Family Economics Review [1980, Number 2]

              IN THIS ISSUE:
uilding Use 0 ly]
SPRING 1980
NATIONWIDE FOOD CONSUMPTION SURVEY RESULTS
OUTLOOK MATERIALS:
CLOTHING & TEXTILES
FOOD
HOUSING
Depository
PROPERTY OF THE
LIBRARY
Ur.!veLity of North Caro.!~a
c:. Greensbo. o
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Science and Education Administration
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW is a quarterly
report on research relating to economic aspects
of family livihg. It is prepared primarily for
home economics agents and home economics
specialists of the Cooperative Extension
Service.
Editor: Katherine S. Tippett
Family Economics Research Group
Science and Education Administration
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Federal Building
Hyattsville, Md. 207 82
Science and Education Administration, Family Economics Review, Spring 1980
Published by Science and Education Administration-Agricultural .Research,
Northeastern Region, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, Md. 207 05
FAMiLY ECONOMICS REVIEW
NATIONWIDE FOOD CONSUMPTION SURVEY RESULTS
The 1977-78 Nationwide Food Consump­tion
Survey (NFCS) provides detailed informa­tion
on the food consumption of households
(at home) and the food intake of individuals
(at home and away from home). Some pre­liminary
results from this survey and a com­parison
of these results with a similar survey
taken in 1965-66 are presented in the following
three articles, which are slightly condensed
from papers presented at the November 1979
Agricultural Outlook Conference.1 In a fourth
article, Mark Hegsted, Administrator of
USDA's Human Nutrition Center, discusses the
implications of the survey results.
From April 1977 to March 1978, a stratified
probability sample of households was surveyed.
Information was obtained from approximately
15,000 households in the 48 conterminous
States and approximately 34,000 individuals
from these households. In addition, 5 supple­mental
surveys were conducted yielding infor­mation
for about 5,000 households in which at
least 1 member was over 65 years of age, 4,700
households with members participating or eligi­ble
to participate in the Food Stamp Program,
3,100 households in Puerto Rico, 1,100 urban
households in Alaska, and 1,250 households in
Hawaii. All the supplemental surveys will pro­vide
data on household food consumption and
individual food intake. 2
The individual and household data presented
here are based on information collected from
the spring quarter in 1977 (April-June).
Included are data from approximately 8,600
individuals and 3,500 households.
Individual Data
In 1977-78, food intake information on indi­viduals
was obtained for 3 consecutive days.
The food intake report consisted of an inter­viewer-
administered 24-hour dietary recall for
the previous day and the participant's record of
1 Copies of the complete papers are available from
the Consumer and Food Economics Institute, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Federal Building, Room
325A, Hyattsville, Md. 20782.
2 A detailed description of the purpose of the
surveys, the methodology, and appropriate uses of the
data appears in the fall 1978 issue of Family
Economics Review.
SPRING 1980
food consumption for the next 2 days .. The
record was picked up and reviewed on a return
visit by the interviewer. Foods and beverages
consumed at home and/or away from home
were reported. In 1965-66, food intake infor­mation
was collected for 1 day only. In the
1965-66 survey, one respondent recalled the
previous day's intake for all members of the
household, whereas the 1977-78 participants
answered for themselves whenever possible.
The data reported in the article by Eleanor
Pao are based only on the dietary recall for the
previous day. The data for 3 days are still being
processed.
Household Data
Information on food used in a surveyed
household was obtained through an interview
with the person identified as most responsible
for food planning and preparation. Trained
interviewers used an aided recall schedule to
obtain the kind (ground beef, skim milk, etc.) ,
the form (canned, frozen, etc.), the quantity,
and the cost, if purchased, of each food or
beverage used in the household during 7 days
prior to the interview. Households were con­tacted
at least 7 days prior to the interview and
asked to keep informal notes, such as shopping
lists, menus, and prices of food used, to assist
them in recalling the food used during the
7 -day period.
In addition to information on food used,
respondents reported the number of meals
eaten from home food supplies during the
week by household members and others. They
also provided information needed to classify
households by income, size, and other family
characteristics.
The methodology used to obtain household
food consumption data in the 1977-78 NFCS
was the same as that used in the 1965-66
survey with a few exceptions. In 1965-66,
households were interviewed at the time of the
first contact. In 1977-78, the type of informa­tion
needed was described to each household in
a contact made at least 7 days prior to the
interview. The impact of this change will be
measured using data from a bridging sample of
1,300 households interviewed without prior
contact during the spring of 1977. Preliminary
3
analysis of data from the bridging sample and
data obtained during the spring quarter by the
new procedure indicate that the latter pro­cedure
did not affect data concerning the
aggregate nutrient levels of food used by
households.
Results are based on housekeeping house­holds,
which are defined as those in which at
least 1 person had 10 or more meals from the
household food supply during the 7 days pre­ceding
the interview. 3
3 The 1977-7 8 survey also included data on
nonhousekeeping households that have not been
analyzed yet.
In comparing the information obtained on
household food use in the spring of 1965 and
1977, changes in the age distribution of the
population during the last decade should be
noted. U.S. Bureau of the Census statistics indi­cate
that the percentage of the population
under 18 years of age declined about 6 points,
whereas the percentage of those between 18
and 44 years of age increased over 4 points.
The percentage of those over 64 years of age
increased about 1 point. The number of house­holds
with one or two members increased,
whereas the number of households with five or
more members declined. Further analysis will
be necessary to assess the impact of these
changes.
HOUSEHOLD FOOD CONSUMPTION, 1977 AND 1965
By Mary Y. Ham a 1
IN SUMMARY
Several trends and patterns emerge from the
data.
1. The proportion of total money for food
that was spent on food away from home
increased from 17 percent in 1965 to 24 per­cent
in 1977. As in 1965, households in 1977
with relatively high incomes used more of their
money for food away from home than did
households with low incomes.
2. Average money value of food used at
home per person in 1977 was 20 percent higher
for the highest income group than for the low­est
income group. Compared with 1965, in
1977 substantially less of the food dollar
accounted for certain food groups-eggs, dry
legumes, nuts; fats and oil; sugar, sirup, jelly,
candy-and substantially more for soft drinks,
punches, and prepared desserts.
1 Economist, Consumer and Food Economics
Institute, Human Nutrition Center, Science and
Education Administration.
4
3. Average quantities of foods used per
person also changed since 1965. In addition to
those food groups that changed in food dollar,
alcoholic beverages underwent a marked
increase in quantity consumed. This may
reflect the greater use of beer and wine, for
which a larger volume intake has been typical,
and people's increased candidness in revealing
their alcoholic consumption.
IN DETAIL
Expenses of Food Away From Home
Of the money value of all food, the propor­tion
due to food consumed away from the
home, including meals and snacks, increased
from 17 to 24 percent between 1965 and
1977. Since 1965, the socioeconomic and
demographic composition of the U.S. popula­tion
as well as lifestyles has changed. Factors
such as more working females, higher house­hold
income, and easier access to inexpensive
fast-food restaurants appear to have contri­buted
to the increased percentage of the food
dollar spent on food away from home.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
The share for food away from home in 1977
is slightly lower than the share reported from
the 197 2-7 3 Consumer Expenditure Survey
conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statis­tics
and from certain other estimates of
expenditures for food away from home. The
lower share may be explained by the difference
in the Nationwide Food Consumption Survey
(NFCS) procedures, which excluded nonhouse­keeping
households, excluded value of
expense-account meals that were reimbursed,
excluded cost or partial cost of federally sub­sidized
meals, such as school lunches and
breakfasts, and excluded the nonhousehold
population.
Income was associated more strongly with
expenditures for food away from home than
with money value of home foods (table 1). In
1977, although there was only a difference of
$1.37 in the money value used at home per
household member between the lowest income
group (under $5,000) and the highest income
group ($20,000 or more), the expenditures for
food bought away from home per member
varied from $2.52 to $6.83---a difference of
$4.31. For the lowest income level, away­from-
home expenditures accounted for only 14
percent of the total money value of food com­pared
with 29 percent in the highest income
interval.
Table 1. Money value per household member of food used in a week
by housekeeping households, 1 spring 1977
Money value per household member 3
Income (1976) People living
before taxes in household2 Total At home4 Bought away
from home
Nwnber DoZZars
All households ....... 3.06 19.91 15.17 4.74
Under $5,000 ....... 2.02 17.51 14.99 2.52
$5,000-$9,999 ...... 2. 72 17.26 14.20 3.06
$10,000-$14,999 3.21 18.50 14.15 4.35
$15,000-$19,999 3.53 19.99 14.99 4.99
$20,000 or more 3.67 23.19 16.36 6.83
lHousehold with at least 1 person having 10 or more meals from the house­hold
food supply during 7 days preceding interview.
2Excludes roomers, boarders, and employees. Average value per household
member calculated using population ratio procedure--aggregate value for all
households divided by aggregate number of members in all households.
3Parts may not total to the whole because of rounding.
4rncludes value of food that was bought, home produced, or received as
gift or pay and used by household members and guests. Value of food
received without direct expense by a household is based on average price per
pound paid for that food by survey households in the same region.
Source: USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1977-78, 48 conterminous
States, spring 1977 (preliminary).
SPRING 1980 5
Money Value of Food at Home2
The average money value of food per
person3 was 20 percent higher for the highest
than the lowest income group (table 2). Of
2 Estimates on the money value of food at home
include value of food used at home by household
members, roomers, boarders, employees, and guests
that was bought, home produced, or received as gift or
pay. Value of food received without direct expense by
a household is based on the average price· per pound
paid for that food by survey households in the same
region .
3 A person considered to eat 21 meals at home
during the past 7 days (based on 3 meals a day for 1
person) was used to adjust for variation among
households in proportion of meals eaten from home
food supplies. Average money value per person was
calculat ed using population ratio procedure-aggregate
value for all households divided by aggregate number
of persons in all households.
particular interest is that the money value of
food per person for the lowest income group,
which averaged $15.42, was comparable with
that for the three middle-income groups. The
possible reason might be that the Food Stamp
Program provided the boost in expanding the
demand for food among the low-income
households.
In contrast, however, when respondents
were asked whether they had enough and the
kinds of food they wanted to eat, 9 percent of
the lowest income group responded that
sometimes or often they did not have enough
to eat. Translated in terms of the U .8.
population, 9 percent of the lowest income
group, or 3 percent of the total population,
represents several million people. At each
successive income level, more households
reported that they had enough and the kinds of
food they wanted.
Table 2 . Money value of food used at home per person per week, 1 spri ng 1977
Income (1976) before taxes
All Under
$5 , 000 $10 ,000 $15 , 000
Food group 2 to t o t o $20 , 000
income 3 $5 , 000 $9 , 999 $14 ,999 $19 , 999 and more
All food 4 •••••••••• • • • ••••••• • • $16 . 44 $15 . 42 $15 .1 7 $15 . 39 $16.04 $18 . 46
Milk, cream, cheese • • ••• 0 •••• 2 . 02 1.77 1. 81 1. 96 l. 93 2 . 37
Meat , poultry, fish • •••• 0 0 • •• 5 . 64 5 . 50 5 . 11 5.22 5 . 82 6 . 32
Eggs, dry legumes , nuts 5
0 . 0 •• . 71 . 75 . 72 . 77 . 64 . 71
Vegetables • 0 ••••••• 0 • • • • 0. 0 •• l. 96 l. 93 l. 98 l. 78 l. 83 2.10
Fruit 0. 0 . 0 • • 0 0. 0 0 0 0 •••••••••• l. 26 1. 16 1.18 1. 15 1. 15 l. 45
Grain products ••••• 0 • ••••• 0 •• l. 96 1. 85 1. 82 l. 89 l. 86 2. 20
Fats, oils • •••••••••••• 0 • • •• 0 . 48 . 46 .48 . 44 .46 . 51
Sugar, sirup , jelly, candy ... .43 . 38 . 39 . 44 . 40 . 48
Soft drinks , punches,
prepared desserts 0 0 • • • •••••• . 63 . 59 . 63 . 63 . 67 . 67
Alcoholic beverages 0 0. 0 0 •• 0 •• . 61 .39 .35 . 47 . 82 .87
Other foods •••• • ••• 0 •••••••• 0 .74 .64 .70 . 64 . 48 . 78
Household size in number of
21-meal persons • •••• 0 •••• 0. 0 •• (2 . 82) (1. 96) (2.55) (2 . 95) (3 . 30) (3.25)
11 person considered to eat 21 meals from home supplies during 7 days.
2Mixtures and soups included with main ingredients except those mainly meat , which are
included with eggs , dry legumes, and nuts .
3rncludes households with income not reported.
4Includes value of food that was bought , home produced, or received as gi ft or pay and used
by household members and guests . Value of food received without direct expense by a household
is based on average price per pound paid for that food by survey households in the same region.
Slncludes plate dinners with main items mostly meat, poultry, and fish .
Source : USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1977-78, 48 cont erminous States , spring 1977
(preliminary).
6 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
Money value of food used at home in 1977
did not appear to have kept pace with the
money value in 1965, after adjustments were
made for the rise in the Consumer Price Index
(CPI) for food at home. The average money
value of food at home per person (21 meals at
home) was $8.7 8 per week in spring 1965 and
$16.44 per week in spring 1977, an increase of
about 87 percent. On the other hand, CPI of
food at home rose 100 percent. The money
value for some food items, of course, increased
substantially more and others less than 100
percent. The difference in the money value of
food used between the two periods appears to
reflect the rise in food prices, the change in the
types of foods used, and the change in the .
quantities of foods consumed by households.
Division of Home Food Dollar
Tab.le 3 shows the distribution of the home
food dollar spent (purchased food plus money
value of nonpurchased foods used) in 1965 and
1977. Compared with those in 1965,
households in spring 1977 allocated more
money to meat, poultry, and fish; fruit; and
soft drinks, punches, and prepared desserts.
Further breakdown of the meat, poultry, and
fish group showed the greatest changes
occurring in the proportion of food dollar for
poultry, from 3.7 to 4.2 percent, and then for
fish, from 3.1 to 3.6 percent. Soft drinks,
punches, and prepared desserts accounted for
the greatest increase in the portion of the food
dollar.
The decrease in share of the dollar for the
eggs, dry legumes, and nuts group in 1977 was
accounted for by a notable decline in the share
for eggs, from 2.9 to 2.0 percent. Households
used less of their home food money for the fats
and oils group, possibly reflecting an increased
concern about fat in diets. The decrease was
due to butter, which dropped from 1.0 percent
of the dollar in 1965 to 0.4 percent in 1977.
The proportion for margarine remained about
the same. The share of the food dollar for
sugar, sirup, jelly, and candy also declined.
Detailed examination of the division of the
food dollar indicates that it was different
among the income groups. The most income
elastic, or income responsive, food group was
alcoholic beverages; the next was the milk,
cream, and cheese group. The share of the food
SPRING 1980
dollar for these groups of food increased with
increasing income. On the other hand, the
lower income households used a much higher
proportion of their food money for eggs and
dry legumes than did higher income
households. Some food groups, such as grain
products and fats and oils, remained virtually
inelastic throughout the income distribution
spectrum.
Quantity of Food Used at Home
Much of the change in the dollar shares may
be attributable to the differences in the average
quantities of food used from 1965 to 1977.
Consumption increased for four groups of
food-meat, poultry, and fish; fruit ; soft
drinks; and alcoholic beverages-and decreased
for milk, cream, and cheese; grain products;
vegetables; eggs, legumes, and nuts; fats and
oils; and sugar, sirup, jelly, and candy.
Comparisons between the 1955 and 1965
surveys reveal a similar pattern; that is, the
changes in direction that occurred for the
average quantity per person from 1955 to 1965
continued to 1977.
Usage of food groups did not always change
by the same percentage or even the same
direction as did the division of the food dollar
(tables 3 and 4). Although in most instances, a
substantial increase in the quantity of food
usually resulted in a corresponding increase in
the proportion of the food dollar allocated to
that food group, deviation in magnitude was
found among some of the food groups---grain
products; sugar, sirup, jelly, candy; and
alcoholic beverages. Consumption of the group
comprising sugar, sirup, jelly, and candy
declined perceptibly; but the dollar share of
this group fell much less, probably owing to a
sharp rise in the price of candy. Similarly,
although the quantity per person for grain
products decreased, an increased use of
commercially prepared products with higher
prices might have lessened the impact on the
dollar share.
Care should be used in interpreting these
results because of a substantial change in food
marketed since 1965. Quantities may have
been lower in 1977 because of increases in
dried food items and dried substitutes. The
greater use of processed and commercially
prepared foods may mean that the weight of
7
refuse is no longer included, or that the weight
of water is included in some groups. Also, in
1977 more enriched and fortified foods were
used, and they may have weighed the same as
those used in 1965 but may have differed
appreciably in terms of nutrients.
Table 3. Division of food dollar used by households,
spring 1965 and 1977
Food group 1
Milk, cream, cheese ..•••.
Meat, poultry, fish .•.••.
Eggs, dry legumes,
nuts 2 •••••••••••••••••••
Vegetables .••.••••.•••••.
Fruit •..••.••..••..•.....
Grain products •••..•••••.
Fats, oils •••....•.•.•..•
Sugar, sirup, jelly,
candy •••.•••..••..•••...
Soft drinks, punches,
prepared desserts •••••..
Alcoholic beverages .••...
Other foods ......••.••...
Total •••.••••.•.•••....
1965
- Cents -
1-2.6
32.7
5.2
12.2
7.4
12.3
3.5
3.1
3.1
3.7
4.1
100.0
1977
12.3
34.3
4.3
11.9
7.7
11.9
2.9
2.6
3.8
3.7
4.6
100.0
Change from
1965
Percent
-2
+5
-17
-2
+4
-3
-17
-16
+23
0
+12
1Mixtures and soups included with group of main ingredients, except those
mainly meat, which are included with eggs, dry legumes, and nuts.
2Includes plate dinners with main ingredient mostly meat, poultry, and fish.
Source: USDA Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1977-78, 48 conterminous
States, spring 1977 (preliminary).
8 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
Table 4. Quantities of foods used by housekeeping households, spring 1965 and 1977
Food group
Milk, cream, cheese (milk equivalent)3 ....
Meat, poultry, fish, and other
protein food 4 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Meat, fish, poultry .................... .
Eggs (fresh equivalent) ................ .
Dry beans (dry weight) ................. .
Nuts (shelled weight) .................. .
Vegetables 3 .........•.....................
Potatoes (fresh equivalent) ............ .
Dark-green ............................. .
Deep-yellow ............................ .
Tomatoes ............................... .
Fruit 3 ................................... .
Citrus (single-strength juice
equivalent) ........................... .
Other ascorbic acid rich fruits .... ...•.
Grain products (flour equivalent) 3 ....... .
Enriched or whole grain (flour
equivalent) 3 .......................... .
Fats and oils ............................ .
Sugar, sirup, jelly, candy ............... .
Soft drinks, punches, prepared desserts,
ascorbic acid added (sugar equivalent) ...
Soft drinks, punches, prepared desserts,
no ascorbic acid added (sugar equivalent)
Alcoholic beverages ...................... .
*Less than 0.5 percent.
Average amount
per person
per week 1
1965 1977
- - - - Pounds - - - -
8.76
5. 69
4.58
.82
.17
.12
5.35
1. 90
.22
.26
.76
3.73
1. 22
.25
2.65
2.08
.83
1. 12
. 05
.20
. 68
8.34
5.70
4.78
.66
.12
.13
5.09
1. 59
.30
.24
.71
3.94
1.71
. 31
2.16
2.05
.70
.83
.12
.22
.94
Change
from 1965 2
Percent
-5
*
4
-19
-25
8
-5
-17
36
-8
-6
6
41
25
-19
-1
-15
-27
144
11
38
1Average is calculated using a population ratio procedure; 21 meals from household
food supplies equivalent to 1 person.
2Calculated prior to rounding.
3Includes mixtures and soups with main ingredient from group.
4Excludes mixtures, soups, and plate meals that consist mostly of meat, fish,
poultry, eggs, legumes, or nuts.
SPRING 1980 9
NUTRIENT LEVELS AND FOOD USED BY HOUSEHOLDS,
1977 AND 1965
By Frances J. Cronin 1
IN SUMMARY
Differences in the quantity of food used by
housekeeping households in the spring of 1977
and in the spring of 1965 were reflected in
differences in energy and nutrient levels in
food used. There was a 10-percent decline in
the level of food energy, probably because of a
decreased use of milk and dairy products,
bread and cereals, fats and oils, and most foods
high in sugar. The decline in food energy was
not coupled with a decline in the level of
vitami~s or iron. Only the level of calcium in
food used decreased. Therefore, the food used
in the spring of 1977 had a higher nutrient
density than that used in 1965.
Overall, the nutrient levels and quantities of
food used were more uniform at the various
income levels in 1977 than in 1965. The
average nutrient levels for households in the
lowest income group improved more than
those in other income levels.
IN DETAIL
Calculations
The average quantities of food and nutrients
from household food supplies are presented in
terms of an "equivalent person." An equivalent
person is equal to 21 meals eaten at home in a
week (based on 3 meals a day). The equivalent
person is used in an attempt to adjust for meals
eaten away from home by household members
and for meals and snacks eaten in the home by
guests and employees. This measure would not
account for the age or sex of people eating in
the household; and, therefore, the nutrient
values presented in this report are not
comparable with the Recommended Dietary
Allowances, which differ depending on age and
sex. The average values were calculated using a
population ratio procedure. Aggregate values
for all households were divided by aggregate
numbers of 21-meal-equivalent persons in all
households.
1 Home economist, Consumer and Food Economics
Institute, Human Nutrition Center, Science and
Education Administration.
10
The nutritive value of the food used is
calculated for the edible portion of food as
brought into the household. Only the vitamin
values are adjusted for cooking loss. Thus the
nutritive value of household food includes
values not only of food eaten by people in the
household but also of some food that is not
eaten. This would include edible food
discarded in the kitchen and at the table and
leftovers fed to animals. Some households
customarily do not eat all edible parts of
certain foods, such as fat that can be trimmed
from meat. Therefore, although this report
shows the nutritive value of food available
from household food, it slightly overestimates
the food energy and nutrient levels of foods
eaten in many households.
Spring 1977 and Spring 1965
Comparison of preliminary data on
household food consumption for the spring of
1977 with data obtained for the spring of 1965
indicates that the food energy (calories)
available declined about 10 percent, reflecting
decreases in dietary fat, carbohydrate, and
protein (table 1). At the same time, the levels
of all vitamins and minerals except calcium
were similar to or higher than those found in
1965. Nutrients that increased most since 1965
were ascorbic acid and thiamin. The decline in
the level of calcium may be related to the
smaller proportion of children and teenagers in
the population. Milk products are the major
source of calcium in the United States, and
children and teenagers are their largest
consumers.
The concurrent decrease in food energy and
the increase in the amount of vitamins and iron
indicate that food used by households in 1977
had a higher nutrient density than food used in
1965. The upward shift in the level of vitamins
was the reverse of the trend seen between 1955
and 1965.
The changes in the average nutrient levels
reflect differences in food use in 1965 and
1977 (see table 4 in "Household Food Con­sumption,"
by Mary Y. Hama). For example,
the 5-percent decline il1 the consumption of
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
milk and dairy products on a milk-equivalent2
basis was reflected in the decline in the calcium
level. The total amount of meat, poultry, fish,
and other high-protein food, such as beans,
eggs, and nuts, was essentially unchanged.
However, there were changes within this group.
Beef, poultry, fish, and nut consumption
increased, whereas the amounts used of pork
(including bacon and salt pork), luncheon
meat, eggs, and dry beans declined.
The decline in the average quantity of all
vegetables used by households appears to have
been due primarily to a decline in the use of
potatoes at home. The use of dark-green vege­tables
increased. These vegetables are good
sources of vitamin A and, if not overcooked, of
ascorbic acid, as well as nutrients not detailed
in this report, such as vitamin B6 , folacin, and
magnesium.
The use of fruit, particularly citrus fruit,
increased. This, coupled with the increased use
of dark-green vegetables and ascorbic acid-forti­fied
fruit drinks, punches, and ades, probably
accounted for the large increase in the level of
ascorbic acid in food used.
2 Milk equivalent: Quantity of whole fluid milk to
which dairy products (except butter) are equivalent in
calcium.
The use of bread and cereals declined on a
flour-equivalent3 basis between 1965 and
1977. This decline did not cause a decrease in
the levels of thiamin, preformed niacin, and
riboflavin in the food used for two reasons.
First, in 1975 the Federal standard for enrich­ment
of flour and bread with these nutrients
was increased. Second, the proportion of
unenriched refined bread and cereal products ·
declined markedly from 21 percent of all
breads and cereals used in 1965 to 5 percent in
1977.
The decline in energy content of food used
at home was a major change between 1965 and
1977. Of the energy-providing nutrients, carbo­hydrate
declined the most. Contributing to the
decline was the decreased use of bread and
cereals, milk products, and sugar, sirup, jelly,
and candy. However, not all high-sugar prod­ucts
declined. Consumption of soft drinks,
punch, and sugar desserts increased, particu­larly
those fortified with ascorbic acid.
The decline in fat reflects decreases in the·
household use of fats, oils, and milk products.
3 Flour equivalent: Weight of flour, cereals, meals,
pastes, plus dry weight of flour, cereals, meals, and
pastes in prepared and bakery products.
Table 1. Comparison of nutrient level in food used in housekeeping
households in the United States, spring 1965-77
Nutrient
Average per ~erson
per day
Percent change
from 19652
Food energy (cal) ...•.•....
Protein (g) ............... .
Fat (g) .•.• · . · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
Carbohydrate (g) ......•...•
Calcium (mg) ...••......•.•.
Iron (mg) ....•...........•.
Vitamin A (IU) ....•...•..•.
Thiamin (mg) ...••..........
Riboflavin (mg) •......••...
Preformed niacin (mg) ..... .
Ascorbic acid (mg) ........ .
1965
3,210
106
154
353
1,110
20
3 7,020
1.6
2.4
25
100
1977
2,900
102
140
307
1,070
20
7,520
1.9
2.6
27
135
-10
-4
-9
-13
-4
2
7
18
7
8
35
!Average is calculated using a population ratio procedure; 21 meals from
household food supplies in a week is equivalent to 1 person.
2calculated prior to rounding.
3Adjustment made to reflect revised vitamin A value for eggs.
SPRING 1980 11
Also the use of fatty pork products (such as
bacon) and luncheon meats decreased.
Comparison by lncome4
In general, households at different income
levels in 1977 used foods that were 'more simi­lar
in nutrient content and used quantities of
the various food groups that were more similar
than in 1965 (tables 2 and 3). The lower levels
of nutrients noted on previous surveys for
households in the low-income group are not
apparent in the 1977 data. Although the use of
foods from the milk group and the bread and
cereal group by the low-income group declined,
the consumption of foods from the meat, poul-
4 Income information obtained in 1977 is not
directly comparable with that obtained in 1965.
However, for the purpose of comparing the quantities
and nutrients in food used in households at different
economic levels, the total number of households
reporting income in each of the 2 years was divided
into five groups according to both income and
percentages of households. For example, the group
try, fish, and bean group and the fruit and
vegetable groups increased.
The level of energy in food used by house­holds
declined 8 to 12 percent for households
in all income groups between 1977 and 1965.
The low-income group showed less of a decline
than the middle-income groups, primarily
because of a smaller decline in fat use. The
level of protein in food used by the low-income
group was essentially the same in 1977 as in
1965.
With the exception of calcium, the levels of
vitamins and minerals in the low-income group
increased between 1965 and 1977. The food
used in these households contained appreciably
more ascorbic acid, vitamin A, thiamin, pre-with
the lowest income contained all households
reporting income of Jess than $3,000 after taxes in
1964 (22.2 percent of the 1965 sample) and of Jess
than $6,000 before taxes in 1976 (21.6 percent of the
1977 sample). No adjustment was made for family size.
Placement in the lowest income group does not mean
that a household had an income that placed it below.
the poverty line.
Table 2. Compa r ison of the nutrient value of food used i n housekeeping
Income gr oup I Income gro up II
Percent Percent
1965 1977 change 1965 1977 change
Less than Less than from $3 ,000- $6 , 000- from
$3,000 $6,000 1965 2 $4,999 $10 ,000 1965 2
Nutrient
-
Average per person per day 3
1 Food energy (cal) ..... . .. .... . .. . 3 , 100 2 , 830 - 9 3,180 2, 840 -11
2 Protein (g) .. .... . . ............ . . 98 99 1 102 99 - 3
3 Fat (g) ............ . · · · · · · · · · · · · · 143 136 -5 150 136 -10
4 Carbohydrate (g) ................ . 363 305 -16 359 307 - 14
5 Calcium (mg) .. ... . ........... .. . . 1,080 1,010 -7 1,070 1, 020 -5
19 20 4 20 20 1
4 6,470 8 , 130 26 4 6' 700 7,950 19
6 Iron (mg) ... ......... ....... ... . .
7 Vitamin A (IU) .... . . ... . ........ .
8 Thiamin (mg) ............ .. .... . . . 1.6 1.9 23 1.6 1. 9 18
9 Riboflavin (mg) ..... ............ . 2.2 2 .5 12 2 . 3 2.5 9
10 Preformed niacin (mg) .. . ... . . . . . . 23 27 15 24 26 8
11 Ascorbic acid (mg) ...... .... . ... . 85 135 62 90 135 49
12 Percent of households ......... . 22.2 21.6 19.8 21. 1
*Less than 0.5 percent.
1Includes only households reporting income . Income groups for 1965 based on 1964 income after
taxes, and income groups for 1977 based on 1976 income before taxes.
2All calculations are completed prior to rounding.
3The statistical average is computed using a population ratio procedure; 21 meals from household
food supplies in a week are equivalent to 1 person.
4Adjustment made to reflect revised vitamin A value for eggs.
12 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
formed niacin, and riboflavin than in 1965.
The decreased use of milk and dairy products
was probably most responsible for the decline
in the level of calcium in the low-income
group. This group also had the largest
. proportion of one-person adult households,
which tend to use less milk and dairy products.
The proportion was higher. in 1977 than in
1965.
The decreased use of bread and cereal prod­ucts
by low-income households did not affect
nutrient levels adversely because flour and
bread products were more highly enriched in
1977 than in 1965, and because most of the
decline was in the use of refined unenriched
products. Households in the low-income group
have always used more bread and cereal prod­ucts
than have households in other income
groups. In 1977, however, differences between
the low-income and higher income groups in
use of these products were smaller than those
in 1965.
The increased consumption of the meat,
fish, poultry, and beans group of low-income
househol ds i n t he United St ates , by income, 1 spring
households reflects an increased use of all types
of meat, fish, and poultry, except bacon and
salt pork. The low-income group also decreased
their use of eggs and beans. Households in this
group consumed more pork, poultry, fish, and
luncheon meat and less beef than did house­holds
in most higher income groups.
The use of vegetables by households in the
lowest income group increased between 1965
and 1977. Quantities in 1977 were similar to or
higher than those used by the other income
groups. Although the home consumption of
potatoes declined during the 12-year period,
the use of all other types of vegetables
increased. The low-income group used more
dark-green and deep-yellow vegetables in 1977
than did households with higher incomes.
Households in the lowest income group also
increased their use of fruits between 1965 and
1977. Most of the increase was in the use of
citrus fruit and juices . . The increase is equiva­lent
to almost 2 cups of citrus juice per person
per week between 1965 and 1977.
1965 and 1977
Income group III Income group IV Income group V
Percent Percent Percent
1965 1977 change 1965 1977 change 1965 1977 change
$5 , 000- $10,001 - from $7,000- $17,001 - from $10,000 llire than from
$6 , 999 $17,000 1965 2 $9,999 $26 , 000 1965 2 or more $26,000 1965 2
Average per person per day 3
3, 210 2, 850 - 11 3 , 280 2, 890 - 12 3, 300 3,020 - 8
2 107 99 - 8 110 101 -8 113 113 *
155 139 -11 160 139 - 13 162 146 -10
4 349 302 -14 354 306 - 14 34 7 308 -11
5 1, 110 1,050 - 5 1 ' 150 1, 080 -6 1,180 1, 210 3
6 20 20 * 19 19 1 20 20 2
7 4 7 ' 180 6 , 720 -6 4 7' 050 7, 250 3 4 7,830 7 , 750 - 1
8 1. 6 1. 8 15 1.6 1.8 14 1. 6 1.9 22
9 2. 4 2.5 2 2.4 2.6 5 2 .5 2.8 10
10 25 26 4 26 26 2 26 29 10
ll 100 130 26 110 135 23 130 155 22
12 25 .4 25 .4 20 . 9 20 . 2 11. 7 11.7
SPRING 1980 13
Table 3. Change in quantity of foods used by housekeeping
Food group
Milk, cream, cheese (milk
equivalent) 4 .. . ....... . ...... .
Meat, poultry, fish , and other
2 protein food 5 .. ... . ... ... . .. . .
3 Meat, fish, poultry . . . . .... . .
4 Eggs (fresh equi valent) .... .•
5 Dry beans (dry weight) .... . . .
6 Nuts (shelled weight) . .... . . .
7 Vegetables 4 . .... . .... . ... . ... . .
8 Potatoes (fresh equivalent) . .
9 Dark- green ....... . ......... . .
10 Deep- yellow ......... .. ..... . .
11 Tomatoes ...... . . . ... . .. . ·. · . ·
12 Fruit 4 . .. . . .. . . . .• ..... . ... . ...
Citrus (single- strength
13 juice equivalent) . . . . ...... .
14 Other ascorbic acid rich fruit
Grain products (flour
15 equivalent) 4 .. . . . . . .... . ..... .
Enriched or whole grain
16 (flour equivalent) 4 . ... . .. . .
17 Fats and oils .. . . . ...... .... .. .
18 Sugar, sirup, jelly , candy .. . . .
Soft drinks, punches , prepared
desserts, ascorbic acid added
19 (sugar equivalent) ... ........ .
Soft drinks, punches, prepared
desserts, no ascorbic acid
20 added (sugar equivalent) ... . . .
21 Alcoholic beverages .. .. ..... .. .
*Less than 0.5 percent .
Income group I
Average pounds
per person
per week 2
1965
Less
than
$3 ,000
7.78
5 . 25
4. 01
. 86
.28
. 10
4 .83
l. 59
.29
. 23
. 60
2.94
. 83
. 14
3.20
2 . 70
.86
l. 25
. 03
. 14
. 22
1977
Less
than
$6,000
7. 18
5. 86
4 . 85
. 73
. 18
. 10
5 . 16
l. 41
.37
. 27
. 69
3.65
l. 66
. 25
2.35
2 . 26
. 69
. 82
. 08
. 18
. 62
Percent
change
from
1965 3
- 8
12
21
- 15
- 38
7
7
-12
29
21
15
24
100
- 72
- 27
-16
-19
- 34
207
30
186
Income group II
Average pounds
per person
per week 2
1965
$3 , 000-
$4,999
8 . 13
5 . 55
4 . 37
.84
. 22
. 11
5. 18
l. 91
. 22
.25
. 67
3 . 17
. 91
. 19
2.84
2 . 32
.85
l. 25
. 03
. 18
. 30
1977
$6,000-
$10,000
7. 75
5. 59
4 . 61
.70
. 18
. 11
5.23
l. 62
. 32
. 24
.72
3 . 78
1. 60
.31
2. 23
2 . 12
. 71
.85
. 12
. 21
. 67
Percent
change
from
1965 3
- 5
1
5
- 17
- 21
- 4
l
- 16
48
- 4
7
19
77
60
- 21
- 9
- 16
- 32
247
22
74
1Includes only households reporting income . Income groups for 1965 based on 1964 income after
taxes and income groups for 1977 based on 1976 income before taxes .
2Average is calculated using a population ratio procedure; 21 meals from household food supplies
is equivalent to 1 person.
3All calculations completed prior to rounding .
4 Includes mixtures and soups with main ingredient from group .
5Excludes mixtures, soups, and plate meals that consist mostly of meat, fish, poultry, eggs ,
legumes, or nuts.
14 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
households, by income, 1 spring 1965 and 1977
Income group III Income group IV Income group V
Average pounds Average pounds Average pounds
per person per person per person
per week 2 Percent per week 2 .Percent per week 2 Percent
change change change
1965 1977 from 1965 1977 from 1965 1977 from
$5,000- $10,001- 1965 "3
$7,000- $17,001- 1965 3
$10,000 More than 1965 3
$6,999 $17,000 $9,999 $26,000 or more $26,000
8.96 8.25 -8 9.36 8.73 -7 9. 64 10.20 6
2 5. 7 5 5.48 -5 5. 78 5.52 -4 6.08 6.07 * 3 4.67 4.59 -2 4.76 4.68 -2 5.06 5.21 3
4 .82 .63 -23 .77 .62 -20 .79 . 62 -22
5 . 14 .11 -20 .10 .08 -25 .09 .08 -14
6 .13 .15 14 .14 .14 -1 .14 .17 19
7 5.39 4.74 -12 5.58 5.06 -9 5.80 5.20 -10
8 1. 95 1. 62 -17 2.08 1. 69 -19 1. 92 1. 50 -22
9 .21 .26 26 .20 .26 34 .19 . 24 23
10 .25 . 19 -24 .26 .24 -11 .33 .26 -20
11 .79 .67 -15 .81 .69 -15 .93 .76 -18
12 3. 72 3. 61 -3 4.09 4.09 * 4.86 4.62 -5
13 1.18 1. 46 24 1. 40 1. 74 25 1. 79 2.21 23
14 .22 .26 20 .32 . 30 -7 .41 .47 15
15 2 . 54 2. 11 -17 2.49 2.02 -19 2.30 2.06 -10
16 1. 97 2.00 1 1.87 1. 90 2 1. 65 1. 96 19
17 .83 .70 -16 .82 .67 -19 .78 . 69 -12
18 1.09 .85 -22 1.08 180 -26 .96 .71 -26
19 .05 .11 119 .06 .13 142 .07 .14 88
20 .21 .24 11 .23 .26 14 .25 .20 18
21 .81 .96 19 .94 1.16 24 .97 1. 29 33
SPRING 1980 15
NUTRIENT CONSUMPTION PATTERNS OF INDIVIDUALS,
1977 AND 1965
By Eleanor M. Pao 1
IN SUMMARY
Comparison of the average nutritive content
of the diets of individuals based on the prelimi­nary
data from the Nationwide Food Con­sumption
Survey in the spring of 1977 with
data from the Household Food Consumption
Survey in the spring of 1965 leads to the fol­lowing
conclusions:
1. Caloric intakes of all sex-age groups were
lower in 1977 than in 1965.
2. Intakes of infants showed the sharpest
drop of all sex-age groups from 1965 to 1977
for food energy, protein, fat, and calci urn but a
large increase for iron.
3. Intakes of food energy, protein, and fat
appear to have decreased the least in older men
and women, whereas calcium, vitamin A, and
vitamin C intakes were higher in 1977 than in
1965 for this age group.
4. From 1965 to 1977, intakes of protein
declined for all sex-age groups except men and
women over 65 years of age, and fat intake
declined for all sex-age groups.
5. Calcium intakes in 1977 were lower than
in 1965 for infants, children, and teenagers but
were close to or above 1965 levels for six of
the eight groups of adults. Average intakes of
females 12 years and over were 25 percent or
more below the 197 4 Recommended Dietary
Allowances (RDA). Several groups of children
and males had intakes that averaged about 10
percent below the RDA.
6. The iron intake of infants in 1977 was
more than twice the intake in 1965. However,
the average intake of 1- to 2-year-olds was
much lower-about 45 percent below the 197 4
RDA. Average intakes of females 12 to 50
years were between 35 and 40 percent below
the RDA, as in 1965.
7. Vitamin C consumption increased con­siderably
from 1965 to 1977.
8. Average intakes of the following nutri­ents
met 197 4 RDA for all sex-age groups: Pro­tein,
vitamin A, riboflavin, and vitamin C.
1 Home economist, Consumer and Food Economics
Institute, Human Nutrition Center, Science and
Education Administration.
16
Thiamin and phosphorus intakes met RDA for
all groups except one.
9. Vitamin B6 intakes of infants, children,
and some groups of teenagers met the 1974
RDA; however, intakes of adult groups were
below RDA. Females 15 years and over had
average intakes between 35 and 40 percent
below the 1974 RDA. Men and girls 12 to 14
years had average intakes falling 7 to 22 per­cent
below the standard. These conclusions
must be taken with caution because food com­position
values for vitamin B6 are still in the
developmental stage.
10. Average intakes of magnesium were
below 197 4 RDA for nearly all sex-age groups,
but food composition values for magnesium are
likewise still in the developmental stage.
IN DETAIL
Caloric Intake
Caloric intakes of individuals in 1977 were
lower on the average than those observed in
1965. Average intakes of energy for infants
declined most, 34 percent. Young children, 1
to 5 years of age, had average intakes that were
15 percent less than in 1965. Caloric intakes of
the oldest group of men and oldest group of
women (65 years and over) dropped the least
between 1965 and 1977. Among the groups of
younger women and girls, average intakes were
5 to 10 percent less in 1977; for the men in
similar age groups, the declines were slightly
greater (10 to 15 percent).
Teenage boys, 15 to 18 years of age, had the
highest caloric intake of any sex-age group in
1977, just over 2,700 kcal. In 1965, the largest
average intake of energy was slightly over
3,000 kcal, by 18- to 19-year-old boys. Average
intakes of calories for groups of men in 1977
decreased with age from about 2,500 kcal for
19- to 34-year-olds to 1,925 kcal for men 65
years and over.
Among girls and women, the highest average
caloric intake \n 1977 was for the group of 12-
to 14-year-olds-1,920 kcal. The highest aver­age
caloric intake in 1965 was 2,150 for the
same age group. A general reduction in caloric
intake with age occurred in 1977 except the
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
group of 51- to 64-year-old women, whose
intake was 1 percent greater than the younger
group, 35 to 50 years of age.
When average caloric intakes for 1977 were
compared with the 1974 RDA, intakes for all
sex-age groups were below recommendations
by about 10 to 25 percent. However, energy
needs of individuals vary co.nsiderably accord­ing
to body size, age, and physical activity;
thus, there are individuals who need less than
the recommended amounts. Groups with
caloric intakes of more than 20 percent below
the RDA for energy were infants, boys and
girls 6 to 8 years, boys and girls 9 to 11 years,
girls 12 to 14 years, and women 19 to 34, 35
to 50, and 65 years and over.
Average weights of people in most groups in
1977 were similar to average weights for 1965.
Thus, the drop in caloric intake does not
appear to be associated with loss of weight.
Perhaps a sedentary life style is more common
in the 1970's than in the 1960's.
Protein, Fat, and Carbohydrate Intakes
Generally, intakes of the three main energy­producing
nutrients-protein, fat, and carbohy­drate-
decreased between 1965 and 1977.
Average protein intakes of individuals in all
sex-age groups decreased or remained the same.
The infants' group showed the largest decline,
about 40 percent below the 1965 level. Chil­dren
in the 1- to 2-year-old group had the
second largest decrease in average protein
intake-about 15 percent below 1965 intakes.
Average intakes of the older groups of children
decreased less. In 1977, protein intake of girls
9 years and over and that for women less than
65 years of age ranged from 91 to 97 percent
of 1965 intakes. For boys and men of the same
ages, the range was 85 to 94 percent of the
averages from the earlier survey. Averages for
the men 65 years and over and the women in
the same age group showed little change from
average quantities of protein consumed in
1965.
The average intake of protein for infants
decreased from 39 grams in 1965 to about 25
grams in 1977. This sharp drop in protein
intake of infants may reflect a change in com­position
of baby formulas from those made
with evaporated cow's milk, as was common in
the 1960's, to the formulas developed to
resemble human milk in the 1970's. Human
SPRING 1980
milk has about one-third as much protein as
cow's milk.
In addition to having the largest caloric
intake, the 15- to 18-year-old boys had the
largest average intake of protein, 107 grams, in
1977. The largest average protein intake in
1965 was 118 grams for the 18- to 19 and 20-
to 34-year-old groups of boys and men. Protein
intakes of men in 1977 decreased with age to
about 80 grams in a day for the men 65 years
and over.
Among the age groups of females in 1977,
girls 12 to 14 years of age had diets with the
highest average intake of protein, about 75
grams. Intakes for women 19 to 65 were about
the same, 64 to 67 grams, decreasing to 60
grams for the oldest group.
Although average protein intakes were lower
in 1977 than in 1965, average quantities in
1977 were more than adequate to meet the
1974 RDA for all groups. Also, despite the
reduction in average intakes of protein, the per­centage
of calories from protein was up slightly
for all groups except infants.
Average fat intakes decreased considerably
in 1977 from 1965; the difference was about
20 percent for almost half the groups. How­ever,
the drop for the infants' group was
exceptionally large; the average was about 45
percent less in 1977 than in 1965. The reason
for this large decrease is not yet known, but
the data will be analyzed further. The elderly
men's and elderly women's groups showed the
least change, about a 6- to 8-percent decline.
Average fat intakes of the groups of boys and
younger men generally decreased a little more
than the intakes for the same age groups for
females from spring 1965 to spring 1977.
(Levels in 1977 were 80 to 86 percent of 1965
values for the groups of males and 85 to 90
percent of 1965 values for the female groups.)
In 1977, the largest average intake of fat for
any sex-age group was the 125 grams consumed
by the 15- to 18-year-old boys. This quantity is
markedly lower than the highest average fat
intake of almost 150 grams for 18- to
19-year-olds in 1965. Intake was lower for suc­cessively
older age groups, and the average fat
intake of men 65 years and over was about 90
grams. Of females, girls 12 to 14 years of age
evidenced the highest group average for fat, 85
grams. Women's intakes were around 70 to 75
grams, except for older women. The average
17
intake for women 65 years and over was about
65 grams. The percentage of calories derived
from fat was lower in 1977 than in 1965 for all
sex-age groups. The steep drop for infants,
from 39 percent in 1965 to 29 percent in
1977, made them the only group to meet the
American Heart Association recommendations
that call for less than 35 percent of energy in
the diet coming from fat. Fat as a source of
energy in men's diets decreased from about 45
in 1965 to 42 percent in 1977' still well above
the recommended amounts. A slightly greater
decrease in the proportion of calories from fat
appeared in the oldest women's group than in
the oldest men's group. The oldest group of
men had the highest proportion of energy from
fat ind.icated by the preliminary data from the
1977 survey. Although these men have lived
past 65 years of age, data on their own apprais­als
of their health status have not been sum­marized
as~ yet. These data will be of considera­ble
interest because high dietary intake of fat is
considered by many health professionals to be
a risk factor for heart disease.
Total carbohydrate consumption for most
groups fell between 1965 and 1977. Excep­tions
were men 65 years and over and the two
oldest groups of women (51 to 64 and 65 years
and over). (The proportions of carbohydrate
coming from natural and added sugar and from
starches are not available.) The decline was
about 1 to 8 percent for girls and women less
than 50 years of age and about 5 to 12 percent
for boys and men less than 65 years of age.
However, the reduction for infants (about 25
percent) was considerably greater than that for
all other sex-age groups.
Boys 15 to 18 years of age had the highest
average intake of carbohydrate-about 300
grams-in 1977 compared with the high of 315
grams in 1965. The 9- to 11-year-old girls had
the highest average intake-225 grams--of all
female groups in 1977, fractionally lower than
the high of 235 grams in 1965 consumed by
the 12- to 14-year-old groups of girls.
Even though the absolute amount of carbo­hydrate
was down in 1977, the proportion of
calories from carbohydrate was up. About 50
percent of the energy intake of infants came
from carbohydrate. Around 40 percent of the
energy intake of men, 19 to 64 years of age,
came from carbohydrate. The proportion for
women in this age range was almost the same,
18
about 42 percent. The oldest group of men and
of women obtained a slightly higher percentage
of their calories from carbohydrate ( 42 and 46
percent) than younger adults but not as much
as the children's group ( 48 percent).
Mineral Intakes
Calcium intakes were lower for infants, chil­dren,
and teenagers in 1977 than in 1965. For
most adult groups, average intakes were close
to or above 1965 levels. Increases in average
intakes of calcium occurred for the oldest
group of men and for the two oldest groups of
women. The sharpest drop in average intakes of
calcium was found for the infants, a decline of
more than 40 percent. Here, as for protein, the
decline may be due to the change in baby
formulas from those based on cow's milk to
formulas simulating breast milk, which has less
than one-third as much calcium as cow's milk.
Nevertheless, the average intake of calcium
for infants in 1977 was well above the 197 4
RDA. Average intakes of calcium in 1977
ranged from 10 to 20 percent lower for
children and from 3 to 15 percent lower for
teenagers than in 1965.
The largest average intake of calcium for
1977 was for teenage boys, 15 to 18 years of
age, followed closely by the intake of the next
younger age group of boys. In 1977, these two
groups were the only ones with intakes exceed­ing
1,000 mg of calcium, whereas in 1965,
infants and boys 9 to 11 years of age also had
average intakes above 1,000 mg of calcium.
The highest average intakes of calcium in 1977
among female groups were found for 9- to 11
and 12- to 14-year-olds. Average calcium
intakes of adults generally decreased for succes­sively
older age groups, but a slightly higher
average was evident in the oldest group for
both sexes.
Among the 18 sex-age groups, 5 had average
intakes of calcium in 1977 that met or
exceeded the 1974 RDA for their group:
Infants, 6- to 8-year-old children, and males 9
to 11, 15 to 18, and 19 to 34 years of age.
Average intakes for the other groups of chil­dren
and boys met 90 percent or more of the
RDA for their group. However, females in age
groups 12 years and over had average intakes
that ranged from 64 to 74 percent of the 1974
RDA. Since these are a.verages for age groups,
we must conclude that many individuals had
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
intakes of calcium that were much below
recommended levels.
Analysis of frequency distributions or per­centiles
of both the 1- and 3-day intakes of
calcium will provide more insight. Despite the
improvement in the calcium intake of the
women 65 years and over, the calcium intakes
of the other groups of females, 12 years and
over, were about the same in 1977 as in 1965.
Average intakes of iron increased in 1977
over 1965 for many sex-age groups. The
increased iron intake of infants was especially
dramatic, well over twice the 1965 value. How­ever,
the 1- to 2-year-olds in 1977 had an
average intake only half as high as that of
infants. Thus, although the average iron intake
of infants was more than adequate to meet
197 4 RDA, the average intake of the group just
beyond infancy (1- to 2-year-old group) was
only 55 percent of the RDA. Average intakes
of the 3- to 5-year-olds more nearly met recom­mendations
and those of the 6- to 11-year-olds
exceeded them. The improvement in average
intake of iron for infants is the result of
increased iron fortification of baby cereals and
baby formulas since the 1965 survey. The aver­age
intake masks the probable existence of
some infants with low intakes and possibly
some with unusually high intakes of iron
because of being fed both iron-fortified cereal
and iron-fortified formula. Whether the infants
with high intakes were also given iron supple­ments
is a question that can be addressed later
with survey information.
In 1977, average iron intakes of the groups
of men exceeded 197 4 RDA by a considerable
margin. Intakes of two groups of boys were
slightly below the recommendations even
though their average intakes were up. Average
intakes of females in the groups 12 through 50
years of age met about 60 to 65 percent of the
RDA for their groups in 1977, practically the
same as in 1965.
Magnesium intake in 1977 was somewhat
less than estimates for 1965 for infants and
most groups of children and teenagers. How­ever,
1977 intakes were higher for most groups
of adults, especially the oldest adult groups.
Average intakes of magnesium for children
under 9 years of age were in the range of 150
to 220 mg, for girls and women around 215 to
240 mg, and for boys and men about 245 to
320 mg. When compared with the appropriate
SPRING 1980
1974 RDA, average intakes for infants and 1-
to 2-year-olds met recommendations and the
other groups of children were only slightly
below recommendations. For the groups of
boys and men, average intakes of magnesium
met between 80 and 89 percent of 1974 RDA.
Comparable age groups of girls and women had
averages supplying 69 to 79 percent of 197 4
RDA with the exception of the 9- to 11-year­old
girls whose intake met 90 percent of the
recommended levels. However, there is greater
uncertainty in the comparisons because reliable
magnesium data are not generally available for
use in calculating magnesium values of diets
such as those reported here.
Phosphorus consumption was calculated for
the first time in 1977. Average intakes of all
groups appear to meet 1974 RDA, except the
group of girls 15 to 18 years.
Vitamin Intakes
Vitamin A intake for all but four groups was
down in 1977 from 1965 levels; the exceptions
were the 6- to 8-year-old children, the oldest
group of men, and the two oldest groups of
women. The decline in the average vitamin A
intake for infants was 35 percent. For the chil­dren
and teenagers, the difference between
1965 and 1977 was much less, ranging from 14
to 18 percent for the girls and 6 to 13 percent
for the boys. The 19- to 34-year-old men's and
women's groups had average intakes for 1977
that were 25 percent below those in 1965.
Although 1977 intakes were down from 1965,
they were sufficient to meet the 197 4 RDA for
all groups. In contrast to some other nutrients
in the diet, the average vitamin A intakes for
adult groups in this sample generally increased
for successively older age groups, although the
51- to 64-year-old group of men had an intake
that slightly exceeded the intake of the oldest
men. It may be that the older adults are con­suming
more vitamin A rich foods, such as
dark-green vegetables.
Ascorbic acid intakes in 1977 were consider­ably
higher than average intakes in 1965, with
levels ranging from 20 to 80 percent over 1965
values. Fortification of beverages and other
foods with vitamin C and increased consump­tion
of citrus fruit and juice contributed sub­stantially
to the increase.
19
Average intakes of thiamin increased in 1977
over 1965 for all groups except one (19- to
34-year-old men), in .which the average was
nearly the same for both surveys. Average
intakes of all groups exceeded the 1974 RDA
except the 19- to 34-year-old women, whose
intake just missed meeting the recommended
level.
Riboflavin intakes of infants and children
decreased between 1965 and 1977. The average
intake for infants dropped most, almost 30 per­cent.
Yet their intakes, when expressed as a
percentage of 197 4 RDA, exceeded the recom­mendation
by more than 100 percent. Average
intakes of men and women, 65 years and over,
were up, but those for the younger adult
groups were down slightly from 1965 levels.
Nonetheless, average intakes met or exceeded
197 4 RDA for all groups.
Vitamin B6 intakes were higher in 1977 than
those estimates for the 1965 survey except for
infants, 1- to 2-year-olds, men and women of
19 to 34 years of age, and men 35 to 50 years
of age. Average intakes of infants and children
in 1977 exceeded 1974 RDA, but intakes of
adults were below the RDA. The average intake
of vitamin B6 for men 65 years and over pro­vided
78 percent of the RDA. For the younger
groups of men, average intakes provided 88 to
99 percent of the RDA. However, for the
groups of females 15 years and over, average
intakes were only 60 to 65 percent of RDA,
indicating that vitamin B6 may be a special
dietary problem for older teenage girls and
women of all ages. Reliable food composition
values for vitamin B6 have been difficult to
obtain because of inadequate analytical
methods and are not available for a consider­able
number of foods. The calculated content
of the vitamin B6 for these diets is an estimate
based on the best information currently avail­able,
but the reliability is less certain than for
other nutrients.
NATIONWIDE FOOD CONSUMPTION SURVEY-IMPLICATIONS
By D. Mark Hegsted 1
What conclusions can we or should we draw
from the data available so far?
I prefer to begin by noting some of the limi­tations,
or possible limitations, in the data so
that we don't overinterpret the findings. The
average household or the average person
doesn't really exist. So, although average values
are important and flag changes in consumption,
they never tell us quite what we would like to
know. If consumption of something stays the
same, increases, or decreases as a whole, various
groups within the population can be expected
to show different trends. The more the data are
broken down into specifics, the more useful
the information is nutritionally. On the other
hand, individuals within any group will also
vary substantially. We cannot monitor the
intake or nutritional status of every individual,
so we do have to deal with groups. Whatever
we conclude, the limitations of statistical data
need to be kept in mind.
1 Administrator, Human Nutrition Center, Science
and Education Administration.
20
Although it is not very useful in helping to
interpret data, it is at least worth noting that
questions can be raised about the reliability of
data collected in such surveys. The food supply
is now exceedingly complex and becomes more
so all the time. Our knowledge of food compo­sition
always lags behind our needs and always
will. Some of the apparent changes in con­sumption
may reflect inadequacies in the data
base and, thus, our interpretation may change
with time as the data base improves. Neverthe­less,
most of us believe that consumption data
are a reasonable reflection of what groups of
people do, although we know that they do not
reflect what individuals do. The average values
reported here agree reasonably well with aver­age
values reported by HANES,2 for example,
2 Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. See
"Dietary intake findings-United States, 1971·1974,"
1977, Vital and Health Statistics, Series 11, No. 202,
data from the National Health Survey, U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
Health Service (DHEW Pub. No. HRA 77-1647).
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
and thus give us some confidence. Nevertheless,
there is still relatively little hard evidence to
compare what people eat with what they say
they eat. Additional efforts are required to
improve our methodology, although I do not
expect major improvements other than, per­haps,
improvements in methods to handle the
information collected.
As Eleanor Pao has indicated in the total
food article on p. 16, total food consumption
of Americans-practically across the board­appears
to be at a very low level. This in spite
of the fact that we are as big and fat as we ever
were and obesity may be gaining on us. About
the only interpretation possible at this time
would be that Americans are becoming increas­ingly
sedentary. It raises many questions. Can
optimal health be achieved by simply reducing
food intake to control obesity? Although many
people have a firm faith in the benefits of exer­cise,
there is little hard evidence on what is
achieved by various amounts of exercise.
Indeed, in the report of the Panel on Obesity
of the American Society of Clinical Nutrition, 3
there remain many questions about what is act­ually
achieved by weight-reducing programs
even when they are successful. Obviously for
Americans as a whole, the emphasis on weight
and obesity over the past many years may have
reduced food consumption but has not
achieved what is thought to be desirable.
These low levels of food consumption make
it increasingly difficult for many Americans to
achieve the rather generous levels of nutrients
specified in the Recommended Dietary Allow­ances.
The Food and Nutrition Board has
repeatedly warned that consumption of less
than the RDA does not mean an individual is
deficient in that nutrient, yet we must also
assume that this Board does believe that con­sumption
at these levels is desirable. What are
we to make of the proposition that the average
American woman consuming a mixed and
well-balanced diet cannot obtain the RDA for
several nutrients? It is one thing to conclude
that a proportion of any group is at risk of
deficiency because of poor food choice or
inadequate supplies. It is something else to
3 "Symposium report of the task force on the
evidence relating six dietary factors to the Nation's
health," 1979, The American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, Vol. 32, No. 2, December Supplement.
SPRING 1980
define the average American at risk of defici­ency.
These low levels of consumption are of inter­est
in that recent estimates place the national
food supply at about 3,500 calories per person
per day. Our survey results indicate that about
2,900 of these calories actually enter the
household, but only 1,800 to 1,900 calories are
actually consumed. Where does all that food
go? Do we really waste almost half of the total
food available or feed it to cats and dogs? How
much redundancy in our total food supply is
required to adequately nourish our population?
We can all list many factors that encourage
waste-the decreasing size of families, the way
foods are packaged, the way food is served in
restaurants, and so forth. Yet, it should be of
considerable interest to find out what actually
happens. Are there 3,500 calories of edible
food? If we envisage a limitation in food sup­plies
some 10 or 20 years down the pike, there
would appear to be great opportunities for con­servation
of food in the same way that there
are opportunities for conservation of energy­the
two are not unrelated.
The data are encotiraging in that they indi­cate
the spread in dollars spent for food and
that the kinds of food consumed at various
income levels are diminishing. The programs of
the 1970's have assisted the lower income
groups so that they more nearly participate in
our abundant food supply. At the same time, 3
percent of all households report that they do
not have enough food, and this rises to 9 per­cent
in the low-income groups. As Mary Hama
has emphasized in the article on p. 4, this is
still a lot of people and much remains to be
done, especially in a country that may waste
nearly half of the total food available.
Secretary Bergland has warned us that we
should be very clear about the problems of the
poor when we talk about food costs. It is
important to note that although we continually
complain about food costs and other faults of
the food system, for most Americans, food
costs are low compared with those for most of
the world. Most Americans would not willingly
trade what American agriculture and our food
system have achieved with that available in
other parts of the world.
Incidentally, it is of substantial interest in
terms of the total world food problem to note
that the average calorie consumption of Ameri-
21
cans at 1,800 to 1,900 calories per day is not
greatly different from that reported in many of
the developing countries where undernutrition
and malnutrition are common. Yet, how many
Americans are hungry? There are problems of
definition as well as distribution and, again,
how much redundancy in food supplies is act­ually
needed to minimize or prevent undernu­trition.
I avoided the term malnutrition in the last
sentence because there is abundant evidence
that Americans are not optimally nourished
and that a major problem is excessive consump­tion-
excessive consumption of fat, cholesterol,
sugar, salt, and alcohol, as well as total calories.
The latter, as I have indicated, is somewhat
hard to square with the apparent level of
energy consumption, obesity, and estimated
energy requirements. This does not mean we
are not concerned with essential nutrients, but
we are still caught to a considerable degree in
traditional methods or areas of concern.
Although we are concerned and must keep
watch on consumption of thiamin, riboflavin,
niacin, vitamin C, and so forth, these do not
represent the major nutritional concerns of the
U.S. population or the major problem areas.
With regard to essential nutrients, the problem
areas would appear to be iron, zinc, magne­sium,
vitamin B6 , and so forth-nutrients
where there is a substantial difference between
levels specified by the RDA and consumption
levels. Because these are emerging interests, our
data base is less adequate.
Many of the problems are obvious to all of
us. These include a better definition of require­ments,
analytical methods, problems related to
bioavailability, and the evaluation of nutrit­ional
status. We now know, for example, that
total iron content of the diet is probably less
important than the form of iron in the diet and
the nature of the diet with which it is con­sumed.
The research effort that will be
required to provide a better evaluation here is
quite clear.
Similarly, comparative data from 1965 to
1977. on fat, cholesterol, salt, and sugar are less
than adequate because of our shifting interests.
These were not major considerations in prior
surveys. Although Americans are apparently
consuming somewhat less fat than previously
(which is desirable), it has not changed much.
I expect that many are actually doing better
22
than these values indicate, since it seems rea­sonable
that a substantial amount of fat might
be trimmed from meat at the table and may
not be adequately accounted for in the
calculations.
As we are aware, we cannot calculate sugar
and salt consumption from these data. Other
data on total available sweeteners indicate an
increase which, when combined with a fall in
total calories consumed, indicates a higher pro­portion
of the total calories in sugar and sweet­eners.
This is an undesirable trend. It is worth
noting that the role of sugar in dental caries is
more related to the kind of product consumed
and when it is consumed than the total amount
consumed. The data indicate that consumption
of sugar, sirup, jelly, and candy has decreased,
which may be a favorable trend. It probably is
due to greater use of sugar in processed foods
rather than use of sugar as such in the house­hold.
Together with an increase in soft drink
consumption, I conclude we are not gaining in
this area.
Increased consumption of alcoholic bever­ages,
again combined with a falling total food
consumption, is probably undesirable, although
I am a believer in moderation in all things.
As I have indicated, future reports will pro­vide
a greater breakdown of the data both in
terms of who eats what and the products actu­ally
eaten, which will be instructive. For exam­ple,
the data available group eggs, legumes, and
nuts together. This makes sense in traditional
terms as good sources of protein other than
meat and dairy products but is less helpful at
this time. Protein consumption is now at a very
high level and, in general at least, it would seem
that we need not place much emphasis on pro­tein.
In contrast, there are valid reasons to
encourage legume consumption-fiber, vege­table
fat, and the current low levels of con­sumption-
and so more specific data will be
useful. Although there are valid reasons to
encourage increased consumption of dietary
fiber (and we know something about sources of
dietary fiber), the analytical methods available
are inadequate to deal properly with this topic.
Let me urge everyone to recognize both the
value and the limitations of these kinds of data.
Statistical data can be exploited for a variety of
purposes both legitimate and illegitimate and I
urge everyone to try to use them honestly and
constructively.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
CLOTHING AND TEXTILES: SUPPLIES, PRICES, AND
OUTLOOK FOR 19801
By joan C. Courdess2
CLOTHING EXPENDITURES AND PRICES
Consumer Spending
Annual spending for clothing and shoes aver­aged
$441 per person, according to preliminary
figures for the first three quarters of 1979-up
5. 8 percent over 197 8 (table 1). Of this
increase, 62 percent was attributable to price
increases and 38 percent was a real increase in
spending. The real increase, however, was con­siderably
less than a year earlier when 62 per­cent
of the increase in per person spending was
due to increased buying:
Year
1975 .... .
1976
1977
1978 .. ...
1979 .....
Increase in spending
per capita over
previous year in--
Constant Current
dollars dollars
9 20
10 24
10 25
25 40
9 24
Percent of increase
attributed to--
Real Increased
buying prices
45 55
42 58
40 60
62 38
38 62
This slowdown in real spending may reflect
continuing pressures on the family pocketbook
from inflation, increased social security taxes,
and higher income taxes caused by cost-of-liv­ing
wage increases that have pushed families
into higher tax brackets.
Retail Sales
The slowdown in real spending is also
reflected in retail sales, which, when adjusted
1 Information here is based on reports available
during January through October 1979. Discussion of
business trends is based on trade reports or news
items in the Daily News Record, the Wall Street
Journal, the Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun,
Business Week, and Knitting Times. Other sources
include Textile Organon L(9), September 1979; U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Economics, Statistics, and
Cooperatives Service, Cotton and Wool Situation,
CWS-18 and CWS-20 (1979); U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Current Pppulation
Report, P-25 (812), September 1979; U.S. Department
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, News (Consumer
Price Index monthly reports).
2 Home economist, Family Economics Research
Group, Science and Education Administrati,.on.
SPRING 1980
for inflation, have been declining since the end
of 1978. The large amount of consumer spend­ing
late in 1978, in anticipation of higher
prices, together with a heavy level of consumer
debt, and the effects of the energy situation,
made buying patterns sluggish. During the sum­mer,
trade papers reported, "Women have no
time for shopping-they're waiting in gas
lines." People shopped around by telephone
rather than by car. With the 78° ruling,
enclosed malls and stores became humid and
muggy and discouraged browsing and buying.
Anticipating winter 1979-80 and the 65°
mandate, stores stocked up on sweaters and
three-piece suits. Spring 1980 merchandise will
include a higher percentage of short-sleeved
shirts and two-piece suits.
Selling well in 1979, according to trade
papers, were-
• Sportswear-the gasoline shortage kept
people closer to home.
• Spectatorwear (cross between sportswear
and loungewear)-for increased leisure
time, comfort, and multipurpose use.
• Quality and versatility instead of high
style-buying fewer well-made clothes
that can be worn several ways and last a
long time are bargains in the long run.
Sportscoats, separates, dark colors,
traditional silhouettes, and clothes made
of 100 percent wool or cotton were in
demand.
Consumer Prices
Prices in 1979 for apparel and footwear, as
measured by the Consumer Price Index ( CPI),
increased 4.2 percent over 1978. This increase
was less than the 10.9-percent increase for the
all items category of the CPI (table 2).
This relatively modest gain in prices con­trasts
with the "considerable increases" that
consumers say they are seeing in clothing
prices. It may be explained in part by the
nature of the CPl. The CPI measures the
change in cost over time of a fixed market bas­ket
of goods and services. The content of the
market basket is kept unchanged as much as
possible. Items are selected based on data col-
23
lected in the Consumer Expenditure Surveys of
the Bureau of Labor St atistics-the last of
which was 1972-73. -The CPI does not reflect
immediately changes in expenditure patterns
nor adjust to new goods and services. Choices
in clothing made by consumers are particularly
sensit ive to changes in fashion, and "high­style
" merchandise-often commanding
premium prices-is not necessarily included in
the CPl. Also, even though the original ticket
prices of garments may be higher than those of
comparable items previously available, retail
practices such as discount pricing and earlier
markdowns mean that a decreased proportion
of consumer clothing purchases are at the origi­nally
marked price. The CPI takes into account
the price at which a garment is offered for sale.
Within the overall CPI category of clothing
and footwear, men's furnishings; boys' coats,
jackets, sweaters, and shirts; boys' furnishings;
jewelry and luggage; and footwear increased
relatively more than other clothing items
between September 1978 and September 1979
(table 3).
Table 1. Annual expenditures on clothing and shoes1
24
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
Years
1978 . . .. . ....... .
19793
Per capita
expenditures 2
Constant
dollars
(1972)
203
203
209
209
222
227
239
236
242
245
240
249
264
281
279
288
298
308
333
342
Current
Dollars
148
149
154
156
166
172
186
192
208
223
227
244
264
291
308
328
352
377
417
441
Percent of
expenditures
for personal
consumption
Constant
dollars
(1972)
8 . 1
8.1
8.1
7. 9
8. 1
7. 9
8 .0
7. 8
7 . 7
7. 6
7.4
7.5
7. 5
7 . 7
7.8
7 . 9
7.8
7.8
8 . 1
8.2
Current
dollars
8 .2
8 .2
8 .1
7.9
8 .0
7.8
7. 9
7.8
7. 8
7.8
7.5
7 . 6
7. 5
7. 6
7. 3
7.2
6 . 9
6 .8
6.8
6. 6
Aggregate
expenditures
Billions
of
constant
dollars
(1972)
36 . 6
37 . 3
38 . 9
39.6
42 . 6
44 . 2
46 .9
46 .9
48.6
49 . 6
49.2
51.6
55 . 1
59 .2
59 . 1
61. 4
64 .2
67.4
72.7
75 . 5
Billions
of
current
dollars
26.7
27 .4
28 . 7
29.5
31.9
33.5
36.6
38 .2
41.8
45 .1
46 . 6
50 . 5
55 .1
61.3
65 .3
70 . 1
75 . 7
82.4
91.2
97 . 2
1Includes yard goods but excludes services , such as cleaning and repairing clothing
and shoes.
2Calculated by dividing aggregate expenditures for each year by population figures
for July of each year.
3Preliminary figures--average of estimates for f~~ rst 3 quar t ers o f 1979 (.~ . e.,
seasonally adjusted quarterly totals at annual rates) .
Sources: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1979, Population esti­mates
and projections, Current Population Reports, Series P-25, No . 812 . U. S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, 1978, Survey of Current Business
(table 11) 59(7): 19; and personal communication with Bureau of Economic Analysis.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
SUPPLIES OF RAW MATERIALS
U.S. mill use of total fibers in 1979, based
on data for the first 9 months, is estimated to
be 58.8 pounds per capita. This includes 13.8
pounds of cotton, 0.5 pound of wool, and 44.5
pounds of manmade fibers. This compares with
197 8 per capita use of 56.} pounds, including
13.9 pounds of cotton, 0.5 pound of wool, and
42.3 pounds of manmade fibers.
Cotton
The 1979 cotton crop is expected to be
about 13.7 million bales, 26 percent more than
last year. The price of cotton has been rela­tively
stable and is becoming more competitive
with polyester. By 1985, any price advantage
polyester has enjoyed over cotton since its
introduction probably will disappear. This is
due in part to the rising price of crude oil. It is
estimated that for each rise of $1 in the price
of a barrel of crude oil, the cost of producing
1 pound of polyester increases $0.01, and the
cost of producing 1 pound of cotton increases
$0.007. During 1979, prices of manmade fibers
were raised three times.
Whereas 10 years ago, cotton was considered
"outdated," today's consumer appreciates the
comfort-enhancing advantages of cotton and
regards it as desirable enough to be a trendset­ter.
The 100 percent cotton durable-press shirts
are selling extremely well at $2 more than the
65 percent polyester, 35 percent cotton blend.
At least five manufacturers are increasing pro­duction
of these shirts. Cotton is also being
used as a year-round sweater fiber.
A major concern of scientists in agriculture
and the cotton industry is the health hazard
associated with the processing of cotton. Dur­ing
the coming year, the National Academy of
Sciences' National Research Council, in a study
funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
will investigate the causes of byssinosis, or
"brown lung." This disease affects the breath­ing
capacity of some persons who handle cot­ton
and other fiber crops and is presumably
caused by one or more parts of the dust that
workers breathe on the job. As yet, the causa­tive
agent has not been identified. Meanwhile,
the problem is being attacked from several
directions:
• Cotton breeders are devising methods of
lowering cotton dust through genetic
changes in the plant itself, and other
scientists are looking at entirely new ways
to harvest and gin cotton to reduce dust
and preclude contamination.
Table 2 . Annual percentage change in selected indexes of consumer prices
Consumer Price Index 1975 1976 1977 1978 19791
AU items .. .... ..... .. .. .. .... .. +9.1 +5.8 +6 .5 +7.6 +10 .9
Apparel and upkeep ... ........ . +4 .5 +3.7 +4 .2 +3 .4 +4 . 2
Men ' s and boys' clothing ... . +4 . 3 +3 .5 +4 . 6 +2.3 +2 . 3
Women ' s and girls ' clothing +2 .4 +2.8 +3 . 2 +1.8 +1.8
Footwear ......... ... ..... ... +4.4 +4 .0 +4.7 +4 .0 +7 . 7
Other apparel commodities2 .. +4.6 -0 .1 +6.6
Infants ' and toddlers '
clothing3 ... ..... ... .. ... .. +2 .9
lpreliminary estimates--average for first 3 quarters of 1979 compared with the
average for first 3 quarters of 1978.
2neveloped in 1976 ; includes sewing materials and notions , jewelry, and luggage.
3neveloped in 1978 .
Source: U.S . Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1979, News, Consumer
Price Index (monthly issues); and personal communication with Bureau of Labor
Statistics .
SPRING 1980 25
Table 3. Percentage change in selected index of consumer prices from
September 1978 to September 1979
Consumer Price Index Percent change
All items +12.4
Apparel and upkeep •....•........•.........•..
Men's and boys' clothing .......•...........
Men's:
Suits, sport coats, and jackets ....... .
Coats and jackets ..•...................
Furnishings and special clothing ...... .
Shirts ................................ .
Dungarees, jeans, and trousers ......•..
B9ys':
Coats, jackets, sweaters, and shirts ...
Furnishings ......•.....................
Suits, trousers, sport coats, and
jackets •..........•••....•............
Women's and girls' clothing .............•.•
Women's:
Coats and jackets .....................•
Dresses ......•.....•...................
Separates and sportswear .............. .
Underwear, nightwear, and hosiery ....•.
Suits ................................. .
Girls' :
Coats, jackets, dresses, and suits ...•.
Separates and sportswear ............•..
Underwear, nightwear, hosiery, and
accessories .........................••
Infants' and toddlers' clothing ........... .
Other apparel commodities ....•.............
Sewing materials and notions ............ .
Jewelry and luggage ..................... .
Footwear ....••.............•.......•.......
Men's •.......•...........•.............•.
Boys' and girls' ........................ .
Women's ....••...••..........•.........•..
+4.6
+2.4
-1.4
-2.7
+6.3
+4.7
+1.1
+6.2
+7.5
+2.2
+1.5
+1.5
-1.3
+0.5
+4.5
+2.2
+0.1
+1.1
+3.0
+3.8
+7. 9
+2.8
+10.0
+8.9
+10.8
+9.2
+7.1
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1978,
CPI Detailed Report September 1978, and personal communication with
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
26 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
• Improving engineerin.g controls for the
capture and removal of respirable dust
through air-handling systems and in the
working atmosphere of textile plants.
• Spraying minute amounts of mineral oil
on the cotton during early processing
steps to reduce dust generation.
• Removing the causative agent by water
washing or chemical deactivation of raw
cotton.
• Substituting rayon and polyester for cot­ton
in blended yarns and fabrics.
Ways of producing yarn without twisting
have been studied both in the United States
and in Europe. Inserting twist is the highest
cost factor in yarn production. When a no-twist
method is used, productivity, or amount of
yarn produced in a specified time period, is
vastly increased and costs are lowered. Also,
knitted tubular fabric made of a no-twist yarn
will not twist out of square during wet finish­ing
processes or when washed. Scientists at
USDA's Southern Regional Research Center
have developed a new method for producing a
no-twist cotton yarn that could become com­mercially
feasible in the future.
Wool
U.S. wool production in 1979 is estimated at
1 percent below 1978 and 6 percent below
1977. Wool growers plan a 50-percent increase
in wool production in the next 10 years to
meet anticipated increased consumer demand
for both wool and lamb. U.S. farm prices for
wool in 1979 were about 10 cents per pound
higher than in 1978.
World wool prices are greatly influenced by
the Australian Wool Corporation (AWC). The
A WC attempts to stabilize prices in the Austra­lian
wool market by stockpiling wool when
prices decline and placing these wools on the
market to increase supply as prices go up.
Australian wool prices have been increasing this
fall and the A WC has reduced its wool stock by
over 80 percent (800,000 bales) from its Octo­ber
197 8 level.
Manmade Fibers
Shipments of manmade fibers by U.S. pro­ducers
during the first 8 months of 1979 were
11 percent above a year earlier. Manmade fiber
domestic shipments for each of the first two
SPRING 1980
quarters of 1979 were at record high levels,
exceeding a billion pounds for the first time.
Nylon and polyester constituted 7 5 percent of
the total domestic shipments.
According to trade reports, growing world
affluence will increase world textile consump­tion.
Because of the need for land to grow food
and the many costly processing steps in pro­ducing
spun (natural) yarns, manmade yarns
are expected to supply most of this increase.
New manufacturing techniques could be used
to introduce texture to filament yarns and
thereby improve appearance and increase the
comfort factor.
Silk
Imports of raw silk for the first 8 months of
1979 were 22 percent higher than the 1978
level for the same time period. Deliveries to
U.S. mills were up almost 37 percent. Silk fiber
prices have risen 17 percent since August 1978.
China has scheduled a price increase for silk
fibers of 6 percent to take effect in January
1980; however, no increased price in Chinese
silk fabrics has been announced. U.S. fabric
manufacturers, according to trade reports, will
have to raise prices. Nevertheless, a growing
demand for pure silk and silk-wool blends as
part of the trend toward natural fibers is
predicted.
Hides and Leather
U.S. production of hides in 1979 will
probably be less than in 1978 as 5 million
fewer cattle go to market. Hide prices have
more than doubled in the last 18 months. The
price of leather in 1979 is estimated to be
between 32 and 35 percent higher than in
1978. About 56 percent of shoe material is
leather; the rest is vinyl and plastic, the cost of
which has also risen because of oil price
increases.
U.S. shoe production for 1979 is estimated
at 390 to 395 million pairs, down from 419
million in 1978. According to industry sources,
the wholesale price of shoes has risen 25
percent in 1979; also, the producer price index
for footwear was up 22 percent this September
over a year ago. However, this has not all been
passed on to the consumer and has not been
reflected in the Consumer Price Index.
Continued price increases in footwear at the
retail level can be expected during 1980.
27
Without a quota on hide exports, the
percentage for domestic use has declined from
52 percent in 1972, to· 38 percent in 1978, and
to 27 percent for the first 7 months of 1979.
The United States produces about 15 percent
of the world's hides; it supplies 7 5 percent of
the internationally traded hides.
On October 1, 1979, Argentina lifted its
embargo on cattle-hide exports in exchange for
a phaseout in U.S. leather import tariffs. The
embargo will be replaced by a temporary
export tax. Both tariff and export tax will
be eliminated on October 1, 1981, after
intermediate reductions, if both nations agree.
This should ease current hide shortages and
prices should increase at a slower rate.
DEVELOPMENTS IN THE EXPORTING
AND IMPORTING OF FIBERS,
FABRICS, AND APPAREL
U.S. exports of manmade fibers were up 64
percent for the first 6 months of 1979 over
that period in 1978. U.S. prices are lower than
those of other nations because of more
efficient production, currency exchange rates,
and the artificial control of U.S. oil prices.
Exports of fabrics increased in 1979; imports
decreased.
A substantial decline in overall U.S. imports
of apparel was recorded. For the first 6 months
of 1979, manmade fiber apparel imports
dropped almost 11 percent, wool apparel 22
percent, and cotton 7 percent from the same
period in 1978. This, together with a lower
level of domestic production, was probably due
to slower retail sales.
After 5 years of multilateral negotiations,
the United States and 40 other nations, on
April12, 1979, entered into agreements
designed to regulate and promote freer trade.
When implemented, the Multinational Trade
Agreement removed export subsidies, import
restrictions, and permitted tariff reductions.
Tariff cuts of 40-60 percent on women's and
children's clothing have been widely reported.
Eventually this will mean lower retail prices for .
imported apparel.
Various government agencies are concerned
with the effects of imports on our domestic
industries and employment levels. When
petitioned by a firm, the U.S. Department of
Commerce will investigate whether increased
28
imports have led to decreased sales or to "lay­offs"
of workers. If certified as eligible to
receive trade adjustment assistance, firms can
receive financial or technical assistance or both.
Since the program began in 1975, over 250
firms in the footwear, apparel, and textile in­dustries
have been certified eligible for assis­tance.
The International Trade Commission
hears complaints from U.S. leather apparel
firms and their workers that increased imports
are detrimental to the domestic industry. The
U.S. Department of Labor has certified that
some 2,000 workers were "laid off" in 1978 as
a result of increased import competition and
are eligible to apply for Federal funds under its
trade adjustment assistance program. Congress
is considering establishing a new special Court
of International Trade to review import trans­actions.
REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS
Federal law prohibits unfair acts and prac­tices
and unfair methods of competition. The
Federal Trade Commission has been conduct­ing
wide-ranging investigations of price fixing
in the men's and women's apparel industries.
When violations of the law are exposed, con­sent
order settlements with the manufacturers
prohibit them from fixing the retail price at
which their product can be sold or advertised.
A new type of label telling consumers more
specifically how to care for textile garments
and piece goods and how to avoid damaging
them will be required under a new Federal
Trade Commission ruling. It will amend the
1972 requirement for permanent care labeling
of textile wearing apparel and will add
draperies and curtains, upholstered furniture
and slipcovers, carpets and rugs, household
linens, and suede and leather garments. New
provisions include:
• Manufacturers recommending washing on
a care label must also recommend the
method (hand or machine) and the water
temperature (unless all temperatures can
safely be used).
• Method of drying and, where necessary,
the temperature must be given.
• Items that need ironing and cannot be
ironed with a hot iron must have care
labels stating the recommended tempera­ture.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
• Appropriate warnings, such as "no
bleach" must be included.
• Manufacturers recommending drycleaning
must also recommend the type of solvent
(unless all solvents can safely be used).
• If an item can be cleaned by more than
one method, the manufacturer need give
instructions for only one.
• Manufacturers should have a "reasonable
basis" for the recommendations on the
care label.
• Care labels for piece goods must be given
upon request by the consumer.
The new label will go into effect in spring 1980.
FOOD PRICES IN 1980
By Kenneth R Farrell1
Persistent inflation continues to be the
major economic concern of the Nation; and,
the most visible of the price rises continue to
be in the energy, food, and transportation sec­tors.
Retail food prices in 1979 averaged nearly
11 percent higher than in 1978, about the same
as the general rate of inflation. Those increases
follow a 1 0-percent rise in food prices and a
7. 7 -percent inflation in the overall economy in
1978.
Most forecasters expect the general rate of
inflation to be around 10 percent for 1980. If
this forecast is accurate, increases in food mar­keting
costs alone imply significant increases in
food prices in 1979. However, if 1980 farm
price increases are moderate, as expected, the
total increase in food prices could well be
below the overall rate of inflation. Current
information and commodity forecasts under­score
that possibility.
Food Prices and Inflation
Price movements in the food sector are often
discussed separately from the state of the eco­nomy
and the general inflation rate. However,
the general economy determines the environ­ment
in which the food sector operates, and
general inflation is a contributing factor to
increases in food prices. Costs of production at
the farm level as well as costs of processing and
1 Administrator, Economics, Statistics, and
Cooperatives Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
This article is condensed from a paper presented at the
Agricultural Outlook Conference in November 1979, at
Washington, D.C. Complete copies are available from
Economics, Statistics, and Cooperatives Service,
Information Division, Publications Unit, Room 0054,
South Building, Washington, D.C. 20250.
SPRING 1980
distributing farm food commodities both
change roughly in line with the general infla­tion
rate. In addition, the strength or weakness
of the economy can change supply and demand
conditions by affecting production and con­sumption
decisions in the food sector.
The close, positive relationship between in­flation
in the general economy and inflation in
the food sector is evident over the past three
decades. In the 1950's, inflation in the general
economy and in the food sector both averaged
about 2 percent. In the 1960's, both also rose
about 2 percent. In the 1970's, although
general inflation varied widely, it has averaged
7 percent while food inflation has averaged
8 percent.
The most commonly used and closely
watched indicator of overall retail prices is the
Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers
(CPI-U). Compiled monthly by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, retail prices are surveyed
nationwide for a fixed basket of consumer
goods and services. Indices representing these
prices are reported, and weighted aggregates are
computed for major goods and services cate·
gories. Changes in the CPI can be used as an
indicator of the general inflation rate and, in
fact, this is the most commonly used inflation
measure.
Currently, the relative importance of food in
the CPI-U is 18.2 percent. This means that
almost one-fifth of consumer expenditures on
goods and services is spent for food. Food is
the second most important category of con­sumer
expenditures behind housing ( 44.3 per­cent)
and slightly ahead of transportation (17 .8
percent).
Expenditures for food at home account for
69 percent of all food expenditures, with the
29
remammg 31 percent being accounted for by
food expenditures away from home. In food
expenditures at home, meat is the most impor­tant
category (26 percent) followed by fruits
and vegetables (14 percent), dairy products (13
percent), and cereals and bakery products (12
percent), and other ( 4 percent).
1980 Outlook
We expect retail food prices in 1980 to aver­age
7 to 11 percent above 1979. About 6 per­cent
of the expected increase in the retail price
of food at home will derive from increases in
the farm value of the foods; 7 4 percent is
expected to result from increases in costs of
marketing food; and about 20 percent will be
traceable to increases in the prices of fish and
imported foods. This outlook contrasts with,
the experience in recent years when higher
farm pr-ices had a major role in pushing up con­sumer
food prices.
Farm value of domestically produced food.
The highlights of the outlook for principal
food commodities follow:
• Red meats and poultry: Farm-level live­stock
and poultry prices are not expected to
rise in 1980. Some further increase in cattle
prices likely will be offset by lower prices for
hogs and broilers. Pork production will be
record large in 1980, but broiler output is
expected to turn lower by midyear. Beef pro­duction
may be only marginally higher than
1979.
• Dairy and eggs: Milk production in 1980
is expected to exceed 1979 by about 1 percent
and prices may rise by 10 percent. Egg produc­tion
may be slightly higher in early 1980, but
large supplies of other protein foods may hold
egg prices below 1979 levels.
• Fruits and vegetables: The new citrus crop
is expected to be record large, up 15 percent
from 1979. This will hold citrus prices down in
1980, especially for oranges. The 1979 crop of
fresh vegetables will be up 3 to 4 percent. The
canned and frozen vegetables supply may be up
6 to 7 percent. In response to larger supplies,
prices to growers are expected to remain below
the 1979 level.
• Cereals and bakery products: Food grain
production was large in 1979, but strong
export demand will push prices higher. The
30
wheat crop is up 18 percent and rice produc­tion
is record large. Wheat and rice prices are
expected to average higher in 1980 than 1979.
• Fats and oils: 1979's record large soybean
crop is up 18 percent from 1978. Demand for
exports is also up but not as much as the
supply. As a result, soybean prices are expected
to average lower in 1980. Peanut production
will be up about 3 percent in 1979 and the
sunflower crop is twice as large as in 1978.
• Sugars and sweeteners: Sugarbeet produc­tion
in 1979 will likely be down about 13 per­cent
from 1978, but U.S. sugarcane production
will be larger. World sugar supplies are tight
and increases in world prices are likely to push
domestic prices up.
Combining and weighting these diverse com­modities
suggests that with no serious weather­related
problems the farm value of the market
basket may average only moderately higher
(1 percent) than in 1979.2 But, as has been
demonstrated in recent years-most recently
the last two winters-weather conditions can
disrupt production of important farm food
commodities and significantly alter the pattern
and level of retail food prices. Such potential
instability is heightened by the close linkage of
our domestic food system with world markets,
which themselves are subject to weather-related
instability. Allowing for the possibility of
serious weather problems in some part of the
country during 1980, a prudent forecast would
range from no change to a 10-percent increase
in the farm value of the market basket in 1980
despite expected large supplies of commodities
in the first half of the year.
Our "favorable weather" forecast of a 1-per­cent
increase in farm value, if realized, is in
sharp contrast to the double digit percentage
increases in 1978 and 1979. If realized, the
farm value will be the primary moderating
effect for retail food price changes next year.
However, as the asymmetry in the forecast
range for the farm value change implies, the
price implications of these weather-related
uncertainties are more likely to push prices
2The farm value is the payment to farmers for the
quantity of farm product equivalent to retail unit, less
allowance for byproduct. Farm values are based on
prices at the first point of sale and may include
marketing charges, such as grading and packing, for
~me commodities.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
higher rather than lower. Supplies of fruits,
vegetables, the summer crops, and even meats
could be affected by weather. The actions of
pork and poultry producers are of particular
importance here.
Marketing costs for domestically produced
food. Food processing and marketing costs are
the major component of retail food prices,
accounting for about 60 percent of the retail
product value. This, of course, varies among
products. For some, such as cereals and bakery
products, these costs account for over 80 per­cent
of the final retail price. For another,
namely eggs, it is as low as 35 percent.
The farm-to-retail price spread, calculated
from the USDA market basket statistics, is a
measure of food processing and marketing
costs. These costs, arising from the nonfarm
sectors, closely parallel the rate of inflation. In
1980, these costs are expected to rise 9 to 12
percent with the current assessment of 10 per­cent
in line with the expected general rate of
inflation.
Labor costs, the largest component of mar­keting
costs ( 46 percent), are expected to rise
almost 10 percent because of higher wages,
increased employee benefits, and small produc­tivity
gains. The large increase in the CPI in
1979 has intensified pressure for larger wage
increases in the future. Unions representing
300,000 food industry employees will negoti­ate
contracts in 1980 and will probably insist
on substantial catch-up raises. Additional raises
are assured for workers who have semiannual
cost-of-living adjustment clauses in their con­tracts.
Also, some workers will benefit from
the increase in the minimum wage from the
present $2.90 per hour to $3.10 that was
effective on January 1, 1980.
Employee benefits-including paid vacations
and holidays, health insurance, private pen­sions,
and employer payments for social secu­rity
and unemployment insurance-have
generally increased more rapidly than hourly
earnings. In contract negotiations, employees
have insisted on more and better fringe bene­fits-
which are not subject to income taxes­rather
than wage increases. To maintain the
purchasing power of pensions for retirees and
to maintain existing benefits for workers, the
cost to the employer will rise with the general
inflation rate.
SPRING 1980
The cost of packaging materials (12 percent
of marketing costs) is expected to increase 9 to
10 percent in 1980, down from last year's
11-percent increase. Plastic packaging materials
will cost more in 1980, reflecting higher petro­leum
prices. The cost of glass containers and
paper packaging materials will also increase,
but less than the general inflation rate.
Food transportation costs (8 percent of mar­keting
costs) are expected to increase 10 to 11
percent, reflecting higher rail and truck freight
rates. General rate hikes and fuel surcharges
imposed in response to higher energy costs in
1979 will continue in 1980. Higher energy
costs will also affect retail store operators and
food manufacturers. The costs of lighting, heat­ing,
cooling, and processing foods will rise sub­stantially
because of higher prices for electric­ity
and natural gas.
Profit rates in the food industry are ex­pected
to decline slightly in 1980, especially if
there is a slowdown in economic activity. Food
manufacturers' profit rates are likely to decline
most, whereas increased competition from dis­count
and volume food stores is expected to
have a negative impact on food retailing
profits.
A decline in profit rates for food retailers in
1980 would follow 2 years of increasing pro­fits.
In 197 8, food retailing profits increased
more than 30 percent. In 1979, food retailing
profits are expected to increase about 13 per­cent.
In both 1978 and 1979, after-tax earnings
to sales ratios in food retailing have averaged
about 0.9 percent-the highest in recent years.
Fish and imported foods. The fish catch in
1979 was up substantially, stimulated in part
by high prices for other meats. The outlook for
1980 is for another large catch. Per capita con­sumption
of fish and seafood has been increas­ing
gradually in recent years, reflecting in­creased
demand. For this reason, with
increased supplies in 1980, fish and seafood
prices are expected to rise about 9 percent.
Coffee production is not expected to in­crease
substantially, mostly because a freeze in
Brazil damaged the 1980 crop. Coffee prices
have increased since last summer as a result of
the freeze and are expected to continue
increasing through 1980. This reverses a down­ward
trend in coffee prices dating back to
1977.
31
Retail food prices. Expected changes in
farm-level commodity prices, along with
increases in marketing costs, are the basis of
our retail price forecasts for major food groups.
In 1980, beef and veal prices are expected to
rise 8.2 percent, pork prices should decline 5.6
percent, and poultry prices are expected to fall
0.6 percent at retail. Egg prices are forecast to
decline 1.3 percent. These changes are largely a
consequence of developments at the farm level.
Dairy product prices are expected to in­crease
9.2 percent in 1980. In addition, higher
marketing costs should result in an 8.9-percent
increase in retail prices for cereal and bakery
products, an 8.2-percent increase in prices for
processed fruits and vegetables, and a 7 .4-per­cent
increase in fats and oils prices. Sugar and
sweets prices should increase about 8.0 per­cent.
The quarterly pattern of food price increases
in 1980 is expected to differ from that of 1978
and 1979. Moderate food price increases are
expected early in 1980 because of larger
supplies of pork and poultry, as well as some
slackening in demand as the economy slows.
More rapid price increases in the second half of
1980 may occur as the economy recovers and
meat output declines.
OUTLOOK FOR HOUSING
By Peter Treadway1
The current outlook for housing is basically
a function of five interrelated variables:
(1) Financial market conditions, particularly
mortgage market conditions, (2) the prospects
for inflation, ( 3) the general economic outlook,
( 4) the cost of housing as compared with con­sumer
income, and (5) the expected demo­graphic
demand for housing.
Financial Market Conditions
The current financial environment has
turned decidedly unfavorable for housing.
Although both long- and short-term interest
rates have been rising since 1977, the real
"squeeze" on housing finance began to be
noticeable only in 1979. Through September
1979, housing starts averaged 1.758 million
units at annual rates, a strong level but 11.4
percent below 1978.
Financial conditions generally impact hous­ing
in two ways-through yield and through
availability. Yields on mortgages , have been
climbing steadily upward. However, I believe
that it is an error to place much emphasis on
1 Vice president and chief economist, Federal
National Mortgage Association.
32
the absolute level of mortgage yields. In the
last year, yields on new mortgages have broken
through the 10- and 11-percent barriers with­out
any housing collapse. In fact with house
prices rising approximately 13 percent per year
and with mortgage interest tax deductible, a
10- or 11-percent mortgage has been a real bar­gain.
With mortgage yields reaching 13 to 14
percent on new commitments, mortgage in­terest
rates are just reaching a level where they
involve a real-pretax-cost in terms of the
overall rate of inflation. It seems safe to say
that, through September 1979 anyway, rising
mortgage rates have had a relatively modest
impact on housing activity.
The credit availability problem in the past is
what has had a large role in bringing housing to
a halt. In 1969-70 and 1973-7 4, savers found
money market rates more attractive than those
on savings deposits, and they diverted funds
out of savings and loans and mutual savings
banks, which are mainstays of the primary
mortgage market, and placed funds in short-term
money instruments such as Treasury Bills.
The process was called disintermediation. The
result was that for a while housing was credit
starved-mortgages in many areas were not
available at any yield-and housing stalled. To
some extent that has occurred on a lesser scale
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
in 1979. Despite the institution of money mar­ket
certificates, which allowed thrift institu­tions
to offer a 6-month certificate at rates
almost competitive with money market yields,
savings flows have been inadequate in 1979,
and this factor more than anything else prob­ably
explains why housing starts are off 11.4
percent.
Interest rates, including mortgage rates, will
likely be falling in the first half of 1980. But
don't expect the 9-percent mortgage to return
soon. Over the next 18 months we will be for­tunate
if mortgage rates drop even to 11 per­cent
for a 20-percent-down conventional mort­gage.
Once the crunch that we're now in eases,
mortgage money will be available but at yields
that on a historical basis are rather high.
The Prospects for Inflation
Owning a house or a condominium has been
a good investment in an inflationary economy
because (a) these are real goods that tend to
appreciate with inflation, (b) they are easily
leveraged, that is, a small amount of capital can
be used to fund a large investment (especially
effective when interest rates are below the
inflation rate as has been typical recently), and
(c) mortgage interest rates are tax deductible.
The outlook for housing then cannot be
divorced from inflation prospects because
home buyers now take inflation into account
in their home-buying plans.
In my opinion, the outlook is for inflation
to continue somewhere in the 8- to 10-percent
range where it is at present. I am not optimistic
about any significant lowerings over the next
few years. The following observations lead to
this pessimism:
1. The current inflation rate took 15 years
of monetary and fiscal excesses to create and it
is not going to be eliminated in 1 or 2 years.
Moreover, most sectors of society-wage
earners, home buyers, lenders, and even the
government-have adjusted to the expectation
of more inflation. This fact of adjustment
makes any abrupt downward change in infla­tion
all the more unlikely because it will be so
painful. The homeowners who borrowed at 12
percent-whether they realize it or not-have a
vested interest in having their houses appreciate
in value at a 10- to 15-percent rate.
SPRING 1980
2. The "old time medicine" of a big reces­sion
to cure inflation has been discredited
politically. The U.S. suffered the worst reces­sion
in 1974-76 since the Great Depression,
and it ultimately was a failure-the underlying
rate of inflation in 1979 was almost double
that of 197 4.
3. 1980 is an election year and traditionally
bad times and rising unemployment are the
wrong background for an incumbent seeking
reelection. There are limits as to how far or
how long the Federal Government can go with
its current tightening policy. It should be
noted, however, that the recent Federal moves
have probably spared the economy further
ratcheting up of inflation in the immediate
future.
4. There are several supply side factors that
will probably push inflation upward regardless
of monetary or fiscal policy. Three deserve
mention here:
(a) Energy. Oil prices give every
indication of rising faster than the
inflation rate over the next few years.
(b) Farm prices. Rising energy prices,
possible water conflicts with energy
programs in the West, and rising world
populations suggest that real wholesale
prices of wheat, corn, and red meat will
not decline in the next few years as they
did from 1950 to 1970.
(c) Environmental and safety regula­tions.
Despite the current backlash in
some quarters, these regulations are not
going to go away and they do add to
conventionally measured costs and
reduce productivity.
The Outlook for GNP in 1980
I will give only a brief sketch here, but in a
nutshell we do not see a Great Depression in
1980. Our view is that real Gross National
Product (GNP) growth will be negative, say at
-2.5 percent annual rate over this quarter and
next and that growth will gradually turn posi­tive
from there on. This would result in real
growth rates of 1.9 percent and -0.5 percent
for 1979 and 1980, respectively. Inflation as
measured by the GNP deflator, which is a bet­ter
index than the Consumer Price Index,
should run at 8.9 and 9.2 percent for 1979 and
1980, respectively. Thanks to the 1979-80
33
recession, the rate of inflation will be down
slightly in 1981.
The Cost of Housing in Relation to Income
Since 1970, house prices have consistently
outpaced consumer incomes (see table). Until
recently, at least, it seemed to some as though
this situation could go on indefinitely. Based
on our estimate for 1979, this trend has inten­sified.
However, it is my view that the relative
rise will increasingly be influencing the type of
new housing that is built.
The Demographic Factors That Support
a Strong Housing Demand
One factor that will keep housing activity
relatively strong over the next few years is the
strong underlying demographic support for
housing. These factors may be listed as follows:
First, the population of the United States is
currently growing by at least 1.6. million per
year. This alone adds to the potential need for
additional housing.
Second, a large demographic "bump" is
making its effect felt on American buying pat­terns.
This bump consists of the children of the
postwar "baby boom," who have been reaching
household formation and house-buying age.
For example, the peak birth year for the
United States was 1957, when 4.33 million
births were recorded. Annual births began ris­ing
sharply at the end of World War II, and
from 1954 to 1964 births in the United States
each year exceeded 4 million. Substantial
declines in the number of births only began in
the mid-1960's and, as a point of comparison,
total U.S. births were 3.1 million in 1976. As
the first "wave" of the baby boom reached
adulthood from 1970 to 1977, the 25- to
Family income and housing prices for selected years, 1963-78
Year
1963 .•............
1964 ......•.......
1965 ............. .
1966 ............. .
196 7 ............. .
1968 ............. .
1969 ...•..........
1970 ............. .
1971 ............. .
1972 ............. .
1973 ............. .
1974 ............. .
197 5 ......•...•...
1976 ......•.......
1977 ............. .
1978 ..•...•.......
19793 ............ .
Median family
income 1
$6,249
6,569
6,957
7,532
7 '9 33
8,632
9,433
9,867
10,285
11,117
12,051
12,904
13,719
14,958
16,009
17' 300
18,500
Median sales
price of
new homes 2
$18,000
18,900
20,000
21,400
22,700
24,700
25,600
23,400
25,200
27,600
32,500
35,900
39,300
44,200
48,800
55,700
4 63,000
Ratio of sales
price to income
(new)
2.9
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.9
2.9
2.7
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.7
2.8
4.9
3.0
3.0
3.2
3.4
1Economic Report of the President, 1978, table B-25.
2u.s. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, New one-family houses
sold and for sale, Construction Report C-25 for selected years.
3Preliminary figures.
48-month average.
34 FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
34-year age group experienced a 31.8-percent
growth-the highest percentage increase of any
age group, as recorded by the Bureau of the
Census. The 25- to 34-year age group is one in
which dramatic increases in headship rates are
normally recorded. The headship rate is derived
from the number of households in a given pop­ulation
divided by that population and can be
regarded as the propensity t~ form households.
This rapid increase in a segment of the popula­tion,
which coincidentally also has a high
tendency to set up new ·households, can be
expected over at least the next 5 years and
probably into the late 1980's. These facts have
important implications for housing. For exam­ple,
a recent study by the U.S. League of
Savings Assocations estimated that 63 percent
of first-time home buyers and 36 percent of all
home buyers were under the age of 30. Thus a
good part of the baby boom will be household
formation and house-buying age during
1979-83.
A third factor affecting housing demand is
the increased percentage of women in the labor
force. This has permitted the creation of more
households in the case of divorced and single
women and has also broadened many families'
ability to afford new and better housing.
A fourth demographic factor is the continu­ous
rapid growth in the age 65 and over popu­lation.
Increased prosperity has permitted a
greater proportion of this rapidly growing
group to maintain separate households. The
headship rate of this group is likely to continue
to be the highest of all age groups.
Outlook for Housing in 1980
A moderate recession, continuing inflation,
lower but still historically high levels of interest
rates, rising real energy costs, and strong under­lying
demographic demand-these are the key
ingredients for the 1980 housing picture. In
terms of new housing activity, I am a relative
SPRING 1980
optimist. Housing starts for 1980 could hit 1.6
million units, thanks basically to the demo­graphic
demand and a continued view of hous­ing
as a good hedge against inflation. Existing
home sales may come in at about 3.5 million
units. In the first 2 quarters, however, new
starts could average only 1.4 million units, with
a rise in housing activity in the second half of
the year.
The type of house built may show some
change from the past. The higher cost of
houses (relative to income) as well as higher
energy costs may work to halt the trend to
more square feet so evident in new house con­struction
in recent years. What we may see is
more attached housing, more condominium­type
construction. In the 1.6-million-unit fore­cast,
I am assuming that 600,000 will be for
multifamily (2 or more) units. About 150,000
to 200,000 units will be subsidized rental units
and the majority of the rest will be oriented to
condominium ownership rather than rental.
Also mobile home shipments may surprise
some people and could run in the 300,000-unit
area.
One fortunate aspect of the current situation
is that unlike 197 4 we do not have any major
overbuilding at the present time. Housing
inventories are modest-the 1979-80 recession
has been forecast for 2 years-and vacancy
rates are low. These factors mitigate against a
housing bust in 1980 on the scale of 197 4.
The big question is what happens after the
next 2 quarters of less than 1.5-million-start
housing activity. In the next 6 months the rate
of house price increases should slow down and
some markets may show an actual downturn in
house prices. But with the demographics as
strong as they are, there is a real possibility
that house prices may take off again in 6 to 9
months when money becomes available. The
moderate curtailment in housing activity over
the next 6 months can only eventually aggra­vate
the problem.
35
USDA/HEW RELEASE JOINT DIETARY GUIDELINES
Nutrition information and education have
frequently been hampered by the flood of con­flicting
statements and advice coming from
many sources, some of which are often ques­tionable.
As a result, the public is perplexed
and confused. To clarify the situation and pro­vide
the public with practical and consistent
nutrition information, scientists in the U.S.
Departments of Agriculture and Health, Educa­tion,
and Welfare developed a set of dietary
guidelines. These scientists worked for more
than a year and a half reviewing present knowl­edge
of nutrition and translating recent scien­tific
findings into easily understood statements.
The product of this joint effort is a set. of
seven dietary recommendations written for the
lay public and published in a booklet, "Nutri­tion
and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for
Americans." The value of selecting a variety of
foods to obtain essential nutrients and the
importance of maintaining ideal body weight
are emphasized. In addition, the booklet pre­sents
information as known today about the
relationship of specific dietary components
(such as fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sugar,
sodium, and alcohol) to specific diseases and
physical conditions. Suggestions are given also
to help people relate food choices to these
health factors.
Copies of the dietary guidelines are available,
without charge, from the Office of Govern­mental
and Public Affairs, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250; from
State cooperative extension nutrition special­ists
at land grant universities; or from public
health nutrition directors in State departments
of health.
TRENDS IN EDUCATION LEVEL OF WORKERS, 1973-78
The educational level of American workers
rose to an average of 12.6 years of school com­pleted
in March 1978, with 34 percent of
workers 16 years old and over completing at
least 1 year of college. This compared with 28
percent in 197 3.
The relationship between rising levels of
education and rising labor force participation
rates became more evident between 1973 and
197 8. Labor force participation rates for per­sons
with at least some college education in­creased
from 65.7 to 69.6 percent, whereas the
rates for persons with less than a high school
education declined from 47.6 to' 46.2 percent.
Much of the increased labor force participation
among persons with some college education
can be accounted for by women, whereas the
decline in participation among the less edu­cated
has occurred among both women and
men. A larger percentage of men in the labor
36
force (19 percent) than women (14 percent)
had completed at least 4 years of college in
1978. Among blacks this is reversed, with a
greater proportion of women than men having
completed high school and obtained a college
degree.
Although persons at all levels of education
had higher unemployment rates in March 1978
than in March 197 3, those with less education
showed a larger increase. The unemployment
rate of those with less than a high school diplo­ma
increased from 8.9 to 12.4 percent, whereas
the rate of those with a college degree in­creased
from only 2.1 to 2.5 percent.
Source: Brown, Scott Campbell, 197 9, Educational
attainment of workers-Some trends from 1973 to
1978, Special Labor Force Report 225, U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
FAMILY ECONOMICS REVIEW
MULTIPLE JOBHOLDERS
An estimated 1 out of every 20 employed
workers, or 4.5 million people in the United
States, were multiple jobholders in May 197 8.1
Although the number of persons with second
jobs was higher in 1978 than in the mid-1960's
and early 1970's, the multiple jobholding rate
(the proportion of the employed who held
second jobs) has declined somewhat because
the number of employed persons rose faster
than the number of multiple jobholders. The
rate was 4.8 percent in 1978 compared with
the prevailing rate of 5 percent during the mid-
1960's and early 1970's.
Approximately 56 percent of the multiple
jobholders held two wage and salary jobs in
such nonfarm industries as manufacturing,
trade, and service. About 16 percent held pri­mary
jobs in nonfarm industries and a second
job in agriculture. Those moonlighting in their
own nonfarm business accounted for another
19 percent.
Multiple jobholding rates are highest among
workers in middle-age groups (25 to 54 years)
and lowest among those in the youngest and
oldest groups. More whites (5.0 percent) than
blacks ( 3.1 percent) and Hispanics ( 3.3 per­cent)
held second jobs, as did more men (5.8
percent) than women ( 3.3 percent). The num-
1 The U.S. Department of Labor considers multiple
jobholders to be those employed persons who, during
the survey week , ( 1) held jobs as wage or salary
workers with two employers or more, (2) were
self-employed and also held a wage or salary job, or
(3) were unpaid family workers on the primary job and
held a secondary wage or salary job.
ber of women multiple jobholders has greatly
increased between 1970 and 1978 because of
the sharp rise of women in the labor force and
the proportion of women who hold a second
job. Women moonlighters are more likely than
men to work part time at both their jobs-48
percent and 20 percent, respectively. The num­ber
of men moonlighting has declined slightly,
although the multiple jobholding rate remained
highest for married men (6.5 percent) and low­est
for married women (2.9 percent). A
decrease in family size contributed to the pro­portionate
decline of married men holding
second jobs.
Multiple jobholding varies according to a
worker's industry and occupation. Professional
and technical workers and farmers and farm
managers are most likely to hold second jobs,
accounting for 7.4 and 7.5 percent, respec­tively,
of all persons in those occupations. By
industry classification, those in the education
services, the post office, and State and local
governments were most likely to hold second
jobs. Men employed on their primary job as
teachers below the college level and protective
service workers, such as police and firefighters,
had the highest moonlighting rate. The lowest
moonlighting rate for men was found among
operatives (except transport) and nonfarm
laborers.
Source : Rosenfeld, Carl, 1979, Multiple jobholding
holds steady in 1978, Special Labor Force Report 221,
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
MUL TIEARNER FAMILIES
Three out of every five husband-wife fam­ilies
reported in March 1979 that at least two
family members were earners during the pre­vious
year. Since 1970, the number of these
multiearner families has increased by 3 million,
mostly as a result of the annual increases in the
number and proportion of working wives. In
1979, 85 percent of the multiearner husband­wife
families had both the husband and wife
working (up from 81 percent in 1970), 13 per-
SPRING 1980
cent had the husband and another family mem­ber
(not wife) working, and 2 percent h