Is there a link between school cafeterias and academic success? (Note)

Usefulness of the article: Is the distribution of subsidized (or free) meals or breakfasts in schools an effective policy? Drawing on several recent articles from academic economic literature, this article highlights the positive impact of these public policies on children’s academic performance. It also shows that these policies could have a long-term impact on the lives of the children concerned.

Abstract:

• Nutrition has long been recognized as a factor influencing academic success. This fact justifies public policies that offer subsidized meals or breakfasts to children from low-income families.
• Several mechanisms may explain these results: (a) high-quality food may directly influence students’ cognitive abilities or concentration, (b) some breakfast distribution programs may reduce student absenteeism, (c) they may also reduce the financial constraints on families, which are generally correlated with lower academic performance.
• The quality of food seems to have a direct impact.
• Economists are beginning to document the long-term impacts of these programs. They are associated with 2-3% higher incomes.

Between 1969 and 1977, nutritional drinks were distributed to young children (aged 0 to 36 months) in several villages in Guatemala. In some villages, the drinks contained micronutrients but were relatively low in calories and protein, while in others, they were rich in micronutrients, calories, and protein. Using this experiment, Maluccio et al. (2009) show that richer food enabled individuals to achieve better results in reading and cognitive tests 25 years later.

This example, corroborated by many others (for a review of the literature, see, for example, Sorhaindo and Feinstein, 2006), justifies the implementation of public policies offering subsidized meals to young people, most often distributed in schools (often breakfast or lunch). These would help to increase academic success.[1] However, do we have evidence of their effectiveness in Europe or the United States, and what are the mechanisms at work?

The article by Maluccio et al. (2009) helps us understand why these questions are not trivial. They show that receiving « the treatment » (the nutrient-rich drink) at an age older than 36 months had no statistically significant impact. Furthermore, while the empirical strategy implemented by the authors compares the results of children[2] who were given two drinks with different nutritional values, rather than children who were given one drink versus those who were not given any, this is because many other factors could have explained the difference in results. [3]

Effective policies through multiple channels

Do meal and breakfast subsidy policies improve academic performance? Recent empirical literature suggests that they do. Frisvold (2015) shows that a program providing free (or reduced-price) breakfasts to low-income American children improved their math and reading scores.

But once again, as the author points out, several mechanisms may explain the effects of this type of public policy. These policies may have a direct effect by preventing children from suffering from deficiencies that would limit their concentration or cognitive abilities. They may also have an indirect effect. For example, breakfast served before the start of classes may encourage children to arrive before the start of classes and therefore be on time. Murphy et al. (1998), after studying several schools in Baltimore and Philadelphia, emphasize that this mechanism should not be overlooked (a finding also shown by Kleinman et al., 2002). More generally, it can motivate children to come to school. A better-nourished child may also be less prone to illness. Finally, by providing breakfasts to children, these policies can, to a certain extent, alleviate the financial problems of the most disadvantaged families. Such problems can have a detrimental effect on children’s academic performance.[4]

Food quality

Despite these caveats about the explanatory mechanisms, several recent articles suggest that the quality of food served in schools has a direct impact on academic performance. In the case of breakfasts, Frisvold (2015) already indicates that the impact of the program is probably explained, at least in part, by access to better quality food.

Anderson, Gallagher, and Ritchie (2018) had access to data on the quality of meals served by school suppliers in California. Using a difference-in-differences methodology, they show that students attending schools supplied by providers with the highest quality meals[5] achieve better results. [6] They also suggest that serving higher-quality meals does not significantly reduce the number of meals served in these schools. The concern, sometimes reported in the media (particularly in the US), that imposing « balanced » meals would lead children to desert school cafeterias therefore seems unfounded.

Anderson, Gallagher, and Ritchie (2018) acknowledge that the impact of better food is relatively modest (although positive and statistically significant). They also emphasize that serving high-quality meals is not necessarily more expensive than serving meals of lower nutritional quality. A high-quality meal served at school is in anycase cheaper than a meal of equivalent quality prepared outside the school (since serving a large number of children allows for economies of scale). Improving the nutritional quality of meals is therefore an inexpensive and effective public policy. While it is difficult to apply these findings directly to other contexts—particularly in France, where the nutritional quality of school meals is more strictly regulated—it is worth bearing in mind that nutritional quality is a factor in success and that it is not necessarily more expensive than lower-quality meals.

Long-term consequences?

Beyond the impact of school meals on academic success, are there any long-term consequences of these programs? Bütikofer, Mølland, and Salvanes (2018) propose using a historical experiment to answer this question. In the 1920s and 1930s in Norway, several cities began organizing breakfast distributions in schools to combat malnutrition (the amounts of vitamins, minerals, and protein in these breakfasts were controlled). However, this program, known as « Oslo Breakfast, » was abandoned during World War II with the introduction of food rationing. The authors show that having benefited from these breakfasts is associated with a greater chance of finishing high school and pursuing longer studies, but above all, a 2-3% higher income during the period 1967-1980. This increase in salary can be explained by the fact that men who were « exposed » to Oslo Breakfast were more likely to hold skilled or semi-skilled jobs and, conversely, less likely to be unskilled workers. This difference in status could be passed on from one generation to the next, with the children of men affected by this program benefiting indirectly. Indeed, the authors show that an increase in income can also be observed among the children (at least the firstborn) of people who benefited from these breakfasts. However, mothers who benefited from Oslo Breakfast do not seem to pass on any advantage to the second generation. In fact, all of the positive effects of Oslo Breakfast seem to be concentrated among men.

These long-term consequences are not limited to breakfasts. Jesper, Lundborg, and Rooth (2017) demonstrate this by looking at the introduction of free, high-quality meals in Swedish canteens in the 1950s and 1960s. They found that children who benefited from this saw their income increase by 3% over their lifetime. This impact was much stronger (twice as strong) for people from modest backgrounds. Using information on academic performance, as well as information from military records, the authors show that people who benefited from this program were healthier and pursued longer courses of study. These results are particularly interesting because the authors were sometimes able to compare individuals from the same family and estimate similar effects. For example, someone who benefited from the program would earn 3-4% more than an older sibling who left school before the free meals program was introduced. By comparing the cost of the program and the financial gains it generated at the same point in time, the authors note that the program was highly profitable. It is estimated to have generated almost four times more than it cost.

Conclusion

The links between quality nutrition and academic success are well established, justifying the implementation of public policies to subsidize breakfasts or meals for children, especially those from low-income families. However, this article shows that the impact of these policies is not always easy to assess. Various mechanisms can explain the impact of these policies, and a distinction must be made between the direct effect of better nutrition and indirect effects, such as reduced absenteeism. Despite these difficulties, it appears that (a) the quality of food seems to have a direct impact on academic performance and (b) that this can lead to substantial differences in the long term.

These findings should be kept in mind when analyzing public policies. For example, those recently proposed by the executive branch that encourage municipalities to offer meals for less than €1 to children from poor families (a measure of the « poverty plan »)[7]. On the contrary, we may question the relevance of the choices made by certain cities that are increasing prices or eliminating free school meals for children from less affluent families.[8]

Reference:

David E. Frisvold, 2015, Nutrition and cognitive achievement: An evaluation of the School Breakfast Program, Journal of Public Economics, Volume 124, pp. 91-104.

Michael L. Anderson, Justin Gallagher, Elizabeth Ramirez Ritchie, 2018, School meal quality and academic performance, Journal of Public Economics, Volume 168, pp. 81-93.

Aline Bütikofer, Eirin Mølland, Kjell G. Salvanes, 2018, Childhood nutrition and labor market outcomes: Evidence from a school breakfast program, Journal of Public Economics, Volume 168, pp. 62-80.

Dahl, Gordon B., Lochner, Lance, 2012. The impact of family income on child achievement:

evidence from the earned income tax credit. Am. Econ. Rev. 102 (5), 1927–1956.

Dahl, Gordon B., Lochner, Lance, 2016, The Impact of Family Income on Child Achievement: Evidence from the Earned Income Tax Credit: Reply, NBER working paper.

Jesper Alex-Petersen, Petter Lundborg, Dan-Olof Rooth, 2017, Long-Term Effects of Childhood Nutrition: Evidence from a School Lunch Reform, IZA working paper.

J. Michael Murphy, Maria E. Pagano, Joan Nachmani, Peter Sperling, Shirley Kane, and Ronald E. Kleinman, 1998, The Relationship of School Breakfast to Psychosocial and Academic Functioning: Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Observations in an Inner-city School Sample, Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 152(9), pp. 899-907.

John A. Maluccio, John Hoddinott, Jere R. Behrman, Reynaldo Martorell, Agnes R. Quisumbing, and Aryeh D. Stein, 2009, The impact of improving nutrition during early childhood on education among Guatemalan adults, The Economic Journal, 119, pp. 734-763.

R.E. Kleinman, S. Hall H. Green, D. Korzec-Ramirez, K. Patton, M.E. Pagano, J.M. Murphy, 2002, Diet, Breakfast, and Academic Performance in Children, Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism, 46, p24–30.

Annik Sorhaindo, Leon Feinstein, 2006, What is the relationship between child nutrition and school outcomes? Wider Benefit of Learning Research Report No. 18.