arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2508.19553

How much does SNAP Matter? SNAP's Effects on Food Security

Abstract

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) aims to improve food security of low-income households in the U.S. A new, continuous food security measure called the Probability of Food Security (PFS), which proxies for the official food security measure but is implementable on longer periods, enables the study of SNAP's effects on the intensive margin. Using variations in state-level SNAP administrative policies as an instrument for individual SNAP participation, I find that SNAP does not have significant effects on estimated food security on average, both on the entire population and low-income population whom I defined as income is below 130\% of poverty line at least once during the study period. I find SNAP has stronger positive effects on those whose estimated food security status is in the middle of the distribution, but has no significant effects in the tails of the distribution.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Seungmin Lee. 2025-08-27. How much does SNAP Matter? SNAP's Effects on Food Security. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.19553

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN