This content analysis examines the arguments used to support or oppose the USDA’s proposed rule that all SNAP-authorized retailers carry more nutritious foods. A random sample of public comments posted to the U.S. Federal Register was analyzed. Three main themes were discussed throughout the comments: 1) arguments used in opposition to the rule; 2) arguments used in support of the rule; and 3) facilitators to assist the stores in implementing the rule. This study’s findings could help guide rule implementation by understanding the viewpoints of stakeholder’s that would be impacted by the policy change.
Arguments Used in Public Comments to Support or Oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Minimum Stocking Requirements: A Content Analysis
The purpose of this project is to examine rural store owners’ perceptions about the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) proposed rule that updates the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) vendor requirements and to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementation. The study will include a content analysis on the … More
The healthfulness of foods and beverages found in retail food stores differs widely across the United States, both by location of the store as well as by store type. Some communities have limited access to stores that carry healthful staple foods such as fruits and vegetables, whole grain-rich foods, and … More
CSPI developed a case study that provides insights into policy strategy and advocacy best practices that resulted in passage of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA). The case study outlines key lessons to help inform nutrition and public health policy initiatives, as well as continued implementation and defense of … More