The Effects of Food Social Security: A Randomized Experiment on Higher Education Students

Last registered on March 26, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
The Effects of Food Social Security: A Randomized Experiment on Higher Education Students
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0015529
Initial registration date
March 19, 2025

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
March 26, 2025, 8:45 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
March 26, 2025, 11:08 AM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Paris School of Economics

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Paris School of Economics
PI Affiliation
Université de Montpellier
PI Affiliation
London School of Economics

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2024-10-18
End date
2025-12-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Despite increasing awareness of the importance of healthy and sustainable eating, students often face significant challenges in maintaining adequate and sustainable food consumption due to financial constraints. This randomized controlled trial examines the impact of a food voucher program, paired with workshops and social activities, on sustainable eating and other outcomes. The program, led by a local NGO, is implemented in the Paris area and involves 190 higher education students, divided into treatment and control groups. We hypothesize that the program can promote healthier and more sustainable food choices and improve health and overall well-being. It may also lead to improved environmental attitudes and behaviors, enhanced social relationships, increased civic engagement, and better academic outcomes.

This study will provide insights into the role of food voucher programs in addressing food insecurity and supporting sustainable consumption behaviors among young adults. Findings will inform policymakers about scalable interventions to improve dietary habits and social outcomes in student populations.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Apouey, Bénédicte et al. 2025. "The Effects of Food Social Security: A Randomized Experiment on Higher Education Students." AEA RCT Registry. March 26. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.15529-1.3
Sponsors & Partners

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The intervention involves a combination of financial support and educational activities aimed at fostering sustainable eating habits among students while addressing food insecurity. This multi-faceted intervention aims to address both immediate and long-term challenges associated with food insecurity while promoting knowledge and practices that align with sustainability goals.

1) Food Vouchers.
Participants in the treatment group will receive a monthly food voucher worth €125 for four months (January to April 2025). These vouchers can be redeemed in a curated list of partner stores that sell organic and/or local products and/or environmentally-friendly items and are mainly located in the 5th, 13th, and 14th districts of Paris. The selection of partner stores and eligible items will be finalized through a participatory process involving the students during the workshops. At this stage (on 11 March 2025), 15 partner stores have agreed to participate in the program, and this list of stores is not final. The vouchers aim to alleviate financial constraints and encourage the purchase of healthy and sustainable food products.

2) Workshops on Sustainable Eating
In November and December 2024 and January 2025, students in the treatment group will participate in a series of workshops designed to raise awareness about sustainable food practices. These workshops will include sessions on (i) the principles of sustainable and healthy eating, (ii) strategies for identifying and purchasing sustainable food products, and (iii) discussions to co-design the criteria for voucher usage, ensuring relevance and practicality for participants. The workshops will also emphasize collaborative decision-making, allowing students to propose and agree on criteria for store selection. By involving participants in shaping the intervention, the program seeks to increase engagement and empowerment.

3) Community Engagement Activities
To foster social interactions and build a sense of community, treated students will also be encouraged to attend regular group activities between the end of January and April/May 2025, running in parallel with the distribution of food vouchers. These events are designed to provide a supportive environment where participants can share experiences, discuss challenges related to food choices, and collaborate on solutions. Potential activities include cooking sessions that emphasize sustainable recipes, hiking in the forest and going to the cinema or the theater. By participating in these activities, participants are expected to build social connections, form peer support networks, enhancing both their knowledge and motivation to adopt sustainable eating practices.
Intervention Start Date
2024-11-03
Intervention End Date
2025-04-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Dietary habits (food access, food knowledge, nutritional quality, embedded GHG emissions footprint, share of organic consumption)
Health and well-being (general health, loneliness, depression, life satisfaction)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We build indices by combining several items using the methodology from Anderson (2008).

Food access is measured with an index based on two questions of the INCA 3 survey.
Food knowledge is measured with an index based on one question on the GHG footprint of dishes and four questions on nutritional facts, also asked in baseline.
Nutritional quality and embedded GHG emissions footprint are measured using a food frequency questionnaire in endline. The food groups will be those required to compute the comprehensive Diet Quality Index (cDQI). The share of organic consumption (in value) will be measured by analyzing the receipts associated to food purchases during one week in March and one in April.

Loneliness, depression and life satisfaction will be measured in endline using the same items as in the baseline questionnaire. Depression is an index built from several items.
General health is also a self-reported measure, based on a single item introduced in the endline questionnaire.

More details are available in the attached document.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Academic achievement (academic ranking, year completion)
Environmental attitudes and behaviour (support for environmental food policies, non-food-related pro-environmental behaviour)
Social relations (social support, trust)
Civic and political engagement (political self-efficacy, political participation, social engagement)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)
Academic achievement will be observed in administrative data after the end of the program. All the other secondary outcomes are measured in the endline questionnaire.
Except for non-food-related pro-environmental behaviour,, the corresponding questions were already asked in the baseline questionnaire. Except for the methodology from Anderson (2008).


More detail are available in the attached document.

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
There is one control group and one treatment group. The treatment group benefits from the intervention described above. The control group will receive 125€ in May 2025 to compensate their participation to the quesitonnaires and teh weeks of receipt collection.

Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
The randomization was done in office by a computer. We stratified the randomization based on 1) self-reported gender 2) whether students live in the area of the shops where the vouchers can be used 3) self-reported food expenditures at baseline and 4) self-reported number of relatives with whom you can discuss intimate matters.
Randomization Unit
Individual (= students)
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
No cluster.
Sample size: planned number of observations
195 students observed in baseline, probably between 180 and 185 in endline.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
99 students in the treatment group, 91 students in the control group in baseline.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
We assume 85 students in the control group and 95 in the treatment group in endline, anticipating attrition. A two-sided two-sample t-test with 5% error has a power of 90% to detect an effect of 0.5 of a standard deviation in the outcome. A one-sided two-sample t-test with 5% error has a power of 80% to detect an effect of 0.38 of a standard deviation in the outcome. This power may be higher when introducing stratum fixed effects in endline. It may be even higher for the outcomes that were also measured in baseline when introducing individual-fixed effects.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB of the Paris Scool of Economics
IRB Approval Date
2024-10-17
IRB Approval Number
2024-051
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information