which a relatively few types of crops
are grown on large-scale farming operations and
fresh fruits and vegetables and organic crops are
riskier to produce. This type of food production
system may fail to meet the recommendations
for a healthy diet outlined by the USDA and the
Institute of Medicine.45
This section describes the different federal
policies governing commodity crops such as corn
and wheat and specialty crops such as fruits and
vegetables. It also reviews the federal crop insurance program and the important role it plays,
especially for growers of specialty crops. Finally,
the section discusses how our food choices have
changed over time, due in part to convenience
foods made from low-cost commodities, and
provides recent examples showing that our food
system is capable of producing healthier foods.
Commodity Crops and Subsidies
Title I of the 2008 Farm Bill addressed commodity crops and subsidies paid to growers of
these types of crops. Subsidies provide growers
with a risk management tool, serving as a safety
net against seasonal fluctuations and disasters,
controlling market prices, and maintaining a reliable food supply.46 Subsidies can be in the form
of direct payments, countercyclical payments, or
marketing loans.47
Eligible commodities include dairy items
in addition to items such as grains and cotton
that can be stored for long periods and can be
bought or sold in bulk in the U.S. and abroad.
The types of crops included in the commodity
programs have expanded over time and currently
encompass about two dozen crops. Corn, sugar
beets, soybeans, wheat, rice, chickpeas, lentils, dry
peas, oats, barley canola and other oilseeds, dairy
products, and peanuts are all designated in federal
laws and regulations as commodities eligible for
subsidies.48 Fruits and vegetables are not eligible
for commodity subsidies.
In the 1970s and 1980s, federal agricultural
policies moved away from ensuring price stability by managing production. Instead it shifted
to a system of direct subsidies for growers that
maintains low prices and high outputs for certain
crops (e.g. corn, wheat, and rice) that could be
sold as commodities both in the U.S. and internationally.45,49 Direct payments to growers were
instituted to encourage competition and increase
production, and led to lower prices for commodity crops.
Commodity crops are also used in U.S. international food aid efforts. Bulk processed and
unprocessed commodity crops and foods made
with these crops are part of international food
relief packages (see Box 2 for more information
about international aid activities in the 2008
Farm Bill). Surplus commodities continue to feed
the poor—both in the U.S. and abroad—through
direct commodity assistance, as well as, in the
form of low-cost, processed food products that
are easily transported and have long shelf lives.
While commodity crops are important to the
U.S. economy and international food aid efforts,
some argue that the current system of commodity subsidies has distorted the types and production methods of crops grown, benefits only a
relatively few large growers, and may ultimately
have a negative impact on the diets and health
of Americans.49 However, research has shown
that farmers growing commodity crops receive
only pennies on the dollar for their crops, due to
overproduction, with the majority of the profit
made by processors, manufacturers, and retailers.49
Between 1984 and 2000, the proportion of each
food dollar that went to farmers decreased from
35% to 19%.49 In 2008, 88 cents of every dollar
spent on food went to nonfarm activities such
as packaging, transportation, and marketing.49,50
Processors of low-cost commodity crops have
increasingly profited from the conversion of these
crops into processed foods.45,49 This results in a
system that reinforces production and marketing
of processed foods over fresh fruits and vegetables.
Importantly, commodity programs are only
one piece of a complex system of food policies,
and there is little evidence that supports a direct
connection between commodity programs and
poor health outcomes.49 As discussed later, the
introduction of a number of Farm Bill provisions
in 2008 encouraging use of local foods and other
community food system efforts has begun to
increase the demand for locally grown foods and
reverse the trend toward consolidation among
growers and retailers.
In 2008, 88 cents of every dollar spent on food went to nonfarm activities such as packaging,
transportation, and marketing.49,50 Processors of low-cost commodity crops have increasingly profited from
the conversion of these crops into processed foods.45,49 This results in a system that reinforces production
and marketing of processed foods over fresh fruits and vegetables.
8
Specialty Crops: Fruits
and Vegetables
Certain types of crops, including fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, herbs, and nursery plants, are
classified as “specialty crops” under the Farm Bill.
Specialty crops were covered in Title X of the
2008 Farm Bill, the first time there was a separate
title for horticulture and organic agricultural
programs.47 The creation of a separate title for
these programs demonstrates their importance
and the growing awareness that providing access
to fruits and vegetables and food produced without synthetic pesticides or other chemicals is an
important function of Farm Bill policies. Title X
addressed a number of key programs and policies
important to the public health community:
„„ Specialty Crops—The 2008 Farm Bill reauthorized the specialty crop block grant
program, which provides states with grants to
support marketing research and promotion to
enhance the competitiveness of their specialty
crops.47
„„ Organic Agriculture—Title X also included
provisions to support organic agriculture. The
National Organic Cost Share Program was
designed to help farmers defray the cost of
obtaining certification under the National Organic Program. The 2008 law also requires the
USDA to collect data about organically grown
crops and distribute current price data for the
organic market.
Production of Fruits and Vegetables
in the U.S.
Approximately 2.5% of total cropland in the
U.S. was planted with fruits and vegetables in
2007.51 The food system’s current output falls
short of providing the amount of fruits and
vegetables needed to meet the recommendations
outlined in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.45 The guidelines recommend more than
four times the amount of fruits and vegetables as
grains. Other factors such as limitations on the
ability to store and safely transport fresh produce
(especially when compared to commodity crops)
also contribute to insufficient supplies of domestically produced produce relative to recommended consumption levels.
Federal Crop Insurance Program
The federal crop insurance program is another
risk-management tool designed to compensate
and protect crop producers from unavoidable
risks associated with adverse weather, weatherrelated plant diseases, and insect infestations.47
Crop insurance policies are sold through private
Box 2: Farm Bill Title III: International Aid Activities
The U.S. is the largest provider of food aid in the world, accounting for about
60% of total global food aid over the past decade.47 International food aid
ensures that individuals around the world receive the necessary nutrition to
maintain their health. Title III of the Farm Bill covers funding for USDA’s international food aid and also addresses barriers to U.S. agriculture exports. The
Farm Bill authorizes food aid purchase and distribution programs, although
most international food aid activities are administered by the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID).47
The 2008 Farm Bill extended international food aid programs through FY2012
and authorized the use of U.S. commodities for emergency relief and nonemergency (development) projects overseas.47 It also provided funds for a
pilot project to purchase food aid locally, thereby saving substantially in shipping costs and time and simultaneously addressing the potential damaging
effects of free or below-market-cost food on local producers and economies.
The 2008 law increased funding for administrative operations, stockpiling and
prepositioning costs, evaluating food aid quality, and segregating emergency
and non-emergency aid funding.47 The law’s food aid components are vital to
addressing emergency and ongoing food insecurity internationally.
insurance companies, but all or a portion of a
producer’s premium is paid for by the federal
government. Although permanently authorized
through the Federal Crop Insurance Act of
1980,52 the federal crop insurance program was
modified in the 2008 Farm Bill and is likely to
be further modified in the 2012 reauthorization
process.
Role of Crop Insurance
The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
underwrites policies offered through private
insurance companies to producers of more than
100 different types of commodity and noncommodity crops. It is the primary mechanism
through which producers of fruit and vegetables
manage risk because they are not eligible for federal direct commodity subsidy programs. In fact,
farmers can be penalized for growing specialty
crops on lands enrolled in federal commodity
programs, even if commodity crops are not currently being grown on that land. 45 Because crop
insurance is the only federally subsidized risk
9
management tool available to fruit and vegetable
producers, it is an important policy mechanism
for protecting the viability of these operations
and, ultimately, maintaining and expanding the
number of suppliers of fruits and vegetables.
While many specialty crop farmers prefer to
maintain crop insurance rather than receive crop
subsidies, it has not historically been sufficient to
fully support farmers’ needs.51 Additionally, farms
planting diverse crops or using organic methods
have a difficult time obtaining crop insurance
due to a lack of historic actuarial data.53,54 Having access to crop insurance at affordable rates is
important for small, mid-sized, and specialty crop
growers. In Farm Bill 2012 discussions, expansion of crop insurance is being considered as an
alternative to some of the existing farm safety
net policies, including direct subsidies. However,
reducing or replacing direct subsidies with crop
insurance could result in higher federal costs if
claims are made during periods of relatively high
prices for growers. Improved insurance coverage
to better support small and mid-sized farmers, producers of organic foods, and farms that
grow diverse crops in managing their risks will
also increase fruit and vegetable production to
T
FOSTERING PRODUCTION THROUGH DEMAND
he 2008 Farm Bill included the new Farm to School Initiative, which
encourages and supports schools purchasing local, unprocessed
foods.60 The new guidelines, which apply to food purchased through
Child Nutrition Act programs (school lunches, etc.), have the potential to greatly
impact the choices available to American schoolchildren. This program links
local producers to institutions, creating stable demand for products from small
and mid-sized farmers. The 2008 Farm Bill also increased mandatory spending
on fruits, vegetables, and nuts for school lunches; encouraged nutrition education; and authorized a pilot program for school gardens in high-poverty schools.
These changes help set healthy eating habits that will positively impact children
throughout their lives.
10
help meet dietary needs. As discussed later, these
types of producers are key to rebuilding local
and regional food systems that have declined or
disappeared in recent decades.
Our Changing Diet and Food
Options
Food manufacturers have successfully created
an array of new foods with low-cost commodity
crops as their foundation.45 In addition to their
lower cost relative to healthier choices, many of
these foods are convenient to prepare and eat, are
calorie dense, and appeal to people’s tastes; however, they are often produced by using added fats,
sugars, and salt and artificial colors and flavorings.45,46 While these changes have extended the
amounts and shelf life of foods, processed foods
dominate grocery sales and have contributed to
increased consumption of fats and sugars in the
U.S. diet, thereby contributing to the nation’s
obesity epidemic.45,57
Producing Healthier Foods
Sensitivity to obesity and other health issues
and the public’s desire for healthier products have
caused many food companies to respond to market demand by reformulating products to reduce
calories, fats, sodium, and sugars. Some producers
have begun to use more organically produced
ingredients in their products. Others have simply
decreased portion sizes without reformulating
their products to achieve calorie reductions.
Food retailers are also beginning to respond
to consumer demands for healthier food options.
Large-scale buyers such as Wal-Mart are using
their buying power to influence food companies’
products, developing their own healthier inhouse brands, and increasing purchases from local
and regional producers around their stores.58,59
These responses to consumer demands are encouraging, and combined with USDA nutrition
programs, will help to effect healthier food and
agriculture practices as well as meaningful longterm change.
Current Farm Bill policies could have a profound impact on what the general population
purchases and consumes. Foods high in refined
grains, added sugars, and fats tend to be generally
inexpensive relative to healthier foods and more
readily available in low-income communities.17
Households with limited resources try to stretch
their available money by buying cheap, highcalorie, filling foods. Schools, hospitals, and other
large institutions are also faced with purchasing
choices that pit more costly nutritious items
against less expensive, low-nutrient foods.17 There
is a need for a combined strategy of increased
demand—to drive production of healthy foods—
and pricing approaches that make the healthier
choice the affordable choice. As the demand
from food assistance programs for healthier
foods grows, food manufacturers will produce
healthier products for institutions as well as for
retail markets. Farm Bill efforts to assist organic
farmers with market data, crop insurance, and
other support have also led to growth in this
market segment of healthier foods.
Increasing Access to
Healthy Foods
Equally important to fostering public policies
that encourage the production of healthy foods
is the need to promote policies that increase demand for and access to healthy foods. Increasing
demand for healthy food choices and providing sufficient access to nutritious foods are key
public health policies supported through several
programs and initiatives in the 2008 Farm Bill.
This section reviews the challenges that some
communities face in accessing healthy, affordable
food and the public health implications of this
lack of access. The section also highlights 2008
Farm Bill initiatives designed to increase the
demand for healthy foods, improve consumers’
understanding of the importance of healthy eating, and foster better access to healthy, affordable
foods. Finally, the section identifies programs
aimed at diversifying and rebuilding local and
regional food systems.
The Challenge of Accessing
Healthy, Affordable Foods
A significant factor in nutritional status is the
extent to which people have regular access to
healthy food options within their community.
Studies have shown that those who have better
access to full-service supermarkets tend to have
healthier diets and a reduced risk of obesity.17
A variety of factors—consolidation among
retail food outlets, inaccessibility of full-service
grocery stores, and the relatively higher cost of
healthy foods—have made it difficult for people
in some communities to access healthy foods
and resulted in “food deserts”: areas with limited
access to affordable and nutritious food.61 Food
deserts disproportionately impact urban lowincome communities and communities of color.
In a review of 21 studies, it was consistently
found that food stores in these communities
offer lower quality items, are less likely to stock
healthy foods, and are more likely to charge
higher prices than stores in higher income or
predominantly white communities.62 In low-
T
USDA FOOD DESERT LOCATOR WEBSITE
he 2008 Farm Bill directed the USDA to study areas with limited access
to affordable, healthy food. Following up on those studies, USDA created
a Food Desert Locator. The Food Desert Locator maps and provides
selected population characteristics of census tracts defined as food deserts: low-income neighborhoods without easy access to a supermarket or large grocery store.
The locator can be accessed at www.ers.usda.gov/data/fooddesert/index.htm.
income communities where residents are reliant
on SNAP and other food assistance programs
and many residents do not have their own
vehicles, accessing healthy, affordable foods can
be difficult.
Lack of access to healthy foods is not limited
to urban communities; food deserts can also
impact rural communities, although some of
the causes are different than in urban areas. Low
population densities and longer distances between grocery stores, as well as the rapid growth
of “supercenters” and their impact on smaller,
local food retailers, have resulted in the creation
of rural food deserts.62 A USDA report on food
deserts noted that consumer behavior, preferences, and other factors may also account for
differences in the types of foods offered across
different areas and that public health education efforts are needed, in addition to increased
access, to help change consumer preferences in
favor of healthier foods.61
Impact of Food Deserts
Residents in food desert communities may
not have many options for buying healthy foods.
This can be especially difficult for low-income
residents who do not have transportation, have
to travel farther to get to a full-service grocery
store, or shop predominantly at local convenience stores that do not have many healthy
food options. Further complicating the “food
environment” is the reality that in many food
desert communities—and even in neighborhoods with supermarkets—residents are inundated with fast-food restaurants and convenience
stores that provide ample opportunity to buy
low-cost, high-calorie, nutrient-poor foods.62,63
When lack of access to healthy foods is coupled
with other community factors such as a lack of
playgrounds, recreation areas, and safe sidewalks
FOOD DESERTS
• Low-income zip codes have
25% fewer chain supermarkets and 1.3 times more convenience stores than middleincome zip codes.62
• Adults with no supermarkets
within a mile of their homes are
25% to 46% less likely to have
a healthy diet than those with
the highest number of supermarkets near their homes.62
11
and paths on which to walk, residents of urban
and rural communities alike can be at increased
risk for overweight or obesity.63,64
Retailer Consolidation
BUILDING ON A SUCCESSFUL FOOD BUSINESS MODEL:
The Fresh Food Financing Initiative
I
n 2011, the USDA together with the Department of Health and Human
Services and the Department of Treasury, jointly implemented a Healthy
Food Financing budget initiative to reduce food deserts and increase ac-
cess to healthy, affordable foods. The initiative was modeled on The Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative, a successful public-private partnership
designed to bring options for healthier foods to underserved rural and urban
communities throughout the state. In the five years between 2004 and 2009,
the PA Fresh Food Financing Initiative developed 83 supermarkets and fresh
food outlets, which created or retained 5,000 jobs.93 The $30 million investment in state seed funds has resulted in projects totaling $190 million.93 Local
tax revenues from one store in Philadelphia increased by $540,000.93 Statewide, 400,000 residents now have increased access to healthier foods.93
The 2012 Senate Farm Bill includes authorization language to further establish
a federal Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI).107 The federal program aims
to attract investments to underserved communities by providing crucial loan
and grant financing to fresh food retailers. The program is designed to help
these retailers overcome significant start-up costs of beginning operations in
underserved, low-income rural, suburban, and urban communities.94 The program can also support renovation and expansion of existing stores.
Programs such as the Pennsylvania model or the proposed federal HFFI and
similar programs in other states are sound approaches to addressing problems
associated with obesity and lack of access to healthy foods while taking into
account the current fiscal constraints and the need to leverage investment to
stimulate economic development and job growth.
12
Concentration within the retail grocery sector
is increasing; the market share of groceries sold
by the four largest food retailers has more than
doubled since 1997.80 As of 2009, the top four
food retailers controlled more than half of all
grocery sales.80 A study of the largest 100 metropolitan areas showed that the four largest food
retailers control 72% of sales.80
Paradoxically, although more grocery stores
nationwide have opened than closed in recent
decades, urban areas have continued to lose
supermarkets as retailers follow their more affluent customers to the suburbs.62,77 And while
alternative sources of fresh foods such as farmers’ markets, produce stands, and communitysupported agriculture programs have likewise
increased in recent years, they tend to be found
in middle-class or wealthy communities.62 Other
factors such as high crime rates, inadequate
building space, and the relatively high cost of
doing business in urban communities have also
contributed to the overall and continuing decline
in the number of chain or large grocery stores in
these communities.61
While consolidation in the various segments
of the food system is not necessarily bad per se, it
can ultimately affect the price, quality, choice, and
availability of foods; eliminate small- and midsized stores; and create highly centralized operations.76 For example, grocery store concentration
can lead to higher consumer prices and drive out
smaller, less competitive stores.80
Initiatives to Promote Demand
for and Access to Healthy Foods
The 2008 Farm Bill authorized a number
of programs to encourage the purchase and
consumption of healthy foods as well as increase
their accessibility. Initiatives designed to increase
the availability of and access to healthy foods
can result in better eating habits: studies have
shown that there is a positive link between access
to healthy food and healthy eating behaviors.62
A USDA study on food deserts notes that easy
access to all foods may be more important than a
lack of access to specific healthy foods in explaining increases in obesity.61 Furthermore, while
easy availability of healthy foods is important,
individuals must choose to purchase these foods;
they need the motivation to buy healthy foods,
the skills to prepare them, and budgeting tools to
maximize their healthy food dollars.
A variety of new and continuing Farm Bill
programs and initiatives are designed to increase
demand for and access to healthy foods:
„„ SNAP Nutrition Education—This is a specific
component of the 2008 law that gives states
discretion to implement nutrition education
programs directed at individuals who receive
or are eligible for program benefits.
„„ Procurement Preferences for Locally Grown
Products for In-School Meals—The 2008
Farm Bill amended the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act to reduce existing
barriers faced by child nutrition programs in
purchasing unprocessed locally grown and locally raised agricultural products.65 Institutions
receiving funds through the federal child nutrition programs, which include the National
School Lunch Program, School Breakfast
Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program,
Special Milk Program for Children, Child
and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer
Food Service Program, may apply an optional
geographic preference in food procurement
for these programs.65 Due to the geographic
diversity of the United States, neither the 2008
Farm Bill nor USDA’s rules define “local”;
each school food authority is permitted to
define the term for itself.65 The locally grown
procurement preference is part of USDA’s
Farm to School Initiative in kindergarten
through grade 12. The initiative seeks to efficiently meet the diverse needs of school nutrition programs, provide support for health and
nutrition education, and support regional and
local farmers, thereby strengthening local food
systems and regional economies.66
„„ Expansion of Community Food Projects—The
USDA Community Food Projects Competitive Grant Program has existed since 1996 to
fight food insecurity through community food
projects that promote self-sufficiency in lowincome areas.67 It was incorporated into the
Farm Bill in 2008. Grants help eligible entities
carry out community food projects that make
communities more self-reliant in maintaining
their food systems while addressing food, nutrition, and farm issues.68 Examples of funded
community food projects include nutrition
education, food policy councils, community
gardening, youth gardening, community-supported agriculture, farm-to-school programs,
farmers’ markets, micro-enterprise development, consumer education and marketing
campaigns, business training, and community
kitchens.69,70 As of 2007, 243 grants and more
than $36 million, which was matched by local
resources, had been distributed through this
program.71
„„ Healthy Urban Food Enterprise Development
(HUFED) Center—The 2008 Farm Bill provided $5 million to the USDA to establish the
Healthy Urban Food Enterprise Development
Center, designed to help make affordable, nutritious fresh foods, including locally produced
foods, more readily available in low-income
communities and neighborhoods.47,72 In January 2009, the USDA announced a $900,000
award to the Wallace Center at Winrock
International (Little Rock, Arkansas) to run
the HUFED Center.73 The center provides
training, technical assistance, and subgrants
to eligible entities for healthy food enterprise development.72 In July 2011, the center
awarded $630,000 to 17 groups to resolve barriers and strengthen or build access to healthy
and regionally produced food in underserved
communities, where rates of diet-related preventable conditions such as obesity are highest.74 The strategies used to achieve these goals
include improved processing and distribution
options, improved aggregation and marketing
with food hubs, mobile markets in rural and
urban areas, and large-scale community-supported agriculture.74
„„ Access to Fresh Foods—Title X included sev-
eral provisions to encourage the consumption
of fresh fruits and vegetables. The bill expanded the Farmers’ Market Promotion Program
to enable food assistance program participants
to use their electronic benefit cards at more
farmers’ markets. Another provision established
the Healthy Urban Food Enterprise Development Center, which makes fresh foods more
readily available to low-income communities
while simultaneously creating jobs.47
„„ Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program
(SFMNP)—SFMNP offers grants to states,
territories, and tribal governments to provide
low-income seniors with coupons that can be
exchanged for eligible foods (fruits, vegetables,
honey, and fresh-cut herbs) at venues including farmers’ markets, roadside stands, and community-supported agriculture programs.75 The
program supports and expands the number
of such venues in addition to making healthy
foods available to low-income seniors.75
Developing and Enhancing
Our Food Systems
I
nitiatives designed to
increase the availability
of and access to healthy
foods can result in better eating habits: studies have shown
that there is a positive link
between access to healthy
food and healthy eating
behaviors.62
While the U.S. food system remains significantly consolidated and centralized, the situa-
13
tion has begun to change recently. Consumers’
interest in knowing more about how their food
is produced and where it comes from has steadily
increased over the past decade.79,92 Demand for
organically and locally grown products continues
to grow.92 The number of farmers’ markets nationally and annual receipts at those markets have
increased.92 These are positive indications that all
players in the food system, as well as consumers
and communities, are envisioning and creating a
more diverse system. Increases in direct-to-consumer sales by farming operations are a sign of
the demand for products produced locally. Government agencies and institutions such as schools
and hospitals have likewise increased their purchases of locally sourced products. Regional food
systems must be reinvigorated to better meet the
rising demand for organic and/or locally grown
foods and to provide markets large enough for
farming operations to be economically viable.
2008 Farm Bill Programs
Affecting Food Systems
The 2008 Farm Bill incorporated programs
designed to help address gaps in community
healthy food access and provide needed economic opportunities in urban as well as rural
communities.
„„ Rural Development Programs—The Farm
Bill’s rural development programs help im-
A
food system that includes the necessary infrastructure for small- and
mid-sized farmers to process and market their products economically will provide the missing link between our current system of large
agribusiness operations and small direct-to-consumer farms.95 Rebuilding regional food system infrastructures will also create jobs, improve local tax bases,
and create further economic opportunities.
14
prove the economic well-being of rural communities. Title VI of the 2008 law included
support for locally produced agricultural food
products and grants to enhance employment
opportunities for disabled individuals in rural
areas.47 In addition, the title contained several
provisions that promote rural public health,
such as telemedicine and water/waste disposal
programs. It also reauthorized programs to
assist the development of broadband Internet
access and telecommunication in rural areas.
Taken together, these provisions are designed
to help strengthen the infrastructure in rural
communities and support the creation and expansion of local and regional food systems.
„„ Research Programs—Title VII of the 2008
Farm Bill contained important agricultural
research provisions that reorganized the management and conduct of agricultural research.
While individually these provisions support
programs and initiatives across many titles of
the Farm Bill, collectively they support the
advancement of our understanding about agriculture and food and how they affect people
and the communities where they live. Specifically, the legislation created the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), a new
USDA entity replacing the Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service
(CSREES), which was responsible for managing extramural research. NIFA was envisioned
as an independent, scientific, research-based
agency for the food and agricultural sciences
based on the competitive research model of
the National Institutes of Health. Title VII also
funded a specialty crop research and extension
initiative and grants to research the safety of
fresh produce.47 Moreover, the legislation supports human nutrition research centers, which
were established through the 1977 Farm
Bill to provide the primary evidence base
used to form and revise the USDA Dietary
Guidelines.
A food system that includes the necessary
infrastructure for small- and mid-sized farmers
to process and market their products economically will provide the missing link between our
current system of large agribusiness operations
and small direct-to-consumer farms.95 Rebuilding regional food system infrastructures will also
create jobs, improve local tax bases, and create
further economic opportunities. Supporting
small- and mid-sized farmers and encouraging and supporting the development of regional
food systems is important in making long-term
impacts on health.95
Fostering Sustainable
Food Systems
The food system in the U.S.—defined
broadly as growers, processors, manufactures,
distributors, and retailers—remains, despite
recent improvements, significantly centralized and consolidated. The methods used in
each of these sectors carry with them human
health and environmental impacts. And while
there are increased efforts to reduce the environmental impacts of food production, more
work remains to be done to create a more
sustainable food system that limits negative
environmental health impacts. This section
identifies some of the health and environmental impacts associated with our current food
system and highlights 2008 Farm Bill programs and initiatives to address these impacts.
Health and Environmental
Impacts of Our Food System
K
eeping large numbers of animals together results in amounts
of waste that exceed the land’s capacity to absorb and process
effectively.83 Waste lagoons and other practices to retain the waste
on site vary in their effectiveness, sometimes subjecting fields, groundwater,
The consolidation of the food system has
led to the participation of increasingly smaller
and surface water to contamination.84
numbers of food producers and processors in
all segments of the system. For example, the
tions, and 48 million illnesses and cost billions
market share of the four largest fluid milk
of dollars.81 Reliance on a highly centralized
manufacturers doubled between 1997 and 2002,
76
food system likewise puts the U.S. food supfrom 21% to 43%. One company controls
ply at greater risk of intentional acts of conabout 40% of the nation’s fluid milk supply.77
tamination. Importantly, while smaller, more
Similarly, the market share for beef and pork
localized regional food systems offer comprocessing operations has become more consolimunity and health benefits, they pose unique
dated, with fewer processors controlling a higher
challenges with respect to balancing safety
share of the market.78,79 Although the U.S. food
and business viability.
system is viewed as the most productive in the
world, the methods used in producing, process„„ Monoculture Agriculture—A significant iming, and manufacturing our foods can result in
pact of federal commodity subsidies has been
significant adverse human health and environtheir encouragement of large-scale planting of
mental impacts. A number of these impacts are
a single or limited number of species of a crop
summarized below.
over wide areas. Large corporate food buyers
have the ability to alter the types and amounts
„„ Food Safety—The highly centralized and
of food grown through their procurement
industrialized nature of our food system has
practices.49,82 Monoculture agriculture is also
contributed to the occurrence of large-scale
seen as an efficient way to reap large harvests
foodborne illness outbreaks. Centralization of
with minimal labor. While efficient from a laprocesses may make it easier to detect where
bor standpoint, reliance on a single or limited
there is contamination; however, if hazard
number of species grown year after year can
control practices are not implemented and
be costly in terms of pesticide and fertilizer
rigorous inspections are not conducted reguusage, which can contaminate drinking water
larly, when contamination does occur, it can
and air quality and impact the health of local
rapidly spread throughout the food system
communities.103 For example, Rivers in the
within a matter of days. National outbreaks
Northeastern U.S. have nitrogren levels 10-15
of foodborne diseases in recent years have
time higher than they were at the beginning
repeatedly demonstrated how vulnerable
of the 20th Century.104 Reliance on growing a
the system is to spreading foodborne disease.
limited scope of species of plants and aniEach year foodborne contaminants cause an
mals also leads to increased disease susceptiaverage of 3,000 deaths, 127,000 hospitaliza-
15
Recent reports indicate that most antibiotics used in the U.S. are fed to animals in feedstock.85 Overuse
and subtherapeutic use of antibiotics can lead to antibiotic resistance in animals and humans. The World
Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have both called for phasing
out the use of antimicrobial growth stimulants for livestock and fish production in order to preserve
therapeutic uses for human and veterinary care.45,86–88
bility and a loss of biodiversity over time.105
In addition to reducing the variety of crops
grown, commodity programs can increase
and concentrate the environmental impacts of
farming.103 However, some commodity programs require compliance with conservation
measures to reduce environmental and health
impacts. These programs provide an important balance in our food production system to
protect the public’s health and are important
to maintain. Shifting to more diversified crop
production will further support human and
environmental health and may create additional jobs.
„„ Confined Animal Feedlot Operations—Con-
fined animal feedlot operations (CAFOs) are a
significant example of the health and environmental impacts of highly centralized agricultural practices. CAFOs are used by livestock
producers to raise or finish growing livestock
prior to slaughter. Keeping such large numbers of animals together results in amounts of
waste that exceed the land’s capacity to absorb
and process effectively.83 Waste lagoons and
other practices to retain the waste on site vary
in their effectiveness, sometimes subjecting
fields, groundwater, and surface water to contamination.84 Such contamination has been
linked in some instances to nationwide disease
outbreaks. For example, dairy feedlots were
implicated as a source of one of the largest
waterborne disease outbreaks in the United
States. Over 400,000 residents of Milwaukee,
Wisconsin became ill and more than 50 died
as a result of cryptosporidium contamination
of their drinking water in 1993.104 CAFOs
are also sources of air pollution, releasing ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, and
particulates. Recent studies have tied CAFOs
to increased rates of respiratory disease and
asthma among workers and neighbors, including young children.78
16
„„ Overuse of Antibiotics—Another common
practice among CAFOs and other large animal feeding operations is the use of antibiotics to both reduce diseases and promote rapid
growth. Recent reports indicate that most antibiotics used in the U.S. are fed to animals in
feedstock.85 Overuse and subtherapeutic use of
antibiotics can lead to antibiotic resistance in
animals and humans. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) have both called for
phasing out the use of antimicrobial growth
stimulants for livestock and fish production in
order to preserve therapeutic uses for human
and veterinary care.45,86–88 In January 2012, the
FDA announced its intent to prohibit the use
of one family of antibiotics, cephalosporins, in
animals.89
„„ Air Quality, Climate Change, and Energy—
Highly centralized agricultural practices allow
crops to be harvested long distances from
where they are stored, processed, and retailed.
Transporting food from farm to table under
a highly centralized, industrialized system
involves using fossil fuels to manufacture and
transport fertilizer and pesticides and move
crops from farms to processors to retailers.45
This not only consumes nonrenewable energy
but contributes to air pollution and climate
change. Small and mid-sized farming operations, when linked with local and regional
markets, can make important contributions
to promoting clean energy and mitigating
climate change.90 Farms that use sustainable
agriculture practices can contribute by using
renewable energy sources such as on-farm
windmills and bioenergy from crop wastes
to fuel their operations and by growing food
without the use of fossil fuel–based pesticides
and fertilizers.90
2008 Farm Bill Programs
Addressing Health and
Environmental Impacts
of Food Production
Title II of the 2008 Farm Bill addresses conservation programs. The USDA administers two
types of conservation programs that seek to improve and manage the environmental impacts of
farming operations: land retirement and easement
programs and working lands programs. Land
retirement and easement programs take land out
of crop production and provide rent payments
and cost-sharing assistance to land owners to
convert the land back into forests, grasslands, or
wetlands and achieve longer term conservation.47
Working lands programs provide technical and
financial assistance to farmers to improve land
management practices.47 These programs prevent
land from being overused and depleted, which
can result in an overreliance on fertilizers and
pesticides to maintain production. The use of
fertilizers and pesticides directly affects the health
of farm workers during application and can lead
to contamination of community watersheds and
drinking water sources.91 Conservation programs
are important for the long-term sustainability of
agricultural lands and the health of their surrounding communities.
Creating a Farm Bill
for Public Health
The Farm Bill affects important agriculture,
health, economic, environment, and social policies both domestically and globally. Public health
professionals, cannot ignore or underestimate the
important role that Farm Bill policies can play
in combating growing chronic disease burdens;
increasing demand for and access to nutritious,
affordable foods; and reducing the environmental
health harms associated with the conventional
food system.
Policies and programs governed by the Farm
Bill have evolved and expanded over time, with a
variety of approaches now being used to support
rural economies, farmers, and consumers in all
types of communities and to ensure a safe, affordable, and plentiful food supply. These policies
and programs encompass a range of issues related
to the public’s health, including food assistance
and distribution, nutrition education, commodity programs, food safety inspections, trade and
foreign aid, conservation, organic agriculture,
horticulture, energy, and research. Collectively,
the Farm Bill programs impact the types of crops
grown, energy consumed, waste generated, labor
needed, and chemicals used to produce our
food, all factors that ultimately affect the public’s
health. More recently, the focus of the Farm Bill
has been to ensure consumers have access to nutritious, affordable foods, grown locally in a safe
and sustainable manner.
Challenges for 2012
This document examined four key ways in
which the Farm Bill can improve the public’s
health and how the programs represented in the
bill can be further improved. While many public
health gains were incorporated into the 2008
Farm Bill, many new and ongoing challenges
remain as the nation develops the 2012 Farm
Bill. Key among these is the tight budgetary
constraints in which the 2012 bill will be crafted
that limits the government’s ability to expand
funding for promising programs. Nonetheless,
the 2012 Farm Bill is an opportunity to support
a healthier, more sustainable food system for the
U.S. and improve the nation’s public health and
communities in the process:
„„ Providing Food and Nutrition Assis-
tance—The Farm Bill is foremost a nutrition
bill; nutrition assistance programs comprise
65% of the Bill’s funding. It authorizes and
funds a number of key food assistance and
nutrition support programs, including SNAP
(formerly the food stamp program), for the
APHA POLICIES RELATED TO FARM BILL ISSUES
A
PHA’s member-developed policy statement and positions on
the important health, environmental, and community justice issues
affected by U.S. agricultural policies are the foundation for the
association’s work on food policy and Farm Bill issues. Key policies include:
• Toward a Healthy, Sustainable Food System (2007)
• Reducing Nutrition-Related Disparities in America Through Food Stamp
Nutrition Education and the Reauthorization of the Farm Bill (2006)
• Addressing Obesity and Health Disparities Through Federal Nutrition and
Agriculture Policy (2007)
• Child Health Policy for the United States (2010)
These and other policies can be accessed through APHA’s website at
www.APHA.org.
17
A
dequate technical assistance for
small and mid-sized
farmers is essential to ensuring that product safety is not
compromised in production or
processing and that addition of
fat, sugar, and sodium to processed foods is minimal. Attention to food deserts through
support of the Healthy Food
Financing Initiative or other
strategies to encourage new
and improved grocery stores
in urban and rural areas is a
promising avenue for improving
the access to healthy food in
underserved communities.
18
most vulnerable Americans. These programs
are a vital component of the nation’s safety net
for vulnerable individuals, and with the U.S.
economic downturn, the need for food assistance programs is clear and continuing. SNAP
and other federal food programs represent the
most significant policy mechanisms to maintain and enhance public health. The scope of
the Nutrition title also represents an opportunity to drive agriculture policy. The Farm
Bill plays an important role in ensuring that
individuals, schools, and other institutions have
access to nutritious, affordable foods, as well as
enhancing local producers’ ability to produce,
promote, and market nutritious food. Federal food assistance programs such as SNAP,
TEFAP, and the Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program have reduced food insecurity
even during economic hardships and have
provided economic incentives to local communities and agriculture producers.
„„ Producing Healthy, Affordable Foods—
Federal farm policies reflected in the Farm Bill
directly and indirectly influence the availability and affordability of crops grown and food
produced in this country. Historic agricultural policy preferences for certain commodity crops have shifted the nation’s agriculture
output, affected the types of foods being
produced, and ultimately altered the American diet. Federal farm subsidies have evolved
over time to create a safety net for producers
that includes income support through direct
payments, price supports, crop insurance,
conservation and acreage limitations, government purchases and distribution of foods, and
support for market promotion, both domestically and internationally. These risk-reduction
programs play a crucial role, particularly for
small and mid-sized farms that supply local
communities and regional markets. Congress
may consider reducing or eliminating direct
payments to commodity farmers and replacing them with crop insurance programs in the
2012 Farm Bill. With a shift to crop insurance
as the primary tool for commodity farmers,
it will be especially important to ensure that
fruit and vegetable producers also have adequate coverage, since crop insurance is their
primary federally subsidized risk management
tool. The Farm Bill offers an opportunity to
further improve nutrition and reduce obesity
through increased production of healthy and
affordable foods for all communities.
„„ Increasing Access to Healthy Foods—
Agriculture and food policies developed over
the years through successive Farm Bills have
not only affected what we eat and how we
produce our food but also directly and indirectly influenced how we access our food
in urban, suburban, and rural communities
alike. The 2008 Farm Bill increased access to
healthy foods for children through government purchases of fruits, vegetables, and other
healthy foods for use in school meal and
snack programs and commodity distribution
programs. The 2008 Farm Bill also contained
several critical measures to begin remaking the
food system by supporting local and regional
farmers through farmers’ markets, and procurements for schools and other institutions
year round. These programs are in their early
stages and their value to local economies and
on the public’s health will become clear over
time. Adequate technical assistance for small
and mid-sized farmers is essential to ensuring that product safety is not compromised
in production or processing and that addition
of fat, sugar, and sodium to processed foods
is minimal. Attention to food deserts through
support of the Healthy Food Financing Initiative or other strategies to encourage new and
improved grocery stores in urban and rural
areas is a promising avenue for improving the
access to healthy food in underserved communities. Programs focusing on rural development and research help to address gaps in
community health food access and provide
needed economic opportunities.
„„ Fostering Sustainable Food Systems—
While there are growing efforts to make
healthier foods more readily available and to
reduce environmental impacts related to their
production, there remains a need to make a
more diverse variety of healthy foods available in all communities and to create a more
sustainable food system. The 2008 Farm Bill
contained important conservation programs
that help minimize negative environmental
health impacts from farming, and improve the
long-term sustainability of agricultural lands
and the health of their surrounding communities. Continued support of organic agriculture approaches that use fewer pesticides and
chemicals will advance public health.
The Farm Bill plays an important role in ensuring that individuals, schools, and other institutions have
access to nutritious, affordable foods, as well as enhancing local producers’ ability to produce, promote,
and market nutritious food. Federal food assistance programs such as SNAP, TEFAP, and the Senior
Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program have reduced food insecurity even during economic hardships and have
provided economic incentives to local communities and agriculture producers.
Notes and References
1. Pub L No. 110-234.
2. Cain Z, Lovejoy S. History and outlook for Farm
Bill conservation programs. Choices. 2004;19(4):37–
42.
3. Yowell E, Estrow FG. Farm Bill 1.01. Available at:
http://foodsystemsnyc.org/node/1854. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
4. Roth D. Food stamps, 1932–1977: from provisional
and pilot programs to permanent policy. Available at:
http://www.nal.usda.gov/ric/ricpubs/foodstamps.
htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
5. U.S. Department of Agriculture. A short history of
SNAP. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/
rules/Legislation/about.htm. Accessed April 20,
2012.
6. Food Stamp Act of 1964, Pub L No. 88-525, 78 Stat
703–709 (1964).
7. In Agriculture: A Glossary of Terms, Programs, and Laws
(http://cnie.org/NLE/CRSreports/05jun/97-905.
pdf), the Congressional Research Service noted that
“[b]eginning in 1973, farm bills have included titles
on commodity programs, trade, rural development,
farm credit, conservation, agricultural research, food
and nutrition programs, marketing, etc. These are
referred to as omnibus farm bills. The following is
a generally agreed chronological list of farm bills:
(1) Food and CRS-96 Agriculture Act of 1965, P.L.
89-321; (2) Agricultural Act of 1970, P.L. 91-524; (3)
Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973,
P.L. 93-86; (4) Food and Agriculture Act of 1977,
P.L. 95-113; (5) Agriculture and Food Act of 1981,
P.L. 97-98; (6) Food Security Act of 1985, P.L. 99198; (7) Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade
Act of 1990, P.L. 101-624; (8) Federal Agriculture
Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, P.L. 104-127;
(9) Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002,
P.L. 107-171.” The most recent version of the Farm
Bill adopted was the Food, Conservation, and Energy
Act of 2008 (Pub L No. 110-234).
8. Johnson R, Becker GS, Capehart T, et al. The 2008
Farm Bill: Major Provisions and Legislative Action. CRS
report for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional
Research Service; 2008.
9. Monke J, Johnson R. Actual Farm Bill spending and
cost estimates. Available at: http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R41195.pdf. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
10. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. Does SNAP decrease food insecurity?
Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/
err85/. Accessed April 20, 2012.
21. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. WIC food packages. Available at: http://
www.fns.usda.gov/wic/benefitsandservices/foodpkg.
htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
11. Monke J. Previewing the next Farm Bill: unfunded
and early-expiring provisions. Available at: http://
www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R41433.
pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
22. The Food Assistance Landscape: FY 2010 Annual Report. Economic information bulletin 6-8. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture; 2011.
12. Feeding America. Child food insecurity: the economic impact on our nation. Available at: http://
feedingamerica.org/SiteFiles/child-economy-study.
pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
13. Seligman HK, Bindman AB,Vittinghoff AM, et al.
Food insecurity is associated with diabetes mellitus:
results from the National Health Examination
and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)
1999-2002. Journal of General Internal Medicine.
2007;22(7):1018-23.
14. Feeding America. The potential consequences of
food insecurity regarding physical and mental health.
Available at: http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-inamerica/impact-of-hunger/physical-and-mentalhealth.aspx. Accessed April 20, 2012.
15. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Food security. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
16. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. Food security in the United States: key
statistics and graphics. Available at: http://www.ers.
usda.gov/Briefing/FoodSecurity/stats_graphs.htm.
Accessed April 20, 2012.
17. Hunger and Obesity? Making the Connection. Working
document. Washington, DC: Food Research and Action Center; 2010.
18. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. Household food security in the United
States in 2010. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.
gov/Publications/ERR125/ERR125.pdf. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
19. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. USDA announces efforts to increase
nutrition assistance to low-income families. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cga/pressreleases/2011/0154.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
20. Richardson J. Domestic Food Assistance:The Farm Bill
and Other Legislation in the 110th Congress. CRS
report for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional
Research Service; 2008.
23. Note that the $95 billion figure represents total
USDA funding on food and nutrition assistance
programs, not just on those programs contained in
the Farm Bill. See Note 22.
24. For the legislative history of SNAP/food stamps, see
http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/rules/Legislation/
about.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012
25. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
participation and costs. (data as of April 2, 2012).
Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/SNAPsummary.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
26. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Trends in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program participation rates: fiscal years 2002–2009.
Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/ora/menu/
Published/snap/FILES/Participation/Trends200209Sum.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
27. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Characteristics of Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program households: fiscal year 2009
summary. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/ora/
menu/published/snap/FILES/Participation/2009Ch
aracteristicsSummary.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
28. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program: eligible food items.
Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/retailers/
eligible.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
29. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
community partner outreach toolkit. Available
at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/outreach/toolkits/2011/basics.html. Accessed April 20, 2012.
30. Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity.
Restrictions on use of SNAP benefits. Available at:
http://www.yaleruddcenter.org/legislation/bill.
aspx?i=34&s=11. Accessed April 20, 2012.
31. Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity.
Purchase of certain foods prohibited under SNAP.
Available at: http://www.yaleruddcenter.org/
resources/upload/docs/what/policy/legislation/
19
TX_HB_1151_Relating_to_purchase_of_certain_
food_under_SNAP_Feb_8_2011.pdf. Accessed April
20, 2012.
32. Yale Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity.
Allowing states to create lists of eligible foods. Available at: http://www.yaleruddcenter.org/resources/
upload/docs/what/policy/legislation/VT_JRH_13_
Allow_states_to_create_list_of_eligible_foods_for_
SNAP_Olsen_Feb_2011.pdf. Accessed April 20,
2012.
33. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Implications of restricting the use of food
stamp benefits: summary. Available at: http://www.
fns.usda.gov/ora/menu/Published/snap/FILES/ProgramOperations/FSPFoodRestrictions.pdf. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
34. Hartocollis A. New York asks to bar use of food
stamps to buy sodas. New York Times. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/
nyregion/07stamps.html. Accessed April 20, 2012.
35. McGeehan P. U.S. rejects mayor’s plan to ban use of
food stamps to buy soda. New York Times Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/20/nyregion/
ban-on-using-food-stamps-to-buy-soda-rejected-byusda.html. Accessed April 20, 2012.
36. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. The Emergency Food Assistance Program
home page. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/
fdd/programs/tefap/. Accessed April 20, 2012.
37. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. About TEFAP. Available at: http://www.fns.
usda.gov/fdd/programs/tefap/about_tefap.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
44. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Benefits of increasing SNAP participation
in your state. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/
snap/outreach/pdfs/bc_facts.pdf. Accessed April 20,
2012.
45. Jackson RJ, Minjares R, Naumoff KS, Patel Shrimali B, Martin LK. Agriculture policy is health
policy. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition.
2009;4(3):393–408.
46. American Farmland Trust. History of the Farm Bill:
overview of subsidy payments. Available at: http://
www.farmland.org/programs/farm-bill/history/
usfarmsubsidies.asp. Accessed April 20, 2012.
47. The 2008 Farm Bill: A Summary of Major Provisions
and Legislative Action. CRS report for Congress.
Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service;
2008.
48. Federal regulations (7 CFR 1412.3) define the
commodity crops covered under federal subsidy programs administered by the U.S. Commodity Credit
Corporation: “Covered commodity means wheat, corn,
grain sorghum, barley, oats, upland cotton, long grain
rice, medium grain rice, soybeans, sunflower seed,
rapeseed, canola, safflower, flaxseed, mustard seed,
crambe, sesame seed, pulse crops, and other oilseeds
as determined by the Secretary.”
49. Food and Water Watch. Do farm subsidies cause
obesity? Available at: http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/reports/do-farm-subsidies-cause-obesity/.
Accessed April 20, 2012.
50. Canning P. A better understanding of our food costs.
Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/
ERR114/ERR114.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
38. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program home
page. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/
FFVP/default.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
51. Planting the Seeds for Public Health: How the Farm Bill
Can Help Farmers to Produce and Distribute Healthy
Foods. St. Paul, MN: Farmers’ Legal Action Group;
2010.
39. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. USDA expands access to fresh fruits and
vegetables for schools across the nation. Available
at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cga/PressReleases/2011/0133.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
52. Federal Crop Insurance Act, codified at 7 USC 1501
et seq.
40. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. “USDA selects Massachusetts to test
ground-breaking nutrition pilot program: SNAP
recipients to receive incentives for healthy eating.
Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cga/PressReleases/2010/0413.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
41. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. “People’s Garden School Pilot Program
award announced. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.
gov/outreach/grants/garden.htm. Accessed April 20,
2012.
42. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. USDA announces new initiatives to end
hunger in America: new grants and resources to
foster hunger-free communities. Available at: http://
www.fns.usda.gov/cga/pressreleases/2011/0078.htm.
Accessed April 20, 2012.
43. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Economic benefits of increased SNAP
participation. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/
outreach/SNAPandSFSPmap.htm
20
53. Iowa State University. Price analysis, risk assessment, and insurance for organic crops. Available
at: http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/dbs/
pdffiles/11pb6.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
54. National Organic Coalition. Testimony of Steven
Etka. Available at: http://www.nodpa.com/pr_NOCappropsFY09Senatetestimony.pdf. Accessed April
20, 2012.
55. Chite R. Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance in the
2008 Farm Bill. CRS report for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service; 2008.
56. Tillotson JE. America’s obesity: conflicting public
policies, industrial economic development, and
unintended human consequences. Annual Review of
Nutrition. 2004;24:617–643.
57. Schoonover H, Muller M, eds. Food Without Thought:
How U.S. Farm Policy Contributes to Obesity. Minneapolis, MN: Institute for Agriculture and Trade
Policy; 2006.
58. Walmart. Walmart launches major initiative to make
food healthier and healthier food more affordable.
Available at: http://walmartstores.com/pressroom/
news/10514.aspx. Accessed April 20, 2012.
59. Walmart. Walmart unveils global sustainable agriculture goals. Available at: http://walmartstores.com/
pressroom/news/10376.aspx. Accessed April 20,
2012.
60. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Farm to School Team: 2010 summary report.
Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/f2s/
pdf/2010_summary-report.pdf. Accessed April 20,
2012.
61. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. Access to affordable and nutritious food:
measuring and understanding food deserts and their
consequences. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/
Publications/AP/AP036/AP036fm.pdf. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
62. Treuhaft S, Karpyn A. The grocery gap: who has access to healthy food and why it matters. Available at:
http://www.policylink.org/atf/cf/%7B97C6D565BB43-406D-A6D5-ECA3BBF35AF0%7D/FINALGroceryGap.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
63. Trust for America’s Health. F as in fat: how obesity
threatens America’s future. Available at: http://
healthyamericans.org/reports/obesity2010/. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
64. Papas MA, Alberg AJ, Ewing R, et al. The built
environment and obesity. Epidemiologic Reviews.
2007;29(1):129–143.
65. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Geographic preference option for the
procurement of unprocessed agricultural products in
child nutrition programs, final rule (76 FR 22603,
April 22, 2011). Available at: http://www.fns.usda.
gov/cnd/Governance/regulations/2011-04-22.pdf.
Accessed April 20, 2012.
66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. What is the Farm to School Initiative? Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/F2S/about.
htm#Initiative. Accessed April 20, 2012.
67. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute
of Food and Agriculture. Community Food Projects
Competitive Grant Program. Available at: http://
www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/food/in_focus/hunger_if_
competitive.html. Accessed April 20, 2012.
68. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute
of Food and Agriculture. Community food projects
funded. Available at: http://www.nifa.usda.gov/nea/
food/sri/hunger_sri_awards.html. Accessed April 20,
2012.
69. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute
of Food and Agriculture. Healthy food, healthy
communities: a decade of community food projects
in action. Available at: http://www.nifa.usda.gov/
newsroom/news/2007news/cfp_report.pdf. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
70. Community Food Security Coalition. A guide to
community food projects. Available at: http://www.
foodsecurity.org/cfsc_case_studies.pdf. Accessed
April 20, 2012.
71. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of
Food and Agriculture. CSREES celebrates 10 years
of community food projects. Available at: http://
www.nifa.usda.gov/newsroom/news/2007news/
cfp_celebration.html. Accessed April 20, 2012.
72. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of
Food and Agriculture. Healthy Urban Food Enterprise Development Center program grants. Available
at: http://www.nifa.usda.gov/fo/healthyurbanfoodenterprisedevelopmentcenter.cfm. Accessed April
20, 2012.
73. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of
Food and Agriculture. USDA grant to create Healthy
Urban Food Enterprise Development Center in
Arkansas. Available at: http://www.csrees.usda.gov/
newsroom/news/2010news/01281_urban_food.
html. Accessed April 20, 2012.
74. Wallace Healthy Urban Food Enterprise Development Center home page. Available at: http://www.
hufed.org/. Accessed April 20, 2012.
75. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. Seniors Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program
home page. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/
wic/SeniorFMNP/SeniorFMNPoverview.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
76. Martinez S. The U.S. Food Marketing System: Recent
Developments, 1997–2006. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service; 2007.
77. Good Food for All. Fact sheet. Washington, DC: Food
and Water Watch; 2011.
78. Horizontal Consolidation and Buyer Power in the Beef
Industry. Fact sheet. Washington, DC: Food and Water
Watch; 2010.
79. Taking on Corporate Power in the Food Supply. Fact
sheet. Washington, DC: Food and Water Watch; 2011.
80. Consolidation and Buyer Power in the Grocery Industry.
Fact sheet. Washington, DC: Food and Water Watch;
2010.
81. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC
estimates of foodborne illness in the United States,
2011. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/foodborneburden/PDFs/FACTSHEET_A_FINDINGS_updated4-13.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2012.
82. Gereffi G, Lee J, Christian M. US-based food and agricultural value chains and their relevance to healthy
diets. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition.
2009;4(3–4):357–374.
83. Thorne PS. Environmental health impacts of
concentrated animal feeding operations: anticipating hazards—searching for solutions. Environmental
Health Perspectives. 2007;115(2):296–297.
84. Burkohlder J, Libra B, Weyer P, et al. Impacts of
waste from concentrated animal feeding operations
on water quality. Environmental Health Perspectives.
2007;115(2):308–312.
85. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Letter to
Representative Louise Slaughter. Available at: http://
www.louise.house.gov/images/stories/FDA_Response_to_Rep._Slaughter.pdf. Accessed April 20,
2012.
86. Gilchrist MJ, Greko C, Wallinga DB, Beran GW,
Riley DG, Thorne PS. The potential role of concentrated animal feeding operations in infectious disease
epidemics and antibiotic resistance. Environmental
Health Perspectives. 2007;115(2):313–316.
87. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Draft guidance: The judicious use of medically important
antimicrobial drugs in food-producing animals.
Available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2010/06/29/2010-15289/draft-guidance-thejudicious-use-of-medically-important-antimicrobialdrugs-in-food-producing. Accessed April 20, 2012.
88. Emerging and Other Communicable Diseases: Antimicrobial Resistance. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health
Organization; 1998.
89. ElBoghdady D. FDA to limit antibiotics to treat livestock to prevent ‘superbugs.’ Washington Post. January
4, 2012. Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.
com/business/economy/fda-to-limit-antibiotics-totreat-livestock-to-prevent-superbugs/2012/01/04/
gIQAe8hVbP_story.html. Accessed April 20, 2012.
90. A Farm Bill for Rural America. Fact sheet. Washington,
DC: Food and Water Watch; 2011.
91. Environmental Working Group. Troubled waters:
farm pollution threatens drinking water. Available
at: http://www.ewg.org/report/troubledwaters. Accessed April 20, 2012.
92. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. Local food systems: concepts, impacts, and
issues. Available at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/err97/. Accessed April 20, 2012.
93. PolicyLink. A healthy food financing initiative: an
innovative approach to improve health and spark
economic development. Available at: http://www.
policylink.org/atf/cf/%7B97c6d565-bb43-406da6d5-eca3bbf35af0%7D/JUNE14_HFFI_ADVOCACY.PDF. Accessed April 20, 2012.
94. PolicyLink. Improving access to healthy food.
Available at: http://www.policylink.org/site/c.
lkIXLbMNJrE/b.5136687/k.61DA/Healthy_Food_
Retailing.htm. Accessed April 20, 2012.
95. A Farm Bill for Consumers. Fact sheet. Washington,
DC: Food and Water Watch; 2011.
97. Food and Nutrition Service Nutrition Standards in the
National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs.
Code of Federal Regulations 7, Parts 210 and 220.
2012.Vol 7; 17. Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/
fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-01-26/pdf/2012-1010.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2012
98. School Meals: Building Blocks for Healthy Children,
Report Brief. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine;
2009.
99. U.S. Department of Agriculture. FY 2012 Budget
Summary and Annual Performance Plan. Pg. 58.
Available at: http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/
FY12budsum.pdf. Accessed June 6, 2012.
100. Public Health Law Center. The United States Farm
Bill: An Introduction for Fruit and Vegetable Advocates. Available at: http://publichealthlawcenter.org/
sites/default/files/resources/phlc-policy-farm-bill.
pdf. Accessed June 6, 2012.
101. Shenkin JD, Jacobson FM. Using the food stamp
program and other methods to promote healthy
diets for low-income consumers. American Journal of
Public Health. 2010;100(9):1562-4.
102. Barnhill A. Impact and ethics of excluding sweetened beverages from the SNAP program. American
Journal of Public Health. 2011; 101(11):2037-43.
103. Keeney D, Kemp L. A new agricultural policy for
the United States. 2003. Pp 29-47. In The Role of
Biodiversity Conservation in the Transition to Rural Sustainability. S. Light, ed. NATO Science Press
Series V: Science and Technology Policy Vol 41.
104. Fields S. Global Nitrogen: Cycling out of Control.
Environ Health Perspectives. 2004; 112:a556-63. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.112-a556.
Accessed June 6, 2012.
105. World food day, Annual review. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations. 1995. Available
at: www.foa.org/review/VIEW6e.htm. Accessed
June 6, 2012.
106. Osterberg D, Wallinga, D. Addressing externalities
from swine production to reduce public health and
environmental impacts. American Journal of Public
Health. 2004; 94(10):1703-8.
107. Improving Access to Healthy Food. Policy Link 2012
Senate Agriculture Farm Bill Summary. 2012.
Available at: http://www.policylink.org/site/
c.lkIXLbMNJrE/b.7086373/k.9A40/HFFI_
Legislation.htm. Accessed June 15, 2012.
96. Agriculture: A Glossary of Terms, Programs, and Laws.
CRS Report for Congress. Washington, DC:
Congressional Research Service; 2005. Available at:
http://cnie.org/NLE/CRSreports/05jun/97-905.
pdf. Accessed June 6, 2012
21
APHA would like to thank the following reviewers for their time and insights:
Caroline Fichtenberg, PhD; Don Hoppert; Rebecca Klein, MS, Ronnie Neff, PhD, MS; Geri Henchy, MPH, RD; Anne Haddix, PhD;
Nancy Chapman, MPH, RD; and Noel Chavez, PhD, RD, LDN
800 I Street, NW • Washington, DC 20001-3710 • 202-777-APHA • fax: 202-777-2534 • www.apha.org