This is a collection of maps, layers, apps and dashboards that show population access to essential retail locations, such as grocery stores. Data sourcesPopulation data is from the 2010 U.S. Census blocks. Each census block has a count of stores within a 10 minute walk, and a count of stores within a ten minute drive. Census blocks known to be unpopulated are given a score of 0. The layer is available as a hosted feature layer.Grocery store locations are from SafeGraph, reflecting what was in the data as of October 2020. Access to the layer was obtained from the SafeGraph offering in ArcGIS Marketplace. For this project, ArcGIS StreetMap Premium was used for the street network in the origin-destination analysis work, because it already has the necessary attributes on each street segment to identify which streets are considered walkable, and supports a wide variety of driving parameters.The walkable access layer and drivable access layers are rasters, whose colors were chosen to allow the drivable access layer to serve as backdrop to the walkable access layer. Alternative versions of these layers are available. These pairs use different colors but are otherwise identical in content.Data PreparationArcGIS Network Analyst was used to set up a network street layer for analysis. ArcGIS StreetMap Premium was installed to a local hard drive and selected in the Origin-Destination workflow as the network data source. This allows the origins (Census block centroids) and destinations (SafeGraph grocery stores) to be connected to that network, to allow origin-destination analysis.The Census blocks layer contains the centroid of each Census block. The data allows a simple popup to be created. This layer's block figures can be summarized further, to tract, county and state levels.The SafeGraph grocery store locations were created by querying the SafeGraph source layer based on primary NAICS code. After connecting to the layer in ArcGIS Pro, a definition query was set to only show records with NAICS code 445110 as an initial screening. The layer was exported to a local disk drive for further definition query refinement, to eliminate any records that were obviously not grocery stores. The final layer used in the analysis had approximately 53,600 records. In this map, this layer is included as a vector tile layer.MethodologyEvery census block in the U.S. was assigned two access scores, whose numbers are simply how many grocery stores are within a 10 minute walk and a 10 minute drive of that census block. Every census block has a score of 0 (no stores), 1, 2 or more stores. The count of accessible stores was determined using Origin-Destination Analysis in ArcGIS Network Analyst, in ArcGIS Pro. A set of Tools in this ArcGIS Pro package allow a similar analysis to be conducted for any city or other area. The Tools step through the data prep and analysis steps. Download the Pro package, open it and substitute your own layers for Origins and Destinations. Parcel centroids are a suggested option for Origins, for example. Origin-Destination analysis was configured, using ArcGIS StreetMap Premium as the network data source. Census block centroids with population greater than zero were used as the Origins, and grocery store locations were used as the Destinations. A cutoff of 10 minutes was used with the Walk Time option. Only one restriction was applied to the street network: Walkable, which means Interstates and other non-walkable street segments were treated appropriately. You see the results in the map: wherever freeway overpasses and underpasses are present near a grocery store, the walkable area extends across/through that pass, but not along the freeway.A cutoff of 10 minutes was used with the Drive Time option. The default restrictions were applied to the street network, which means a typical vehicle's access to all types of roads was factored in.The results for each analysis were captured in the Lines layer, which shows which origins are within the cutoff of each destination over the street network, given the assumptions about that network (walking, or driving a vehicle).The Lines layer was then summarized by census block ID to capture the Maximum value of the Destination_Rank field. A census block within 10 minutes of 3 stores would have 3 records in the Lines layer, but only one value in the summarized table, with a MAX_Destination_Rank field value of 3. This is the number of stores accessible to that census block in the 10 minutes measured, for walking and driving. These data were joined to the block centroids layer and given unique names. At this point, all blocks with zero population or null values in the MAX_Destination_Rank fields were given a store count of 0, to help the next step.Walkable and Drivable areas are calculated into a raster layer, using Nearest Neighbor geoprocessing tool on the count of stores within a 10 minute walk, and a count of stores within a ten minute drive, respectively. This tool uses a 200 meter grid and interpolates the values between each census block. A census tracts layer containing all water polygons "erased" from the census tract boundaries was used as an environment setting, to help constrain interpolation into/across bodies of water. The same layer use used to "shoreline" the Nearest Neighbor results, to eliminate any interpolation into the ocean or Great Lakes. This helped but was not perfect.Notes and LimitationsThe map provides a baseline for discussing access to grocery stores in a city. It does not presume local population has the desire or means to walk or drive to obtain groceries. It does not take elevation gain or loss into account. It does not factor time of day nor weather, seasons, or other variables that affect a person's commute choices. Walking and driving are just two ways people get to a grocery store. Some people ride a bike, others take public transit, have groceries delivered, or rely on a friend with a vehicle. Thank you to Melinda Morang on the Network Analyst team for guidance and suggestions at key moments along the way; to Emily Meriam for reviewing the previous version of this map and creating new color palettes and marker symbols specific to this project. Additional ReadingThe methods by which access to food is measured and reported have improved in the past decade or so, as has the uses of such measurements. Some relevant papers and articles are provided below as a starting point.Measuring Food Insecurity Using the Food Abundance Index: Implications for Economic, Health and Social Well-BeingHow to Identify Food Deserts: Measuring Physical and Economic Access to Supermarkets in King County, WashingtonAccess to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their ConsequencesDifferent Measures of Food Access Inform Different SolutionsThe time cost of access to food – Distance to the grocery store as measured in minutes

Large white, Grade A chicken eggs, sold in a carton of a dozen. Includes organic, non-organic, cage free, free range, and traditional."

A collection of over 75 charts and maps presenting key statistics on the farm sector, food spending and prices, food security, rural communities, the interaction of agriculture and natural resources, and more. How much do you know about food and agriculture? What about rural America or conservation? ERS has assembled more than 75 charts and maps covering key information about the farm and food sectors, including agricultural markets and trade, farm income, food prices and consumption, food security, rural economies, and the interaction of agriculture and natural resources. How much, for example, do agriculture and related industries contribute to U.S. gross domestic product? Which commodities are the leading agricultural exports? How much of the food dollar goes to farmers? How do job earnings in rural areas compare with metro areas? How much of the Nation’s water is used by agriculture? These are among the statistics covered in this collection of charts and maps—with accompanying text—divided into the nine section titles.

The global food modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) market is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing demand for extended shelf life of fresh produce and prepared foods. The market, valued at approximately $25 billion in 2025, is projected to exhibit a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 6% from 2025 to 2033, reaching an estimated $40 billion by 2033. This expansion is fueled by several key factors. The rising consumer preference for convenient, ready-to-eat meals contributes significantly to the demand for MAP, as it effectively preserves product freshness and quality, minimizing waste. Furthermore, advancements in packaging materials, including the development of more sustainable and eco-friendly options, are driving market growth. The increasing focus on food safety and reducing food spoilage across the global supply chain further reinforces the adoption of MAP technology. Segment-wise, the fresh food application dominates the market, followed by delicatessen and baked goods, with considerable growth potential observed in all segments. The hard packaging segment currently holds a larger market share than flexible packaging, however, flexible packaging is experiencing faster growth due to its versatility and cost-effectiveness. Geographical analysis reveals a diverse market landscape, with North America and Europe currently leading in MAP adoption due to established food processing industries and high consumer awareness. However, developing economies in Asia-Pacific, particularly China and India, are witnessing rapid growth, driven by rising disposable incomes and a growing middle class with a greater emphasis on food quality and convenience. This trend suggests significant opportunities for market expansion in these regions in the coming years. Challenges include fluctuating raw material prices and the need for continuous innovation to address the evolving consumer preferences and sustainability concerns. Competition is intense, with major players such as Amcor PLC, Linde AG, and Sealed Air Corporation continually striving for innovation and market share. The market presents significant opportunities for companies focused on sustainable solutions and those catering to the specific needs of emerging markets.

The Americas Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) market, valued at approximately $XX million in 2025, is projected to experience robust growth, driven by a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4.29% from 2025 to 2033. This expansion is fueled by several key factors. The increasing demand for fresh and minimally processed foods, particularly within the fruits, vegetables, and meat sectors, is a significant driver. Consumers are increasingly prioritizing convenience and extended shelf life, which MAP effectively provides. Furthermore, the growth of the food retail sector, particularly e-commerce and grocery delivery services, necessitates extended product shelf life to maintain quality during transportation and storage. Technological advancements in MAP materials, such as the development of more sustainable and recyclable options (e.g., bio-based polymers), are further boosting market growth. While the market faces some restraints, such as the relatively high initial investment costs for MAP implementation and potential challenges related to maintaining consistent atmospheric conditions, the overall growth trajectory remains positive. The North American region, particularly the United States, is currently the dominant market segment, but significant growth is anticipated in Central and South America driven by rising disposable incomes and increasing consumer awareness of food preservation techniques. The segmentation of the Americas MAP market reveals a diverse landscape. Polyethylene (PE) and Polypropylene (PP) currently dominate the materials segment due to their cost-effectiveness and versatility. However, the increasing demand for eco-friendly packaging is expected to propel the growth of other materials like bio-based polymers. Within application segments, fruits and vegetables continue to be major consumers of MAP, followed by poultry, seafood, and meat products. The bakery and confectionery segments are also showing promising growth, indicating an expansion beyond perishable goods. Key players like Silgan Plastic Food Containers, Amcor Plc, and Berry Global Inc. are actively shaping the market landscape through product innovation, strategic partnerships, and investments in sustainable packaging solutions. The forecast period of 2025-2033 presents considerable opportunities for growth, particularly with increasing focus on food safety and preservation technologies within the expanding food industry. Key drivers for this market are: Growing Demand for Packaged Food Coupled with Increasing Awareness Towards Food Safety, Increasing Demand for Hygienic and Convenient Packaging. Potential restraints include: High Cost of the Process. Notable trends are: Polyethylene (PE)​ Material is Expected to Exhibit Significant Adoption.

The Americas Modified Atmosphere Packaging (MAP) market, valued at approximately $XX million in 2025, is projected to experience robust growth, driven by increasing demand for extended shelf life of food products and a rising preference for convenient, ready-to-eat meals. The market's 4.29% CAGR from 2019-2033 indicates a steady expansion, fueled by several key factors. The burgeoning food processing and retail sectors are significant contributors, along with the growing adoption of MAP technology across various segments including fruits, vegetables, and meat products. Polyethylene (PE) and Polypropylene (PP) are the dominant materials due to their cost-effectiveness and barrier properties, though the use of other materials, potentially including more sustainable alternatives, is expected to increase. North America, particularly the United States, commands a substantial market share due to its advanced food processing infrastructure and high per capita consumption of packaged foods. However, growth in Central and South America is anticipated to accelerate, driven by rising disposable incomes and changing consumer preferences. While increasing material costs and environmental concerns pose potential restraints, innovation in material science and the development of sustainable packaging solutions are likely to mitigate these challenges and further propel market growth. Competitive landscape analysis reveals key players like Amcor Plc, Sealed Air Corporation, and Berry Global Inc. are actively shaping market dynamics through product innovation and strategic partnerships. The forecast period (2025-2033) anticipates continued growth across all segments. The fruits and vegetables segment is expected to remain the largest, followed by meat and poultry. Growth in the bakery and confectionery segment is also projected, driven by rising demand for longer-lasting packaged baked goods. The increasing adoption of MAP technology in e-commerce and online grocery deliveries will also contribute significantly to the market's expansion. Furthermore, regulations promoting food safety and reduced food waste are expected to further bolster the adoption of MAP across the Americas. The market will likely witness increased competition, necessitating strategic partnerships, product differentiation, and focus on sustainability to maintain market share and drive profitability. Notable trends are: Polyethylene (PE)​ Material is Expected to Exhibit Significant Adoption.

https://map.feedingamerica.org/Every community in the country is home to people who struggle with hunger. Since federal nutrition programs don’t reach everyone in need, food banks help fill the gap. Learn more about local food insecurity by exploring data from Feeding America’s annual Map the Meal Gap study. When we better understand hunger, we can help end hunger.What is food insecurity and what does it look like in America?Food insecurity refers to USDA’s measure of lack of access, at times, to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members and limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate foods. Food-insecure households are not necessarily food insecure all the time. Food insecurity may reflect a household’s need to make trade-offs between important basic needs, such as housing or medical bills, and purchasing nutritionally adequate foods.Gundersen, C., A. Dewey, M. Kato, A. Crumbaugh & M. Strayer. Map the Meal Gap 2019: A Report on County and Congressional District Food Insecurity and County Food Cost in the United States in 2017. Feeding America, 2019.

The global market for mixed gas equipment in the food industry is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing demand for precise gas mixtures in various food processing applications. The rising adoption of modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) and controlled atmosphere storage (CAS) techniques to extend shelf life and maintain food quality is a significant factor. Furthermore, the expanding food and beverage industry, particularly in developing economies, is fueling demand for efficient and reliable mixed gas systems. The market is segmented by application (snack foods, beverages, and other applications) and equipment type (manual, semi-automatic, and fully automatic). Fully automatic systems are gaining traction due to their enhanced precision, efficiency, and reduced labor costs. While the initial investment for these systems is higher, the long-term benefits in terms of improved product quality and reduced waste are compelling businesses to adopt them. The market is witnessing a shift towards more sophisticated gas blending technologies, enabling precise control over gas composition for optimal food preservation. The major players in this market, including L Ronning, Ametek, Phoenix, and others, are focusing on innovation and strategic partnerships to enhance their market share. Geographical analysis reveals significant regional variations in market growth, with North America and Europe currently dominating due to established food processing industries and higher adoption rates of advanced technologies. However, Asia-Pacific is poised for substantial growth in the coming years driven by rapid industrialization and rising consumer demand for processed foods. Regulatory changes related to food safety and preservation are also influencing the adoption of mixed gas equipment, particularly in regions with stringent food safety standards. Despite the positive outlook, challenges such as high initial capital costs and the need for skilled operators could potentially restrain market expansion in some segments. However, ongoing technological advancements and cost reductions are expected to mitigate these challenges over the forecast period (2025-2033).

640 Global import shipment records of Frozen Food with prices, volume & current Buyer's suppliers relationships based on actual Global export trade database.

There is more to housing affordability than the rent or mortgage you pay. Transportation costs are the second-biggest budget item for most families, but it can be difficult for people to fully factor transportation costs into decisions about where to live and work. The Location Affordability Index (LAI) is a user-friendly source of standardized data at the neighborhood (census tract) level on combined housing and transportation costs to help consumers, policymakers, and developers make more informed decisions about where to live, work, and invest. Compare eight household profiles (see table below) —which vary by household income, size, and number of commuters—and see the impact of the built environment on affordability in a given location while holding household demographics constant.*$11,880 for a single person household in 2016 according to US Dept. of Health and Human Services: https://aspe.hhs.gov/computations-2016-poverty-guidelinesThis layer is symbolized by the percentage of housing and transportation costs as a percentage of income for the Median-Income Family profile, but the costs as a percentage of income for all household profiles are listed in the pop-up:Also available is a gallery of 8 web maps (one for each household profile) all symbolized the same way for easy comparison: Median-Income Family, Very Low-Income Individual, Working Individual, Single Professional, Retired Couple, Single-Parent Family, Moderate-Income Family, and Dual-Professional Family.An accompanying story map provides side-by-side comparisons and additional context.--Variables used in HUD's calculations include 24 measures such as people per household, average number of rooms per housing unit, monthly housing costs (mortgage/rent as well as utility and maintenance expenses), average number of cars per household, median commute distance, vehicle miles traveled per year, percent of trips taken on transit, street connectivity and walkability (measured by block density), and many more.To learn more about the Location Affordability Index (v.3) visit: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/location-affordability-index/. There you will find some background and an FAQ page, which includes the question:"Manhattan, San Francisco, and downtown Boston are some of the most expensive places to live in the country, yet the LAI shows them as affordable for the typical regional household. Why?" These areas have some of the lowest transportation costs in the country, which helps offset the high cost of housing. The area median income (AMI) in these regions is also high, so when costs are shown as a percent of income for the typical regional household these neighborhoods appear affordable; however, they are generally unaffordable to households earning less than the AMI.Date of Coverage: 2012-2016 Date Released: March 2019Date Downloaded from HUD Open Data: 4/18/19Further Documentation:LAI Version 3 Data and MethodologyLAI Version 3 Technical Documentation_**The documentation below is in reference to this items placement in the NM Supply Chain Data Hub. The documentation is of use to understanding the source of this item, and how to reproduce it for updates**

Title: Location Affordability Index - NMCDC Copy

Summary: This layer contains the Location Affordability Index from U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - standardized household, housing, and transportation cost estimates by census tract for 8 household profiles.

Notes: This map is copied from source map: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=de341c1338c5447da400c4e8c51ae1f6, created by dianaclavery_uo, and identified in Living Atlas.

Prepared by: dianaclavery_uo, copied by EMcRae_NMCDC

Source: This map is copied from source map: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=de341c1338c5447da400c4e8c51ae1f6, created by dianaclavery_uo, and identified in Living Atlas. Check the source documentation or other details above for more information about data sources.

Feature Service: https://nmcdc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=447a461f048845979f30a2478b9e65bb

UID: 73

Data Requested: Family income spent on basic need

Method of Acquisition: Search for Location Affordability Index in the Living Atlas. Make a copy of most recent map available. To update this map, copy the most recent map available. In a new tab, open the AGOL Assistant Portal tool and use the functions in the portal to copy the new maps JSON, and paste it over the old map (this map with item id

Date Acquired: Map copied on May 10, 2022

Priority rank as Identified in 2022 (scale of 1 being the highest priority, to 11 being the lowest priority): 6

Tags: PENDING

https://map.feedingamerica.org/Every community in the country is home to people who struggle with hunger. Since federal nutrition programs don’t reach everyone in need, food banks help fill the gap. Learn more about local food insecurity by exploring data from Feeding America’s annual Map the Meal Gap study. When we better understand hunger, we can help end hunger.What is food insecurity and what does it look like in America?Food insecurity refers to USDA’s measure of lack of access, at times, to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members and limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate foods. Food-insecure households are not necessarily food insecure all the time. Food insecurity may reflect a household’s need to make trade-offs between important basic needs, such as housing or medical bills, and purchasing nutritionally adequate foods.Gundersen, C., A. Dewey, M. Kato, A. Crumbaugh & M. Strayer. Map the Meal Gap 2019: A Report on County and Congressional District Food Insecurity and County Food Cost in the United States in 2017. Feeding America, 2019.