A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.

The Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) is the basis of benefit allocations within the USDA's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which administers nearly $70 billion in benefits to over 42 million people annually. To produce the allocation of food within the TFP, the USDA uses a mathematical...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Angela M Babb, Daniel C Knudsen, Scott M Robeson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219895
id doaj-40699718b58946a3a79873c4a05d8cf2
record_format Article
spelling doaj-40699718b58946a3a79873c4a05d8cf22021-03-03T20:33:44ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01147e021989510.1371/journal.pone.0219895A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.Angela M BabbDaniel C KnudsenScott M RobesonThe Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) is the basis of benefit allocations within the USDA's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which administers nearly $70 billion in benefits to over 42 million people annually. To produce the allocation of food within the TFP, the USDA uses a mathematical optimization model that solves for the daily apportionment across various food groups. The model is constrained by nutritional and consumption requirements to produce an "optimal" allocation. Despite the importance of the TFP, the computational solution developed by the USDA has received insufficient attention, with only a handful of articles written on the TFP optimization model. Here, we run three alternative objective functions that are simpler than the one used by USDA. Our first alternative objective function minimizes the sum of squared errors between the consumed market basket of goods and an allocated market basket of goods, the second alternative objective function minimizes the sum of the absolute value of the difference between the consumed market basket of goods and an allocated market basket of goods, and the third alternative objective function minimizes the weighted absolute deviation of allocations and actual consumption expressed as a proportion of observed consumption. A clear theoretical advantage of either of our methods is that they eliminate the need to arbitrarily set allocated consumption to nonzero values, as is the case for the logarithmic objective function used by USDA. In an operational sense, we find that our model formulations produce an allocation that fits actual consumption better than the objective function employed by the USDA.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219895
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Angela M Babb
Daniel C Knudsen
Scott M Robeson
spellingShingle Angela M Babb
Daniel C Knudsen
Scott M Robeson
A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Angela M Babb
Daniel C Knudsen
Scott M Robeson
author_sort Angela M Babb
title A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.
title_short A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.
title_full A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.
title_fullStr A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.
title_full_unstemmed A critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the Thrifty Food Plan.
title_sort critique of the objective function utilized in calculating the thrifty food plan.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description The Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) is the basis of benefit allocations within the USDA's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which administers nearly $70 billion in benefits to over 42 million people annually. To produce the allocation of food within the TFP, the USDA uses a mathematical optimization model that solves for the daily apportionment across various food groups. The model is constrained by nutritional and consumption requirements to produce an "optimal" allocation. Despite the importance of the TFP, the computational solution developed by the USDA has received insufficient attention, with only a handful of articles written on the TFP optimization model. Here, we run three alternative objective functions that are simpler than the one used by USDA. Our first alternative objective function minimizes the sum of squared errors between the consumed market basket of goods and an allocated market basket of goods, the second alternative objective function minimizes the sum of the absolute value of the difference between the consumed market basket of goods and an allocated market basket of goods, and the third alternative objective function minimizes the weighted absolute deviation of allocations and actual consumption expressed as a proportion of observed consumption. A clear theoretical advantage of either of our methods is that they eliminate the need to arbitrarily set allocated consumption to nonzero values, as is the case for the logarithmic objective function used by USDA. In an operational sense, we find that our model formulations produce an allocation that fits actual consumption better than the objective function employed by the USDA.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219895
work_keys_str_mv AT angelambabb acritiqueoftheobjectivefunctionutilizedincalculatingthethriftyfoodplan
AT danielcknudsen acritiqueoftheobjectivefunctionutilizedincalculatingthethriftyfoodplan
AT scottmrobeson acritiqueoftheobjectivefunctionutilizedincalculatingthethriftyfoodplan
AT angelambabb critiqueoftheobjectivefunctionutilizedincalculatingthethriftyfoodplan
AT danielcknudsen critiqueoftheobjectivefunctionutilizedincalculatingthethriftyfoodplan
AT scottmrobeson critiqueoftheobjectivefunctionutilizedincalculatingthethriftyfoodplan
_version_ 1714821751262674944