Abstract: Food stamp redemption data (fiscal year 1978) are presented in an update of an earlier report; the importance of the socioeconomic characteristics of households in the redemption stores' immediate areas is explored. Sources of data and methods of comparison are described. Socioeconomic characteristics of the households in the trading areas include: proportion of white collar to blue collar workers, proportion of households without a car, consecutive years ofresidence, median household income, and ethnic composition. Relation of socioeconomic factors and ratios of food stamp redemptions to food sales are analyzed statistically. A comparison of food stamp redemptions and cash/check receiptsby kind and size of store is made. Finally, variations in regions (1978) and changes among and within regions (1976-1978) are described. (rkm).

Extract: This report summarizes four selected food stamp research studies mde by analysts in the Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. The studies focused on the Food Stamp Program's (FSP) effect on food prices, sales by region, size, and kind of participating store, and where and on which food items the stamps are used. The studies were chosen for review because of their potential interest to consumers and food retailers. A list of the studies follows this report.

The local food movement is one of the most active of current civil engagement social movements. This work presents primary evidence from over 900 documents, interviews, and participant observations, and provides the first descriptive history of local food movement national policy achievements in the US, from 1976 to 2013, and in the UK, from 1991 to 2013, together with reviews of both the American and British local food movements. It provides a US-UK comparative context, significantly updating earlier comparisons of American, British and European farm and rural policies. The comparative perspective shows that, over time, more effective strategies for national policy change required social-movement building strategies, such as collaborative policy coalitions, capacity-building for smaller organizations, and policy entrepreneurship for joining together separate rural, farming, food, and health interests. In contrast, narrowly-defined single issue campaigns often undermined long-term policy change, even if short-term wins emerged. By profiling interviews of American and English movement leaders, policymakers, and funders, the book demonstrates that democratic participation in food policy is best supported when funders incentivize groups to work together and overcome their differences.