Differences in expenditure and amounts of fresh foods, fruits and vegetables, and fish purchased in urban and rural Scotland. Issue 3 (5th October 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: de Roos, Baukje; Binacchi, Ferdinando; Whybrow, Stephen; Sneddon, Alan A
• Is Part Of: Public health nutrition. Volume 20:Issue 3(2017)
• Page Start: 524
• Page End: 533
• Publication Date: 2016-10-05
• Subjects: Purchasing behaviour, -- Rural–urban, -- Fresh foods, -- Shopping; Nutrition -- Periodicals; Nutrition policy -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; 613.2
• DOI: 10.1017/S1368980016002688
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1368-9800

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To quantitatively analyse expenditure on all fresh foods, fruits and vegetables (F&V) and fish across urban and rural households in Scotland. Fresh foods were chosen since, in general, they are perceived to contribute more to health than processed foods. Design: Descriptive analysis of purchase data of all foods brought into the home during 2012 from the Kantar Worldpanel database. Purchase data were restricted to fresh, unprocessed and raw foods or 'fresh to frozen' foods where freezing was part of harvesting. Total household purchases were adjusted for household size and composition. Setting: Scotland. Subjects: Households ( n 2576). Results: Rural households reported the highest expenditure per person on fresh foods and F&V, but also bought the most (kilograms) of these items. There were linear trends of average prices paid with urban–rural location ( P <0·001), with average prices paid by large urban and remote rural households being £2·14/kg and £2·04/kg for fresh foods, £1·64/kg and £1·60/kg for F&V and £10·07/kg and £10·20/kg for fish, respectively, although differences were quantitatively small. Conclusions: Contrary to previous studies, purchase data show that access to and average prices of fresh foods generally, and F&V and fish specifically, are broadly similar between urban and rural areas. Therefore, the higher expenditure on these foods in rural v . urban areas is probably due to factors other than pricing and availability.