The Opportunity Cost of Home Cookin'

In a USDA report entitled "Who Has Time to Cook? How Family Resources Influence Food Preparation" takes a look at the relationship between home food preparation and wage rate. The other factor that was explored was the precious resource of time. Lower income households are less able and less willing to substitute time for money. It was found that the opportunity cost of sacrificing time, which can be converted into money or wages, was too large for those earning lower incomes. As of 2005 women still performed 3 times as much of the meal preparation as men, therefore the study focuses mostly on women as the correlations don't coincide as strongly with men. It is noted that as women's work hours increase, their time spent preparing food decreases. Non-working women spent on average 71 minutes daily preparing food and women who worked full-time spent on average 38 to 46 minutes. Interestingly, the women who had lower incomes were near the 46 minute range. One can conclude that time resources are the largest determinant on whether meals are made at home; income is only a secondary determinant. Being a single parent and working full-time are the most detrimental factors on home cooking.

It is no doubt that income is a determining factor in food choice. In a recent national campaign to improve Americans' nutritional decisions, establishments with more than 20 locations will be required to post nutritional data. New York City was ahead of this trend and mandated in 2008 that nutritional data be posted at restaurants with more than 15 locations. In a joint study by Yale and New York University professors, the choices of fast food customers in poor areas of NYC were followed. The results showed that the attempt at calorie sticker shock had little to no impact on how many calories were ultimately consumed. Michael Jacobson, executive director for the Washington DC Center for Science in the Public Interest, says "Nutrition is not the top concern of low-income people, who are probably the least amenable to calorie labeling." Given the above USDA study, could it be that people just need access to more quick, healthy choices? Could it be that Americans who are both busy and have lower incomes are simply looking for quick, calorie dense foods? More bang for the buck, perhaps? I believe it comes down to education around the cost and value of food. Simple carbohydrates, high fructose corn syrup, and sugar will cause the blood sugar to spike and the subsequent energy crash will ensue. That value meal really isn't much of a value now is it?