Journal of Public Health

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 23–28 | Cite as

Assessing the variety and pricing of selected foods in socioeconomically disparate districts of Berlin, Germany

  • Nanette Stroebele
  • Pia Dietze
  • Peter Tinnemann
  • Stefan N. Willich
Original Article



The neighbourhood environment appears to influence people’s food consumption. Access, variety and pricing of foods play a role in the socioeconomic difference of fruit and vegetable consumption. This study compared differences in the number of grocery stores, variety of fresh fruits and vegetables, and food prices in districts with different Social Indices (SI) in Berlin, Germany.


The district with the lowest SIs was compared to the district with the highest SI. The number of grocery stores offering fresh produce, the variety of fresh fruits and vegetables, and prices of selected healthy and less healthy food items were assessed and compared.


The low SI district had more grocery stores per residents than the high SI district. Variety and prices of fruits and vegetables did not differ between the two districts, but milk and whole wheat bread were less expensive in the high SI district. For all grocery stores, selected foods with higher energy density had lower energy costs than low energy density foods.


Health inequalities in Germany might be less influenced by access to healthy foods than in other countries, but nutrient-rich foods such as fruits and vegetables have higher energy costs than high energy dense foods.


Environment Fruit and vegetables Pricing Accessibility Variety 


Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Cassady D, Jetter KM, Culp J (2007) Is price a barrier to eating more fruits and vegetables for low-income families? J Am Diet Assoc 107:1909–1915CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Chung C, Myers SL (1999) Do the poor pay more for food? An analysis of grocery store availability and food price disparities. Journal of Consumer Affairs 33:276–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Darmon N, Briend A, Drewnowski A (2004) Energy-dense diets are associated with lower diet costs: a community study of French adults. Public Health Nutr 7:21–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Deutscher Fruchthandelsverband e.V., DFHV (2009) Obst und Gemüse in Deutschland. BonnGoogle Scholar
  5. Drewnowski A (2004) Obesity and the food environment: dietary energy density and diet costs. Am J Prev Med 27:154–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Drewnowski A (2009) Obesity, diets, and social inequalities. Nutr Rev 67(Suppl 1):S36–S39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Drewnowski A, Specter SE (2004) Poverty and obesity: the role of energy density and energy costs. Am J Clin Nutr 79:6–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Drewnowski A, Darmon N (2005) Food choices and diet costs: an economic analysis. J Nutr 135:900–904PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Giskes K, Turrell G, Patterson C, Newman B (2002) Socio-economic differences in fruit and vegetable consumption among Australian adolescents and adults. Public Health Nutr 5:663–669CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Giskes K, Kamphuis CB, van Lenthe FJ, Kremers S, Droomers M, Brug J (2007) A systematic review of associations between environmental factors, energy and fat intakes among adults: is there evidence for environments that encourage obesogenic dietary intakes? Public Health Nutr 10:1005–1017CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hendrickson D, Smith C, Eikenberry N (2006) Fruit and vegetable access in four low-income food deserts communities in Minnesota. Agric Hum Values 23:371–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hernandez-Quevedo C, Jones AM, Lopez-Nicolas A, Rice N (2006) Socioeconomic inequalities in health: a comparative longitudinal analysis using the european community household panel. Soc Sci Med 63:1246–1261CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hosler AS, Rajulu DT, Fredrick BL, Ronsani AE (2008) Assessing retail fruit and vegetable availability in urban and rural underserved communities. Prev Chronic Dis 5:A123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hulshof KF, Brussaard JH, Kruizinga AG, Telman J, Lowik MR (2003) Socio-economic status, dietary intake and 10 y trends: the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey. Eur J Clin Nutr 57:128–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Jetter KM, Cassady DL (2006) The availability and cost of healthier food alternatives. Am J Prev Med 30:38–44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kamphuis CB, Giskes K, de Bruijn GJ, Wendel-Vos W, Brug J, van Lenthe FJ (2006) Environmental determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among adults: a systematic review. Br J Nutr 96:620–635PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kamphuis CB, van Lenthe FJ, Giskes K, Brug J, Mackenbach JP (2007) Perceived environmental determinants of physical activity and fruit and vegetable consumption among high and low socioeconomic groups in the Netherlands. Health Place 13:493–503CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Mackenbach JP, Stirbu I, Roskam AJ, Schaap MM, Menvielle G, Leinsalu M, Kunst AE (2008) Socioeconomic inequalities in health in 22 European countries. N Engl J Med 358:2468–2481CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Moore LV, ez Roux AV (2006) Associations of neighborhood characteristics with the location and type of food stores. Am J Public Health 96:325–331CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Powell LM, Slater S, Mirtcheva D, Bao Y, Chaloupka FJ (2007) Food store availability and neighborhood characteristics in the United States. Prev Med 44:189–195CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Robert Koch-Institut (2006) Gesundheit in Deutschland. Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes. Berlin, Robert Koch-InstitutGoogle Scholar
  22. Senatsverwaltung für Gesundheit, Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz [Senate Administration for Health, Environment and Consumer Protection] (2009) Spezialbericht 2009-1: Sozialstrukturatlas Berlin 2008 - Ein Instrument der quantitativen, interregionalen und intertemporalen Sozialraumanalyse und -planung. Berlin, Senatsverwaltung für Gesundheit, Umwelt und VerbraucherschutzGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith DM, Cummins S, Taylor M, Dawson J, Marshall D, Sparks L, Anderson AS (2010) Neighbourhood food environment and area deprivation: spatial accessibility to grocery stores selling fresh fruit and vegetables in urban and rural settings. Int J Epidemiol 39:277–284CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Turrell G, Hewitt B, Patterson C, Oldenburg B, Gould T (2002) Socioeconomic differences in food purchasing behaviour and suggested implications for diet-related health promotion. J Hum Nutr Diet 15:355–364CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. van Doorslaer E, Koolman X (2004) Explaining the differences in income-related health inequalities across European countries. Health Econ 13:609–628CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Winkler E, Turrell G, Patterson C (2006a) Does living in a disadvantaged area mean fewer opportunities to purchase fresh fruit and vegetables in the area? Findings from the Brisbane food study. Health Place 12:306–319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Winkler E, Turrell G, Patterson C (2006b) Does living in a disadvantaged area entail limited opportunities to purchase fresh fruit and vegetables in terms of price, availability, and variety? Findings from the Brisbane Food Study. Health Place 12:741–748CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Zenk SN, Schulz AJ, Israel BA, James SA, Bao S, Wilson ML (2005) Neighborhood racial composition, neighborhood poverty, and the spatial accessibility of supermarkets in metropolitan Detroit. Am J Public Health 95:660–667CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Zenk SN, Lachance LL, Schulz AJ, Mentz G, Kannan S, Ridella W (2009) Neighborhood retail food environment and fruit and vegetable intake in a multiethnic urban population. Am J Health Promot 23:255–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nanette Stroebele
    • 1
  • Pia Dietze
    • 1
  • Peter Tinnemann
    • 1
  • Stefan N. Willich
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health EconomyCharité University Medical CentreBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations