During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, a heightened awareness of hygiene permeated every aspect of daily life, from meticulous handwashing routines among restaurant workers to the careful handling of external packages. This period fostered an environment where public health and safety protocols were rigorously observed, establishing a new, albeit temporary, standard for cleanliness and vigilance across industries, particularly in foodservice. The collective experience of a global health crisis underscored the critical importance of robust hygiene practices in mitigating public health risks.
However, as the immediate panic associated with the pandemic has subsided, there are growing indications that some of this hard-won rigor in health and safety compliance may be receding. Recent health inspection data, unveiled by Hazel Analytics at the 2023 Nation’s Restaurant News Food Safety Symposium in partnership with Ecolab, sheds light on the evolving landscape of restaurant hygiene. This comprehensive report, drawing from a vast dataset of two million restaurant inspections conducted between September 2022 and September 2023, suggests a complex picture of both persistent challenges and an increased focus from regulatory bodies.
The overarching trend revealed by this analysis points to a significant shift in the focus of health department inspections, accompanied by a noticeable increase in the citation of violations. Loveleen Lohia, customer success manager at Hazel Analytics, observed this shift across 255 health departments, noting that “there has been an increase on the regulatory side on citing those violations much more than before COVID.” This suggests that while pandemic-era vigilance may have waned in some areas, regulatory bodies are, in fact, intensifying their scrutiny, aiming to enforce food safety standards with renewed vigor. This development raises important questions about the sustainability of hygiene practices and the effectiveness of oversight in safeguarding public health.
1. **Increased Regulatory Scrutiny in the Post-Pandemic Era**The period following the most intense phases of the COVID-19 pandemic has ushered in a distinct shift in how health departments approach restaurant inspections. This is not merely a return to pre-pandemic norms, but rather an evolution in regulatory focus and enforcement. Data analyzed by Hazel Analytics, encompassing two million restaurant inspections, clearly indicates that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has adopted a more stringent approach to compliance since the pandemic’s outset.
According to Loveleen Lohia, customer success manager at Hazel Analytics, health department inspection priorities have “shifted significantly.” This observation, derived from an analysis of 255 health departments, reveals a deliberate move on the regulatory side to cite violations with greater frequency and intensity compared to the period before COVID-19. This enhanced scrutiny underscores a commitment to reinforcing food safety standards that may have been temporarily relaxed or overlooked during the crisis, or perhaps a response to perceived declines in operator diligence.
The implications of this increased regulatory focus are substantial for the restaurant industry. It signifies that businesses are now operating under a more watchful eye, with inspectors more inclined to document and penalize non-compliance. This proactive stance by regulatory bodies aims to prevent potential public health issues and reinforces the importance of consistent adherence to food safety protocols. The industry is thus challenged to meet these elevated expectations, necessitating a renewed emphasis on internal compliance and training.
This heightened regulatory environment requires restaurants to be exceptionally diligent, not only in their daily operations but also in their preparedness for inspections. It suggests that health departments are not only identifying more violations but are also more consistently enforcing existing food codes. This proactive enforcement strategy serves as a critical mechanism for maintaining public trust in the safety of the food supply, reflecting a broader governmental commitment to public health in the wake of a devastating global pandemic.
2. **Inadequate Handwashing Stations: A Persistent Problem**Among the array of food code violations identified in the comprehensive health inspections data, inadequate handwashing stations emerged as the leading offender. This finding is particularly striking given the intense public health messaging and emphasis on hand hygiene during the peak years of the COVID-19 pandemic. The data reveals that nearly 6% of all inspections received citations for this specific deficiency, highlighting a significant and widespread challenge within the restaurant industry.
The prominence of handwashing violations points to a critical lapse in fundamental hygiene practices, which are cornerstones of preventing foodborne illnesses. Proper handwashing facilities, readily accessible and adequately stocked, are essential for employees to maintain personal cleanliness and prevent the transfer of pathogens from hands to food. The frequency of these citations suggests that either facilities are not up to standard, or that procedures for maintaining them are not being consistently followed.
This issue extends beyond mere facility availability; it often encompasses the proper setup and maintenance required to ensure effective handwashing. An adequate handwashing station involves not just a sink, but also hot and cold running water, soap, and a means for sanitary drying. Lapses in any of these components can render a station ineffective, leading to violations and, more importantly, increasing the risk of contamination.
The continued high incidence of inadequate handwashing stations as a top violation indicates a need for sustained education and enforcement. It suggests that while the concept of hand hygiene was widely internalized during the pandemic, the practical implementation and maintenance of proper handwashing infrastructure in restaurants may still fall short. Addressing this core issue is paramount for elevating overall food safety standards across the industry, ensuring that a basic, yet crucial, preventative measure is consistently upheld.
3. **Sanitization of Food Contact Surfaces: A Critical Concern**Beyond hand hygiene, the sanitization of food contact surfaces stands out as another pervasive and critical violation in restaurant health inspections. This category of infraction was identified as the second top offender in the overall FDA food code violations, accounting for 5.6% of all inspections. Its significance is further amplified when considering custom data from the 17 hospitality and foodservice brands attending the Food Safety Symposium, for whom it was the *top* safety violation, with a staggering 20% of their inspections receiving citations.
Food contact surfaces include any equipment or utensil that food directly touches, such as cutting boards, preparation tables, slicers, and serving dishes. Improper sanitization of these surfaces can lead to the survival and proliferation of harmful bacteria, viruses, and other pathogens, which can then be directly transferred to food items. This poses a direct and immediate threat of foodborne illness to consumers, making it a high-risk area for compliance.
The discrepancy between the overall FDA data and the symposium attendees’ custom data suggests that even among establishments with a vested interest in food safety, challenges persist in consistently meeting standards for surface sanitization. This could be due to a variety of factors, including inadequate training on proper cleaning and sanitizing procedures, insufficient cleaning schedules, or a lack of appropriate sanitizing agents. The higher percentage for industry attendees might also reflect a more self-aware or targeted assessment of their own internal challenges.
Addressing this violation requires a multi-faceted approach, emphasizing not only the physical act of cleaning but also the understanding of microbial risks and the correct application of sanitizing solutions. Regular monitoring, employee training, and the provision of suitable equipment and chemicals are all essential components in ensuring that all food contact surfaces are consistently kept free from harmful contaminants. This focus is indispensable for protecting public health and maintaining consumer confidence in the safety of restaurant food.
4. **Ensuring a Certified Food Protection Manager is Present**The presence of a certified food protection manager is a key regulatory requirement in many jurisdictions, underscoring the importance of informed leadership in maintaining food safety standards. The absence of such a manager was identified as a significant violation, accounting for 4.4% of overall FDA food code infractions. For the specific cohort of hospitality and foodservice brands providing custom data at the symposium, this figure was even higher, at 12.3% of their inspections.
A certified food protection manager is an individual who has demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of food safety principles and practices through an accredited examination. Their role is pivotal in overseeing daily operations, implementing food safety management systems, training staff, and ensuring compliance with health regulations. Their expertise provides a critical layer of protection, preventing potential hazards before they escalate into serious public health issues.
The consistent appearance of this violation, both in general FDA data and among industry-specific attendees, suggests ongoing challenges in ensuring that qualified personnel are always on-site or appropriately designated. This could stem from staff turnover, difficulties in scheduling training and certification, or a misapprehension of the regulatory necessity. The higher incidence among symposium attendees might indicate a particular struggle within larger or more complex organizational structures to maintain this certification across all their establishments.
The implications of lacking a certified food protection manager are far-reaching. Without a knowledgeable leader to champion and enforce food safety, other violations, such as inadequate handwashing or improper sanitization, are more likely to occur. Therefore, ensuring the consistent presence of a certified manager is not just a matter of compliance, but a foundational element of a robust food safety culture within any restaurant operation, directly impacting the safety and quality of food served to the public.
5. **Proper Cold Holding Temperatures: Guarding Against Spoilage**Maintaining proper cold holding temperatures for perishable food items is a fundamental principle of food safety, crucial for inhibiting the growth of pathogenic bacteria. Violations related to this critical aspect were observed in 3.7% of all FDA inspections. Furthermore, for the group of 17 hospitality and foodservice brands, this was a more pronounced issue, with 15.9% of their inspections citing infractions for improper cold holding temperatures.
Cold holding involves keeping potentially hazardous foods at temperatures below a specific threshold (typically 41°F or 5°C) to prevent bacteria from multiplying rapidly. When foods are held above this temperature for extended periods, they enter the “temperature danger zone,” where pathogens can thrive and produce toxins, significantly increasing the risk of foodborne illness. This makes adherence to cold holding regulations one of the most vital controls in a commercial kitchen.
The relatively high incidence of this violation, particularly within the specialized industry cohort, indicates that challenges persist in consistently managing temperature controls. These challenges can arise from various sources, including malfunctioning refrigeration units, improper storage practices, overcrowding of refrigerators, or inadequate monitoring of temperatures by staff. Even minor deviations can accumulate over time, compromising food safety.
Effective management of cold holding temperatures necessitates reliable equipment, diligent staff training on temperature monitoring and proper storage, and regular checks to ensure compliance. Addressing these violations requires a proactive approach, from equipment maintenance to staff accountability, ensuring that all perishable ingredients and prepared foods remain safely chilled throughout their time in the kitchen. This focus is indispensable for preventing spoilage and, more critically, for safeguarding the health of patrons.
6. **Food Obtained from an Approved Source: Tracing the Supply Chain**Ensuring that food is obtained from an approved source is a fundamental food safety requirement, albeit one that appears less frequently as a direct violation than some operational issues. This infraction, relating to the provenance of food products, constituted 3.5% of the overall FDA food code violations. While seemingly a smaller percentage, its implications for public health and supply chain integrity are profound, as it addresses the very origin of the ingredients consumers ultimately consume.
An “approved source” refers to a reputable supplier that operates under government oversight and adheres to established food safety regulations. Sourcing food from unapproved or unknown vendors can introduce significant risks, as there is no guarantee regarding the safety, quality, or handling practices of the products. This can include anything from meat and produce to dairy and packaged goods, where contamination or adulteration could occur at any point before reaching the restaurant.
Violations in this category suggest a breakdown in purchasing protocols or a lack of due diligence in vetting suppliers. This could be motivated by attempts to reduce costs, or simply a lack of awareness regarding the importance of supply chain transparency and accountability. Regardless of the reason, using unapproved sources bypasses crucial regulatory safeguards designed to protect consumers from unsafe food.
Restaurants must maintain stringent purchasing policies, verifying that all suppliers are licensed, inspected, and compliant with relevant food safety standards. Documenting these relationships and routinely reviewing supplier credentials are vital steps in mitigating the risks associated with unapproved sources. This commitment to a secure supply chain is an essential component of comprehensive food safety, ensuring that raw ingredients are safe before they even enter the kitchen for preparation.
7. **Food Separated and Protected: Preventing Cross-Contamination**Preventing cross-contamination is a cornerstone of food safety, and violations related to food being separated and protected directly address this critical concern. While not explicitly listed among the top five general FDA violations, this category emerged as a significant issue in the custom data gathered from the 17 hospitality and foodservice brands at the symposium, accounting for 8.3% of their inspections. Notably, approximately 66% of these particular violations fall into the high-risk foodborne illness danger category, underscoring their severe potential impact.
“Food separated and protected” refers to practices designed to prevent the transfer of harmful bacteria or allergens from one food item to another, or from contaminated surfaces to food. Common examples of such violations include storing raw meat above ready-to-eat foods in a refrigerator, using the same cutting board for raw poultry and vegetables without proper cleaning, or allowing dripping from raw products to contaminate other items. These seemingly minor lapses can have major health consequences.
The elevated percentage of these violations among the industry attendees, coupled with their high risk classification, indicates that cross-contamination remains a persistent and dangerous challenge, even for organizations actively engaged in food safety discourse. This suggests a need for continuous training, vigilant oversight, and clearly defined procedures to ensure that food handlers understand and consistently apply practices that prevent cross-contamination.
Effective strategies to address these violations include dedicated equipment for different food types (e.g., color-coded cutting boards), strict segregation of raw and cooked foods, proper labeling and storage protocols, and thorough cleaning and sanitization between tasks. Emphasizing these practices in daily operations is paramount. The high risk associated with these infractions demands immediate and sustained attention, highlighting that preventing cross-contamination is not merely a best practice, but an essential defense against foodborne illness, directly safeguarding the health and well-being of the dining public.
Beyond the general trends in hygiene violations, the COVID-19 pandemic unveiled a more insidious dimension of inequality within the restaurant industry, particularly affecting Asian establishments. As the world grappled with a public health crisis, Asian restaurants found themselves contending not only with unprecedented economic challenges but also with a resurgence of historical biases, which, as data suggests, were exacerbated through the very mechanisms intended to ensure public safety: health inspections. This section delves into the systemic biases that manifested during the pandemic, exploring how long-standing anti-Asian racism converged with the health crisis to disproportionately impact these businesses.
8. **The Disproportionate Impact of COVID-19 on Asian Restaurants**During the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, Asian restaurants experienced profound and disproportionate economic devastation. Early reports indicated that these businesses suffered significant losses well before widespread shelter-in-place orders were implemented across the United States. This premature decline in patronage and revenue underscored a troubling trend, signaling that factors beyond general economic downturns were at play.
Data from various sources corroborates this severe impact. The Pew Research Center, for instance, reported that the highest increase in unemployment observed between February and May of 2020 was among Asian Americans, with a staggering rise from 2.5% to 20.3%. Similarly, data from the New York Bureau of Labor revealed that unemployment claims filed by Asian Americans in a six-week period ending May 9, 2020, were 56 times higher than during the same period in 2019, a rate significantly exceeding that of white, Black, and Latinx individuals.
Numerous media outlets and empirical studies documented that Asian restaurants saw a sharp decrease in business as early as January 2020. This was notably prior to official government mandates regarding closures or social distancing. One poignant example cited was the owner of San Francisco’s Golden Gate Fortune Cookie Company, who described his business as “dead,” estimating an 80% drop in foot traffic since the outbreak began. Such accounts paint a grim picture of businesses struggling under the weight of an unseen force long before the wider economic shutdowns.
Furthermore, the hardships extended beyond financial losses to include acts of explicit racism and vandalism. Several Asian restaurants reported being defaced with racist graffiti and other forms of damage during the pandemic. Douglas Kim’s Jeju Noodle Bar in New York City was among those affected. This pattern of discrimination was undeniably linked to a surge in anti-Asian harassment and discrimination reported nationwide and globally, reflecting deeply rooted prejudices that resurfaced during the crisis.
9. **The Historical Roots of Anti-Asian Racism and Food Stereotypes**To comprehend the contemporary anti-Asian sentiments observed during the pandemic, it is imperative to contextualize them within a centuries-long history of discrimination. The notion of “Yellow Peril,” which posits East Asians as an enduring threat to whiteness, found renewed expression during COVID-19. This deeply ingrained fear and hostility have historical roots that trace back to the late 1800s in the United States, far preceding the recent global health crisis.
The California Gold Rush of the mid-19th century initiated the first significant wave of Chinese immigration to the U.S., with as many as 300,000 individuals eventually working in sectors such as agriculture, mining, and transportation. This influx, however, was met with hostility from non-Chinese, predominantly white workers who perceived Chinese laborers as a threat due to their willingness to work for lower wages. Anti-Chinese sentiment quickly escalated into widespread violence, with tragic events such as the 1871 massacre in Los Angeles, where at least 18 Chinese immigrants were brutalized and killed by a white mob, highlighting the extreme prejudice of the era.
The U.S. government not only failed to provide protection but actively codified this discrimination into law. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 marked a watershed moment, becoming the first federal law to prohibit the entry of a specific ethnic group and deny existing Chinese residents a path to citizenship. This legislation legitimized the persecution and forced removal of Chinese immigrants from mainstream labor markets, compelling many to establish segregated ethnic enclaves, known as Chinatowns, and develop labor niches such as restaurant work.
By 1924, further restrictive legislation, the Immigration Act of 1924, denied all Chinese and other Asian immigrants the right to become naturalized citizens and own land. These severe limitations made restaurant work within Chinatowns one of the primary economic opportunities for Chinese immigrants. In these often impoverished and segregated neighborhoods, they adapted and innovated, creating dishes that catered to non-Chinese palates, transforming Chinese food into a widely accessible commodity in America.
10. **The Evolution of ‘Unclean’ Stereotypes Against Chinese Cuisine**Despite the burgeoning popularity of Chinese restaurants, which became symbols of “abundance” and “democracy” offering inexpensive fusion dishes like “chop suey” and “chow mein,” anti-Chinese sentiments persisted and evolved. The phenomenon of affordable Chinese American food inadvertently reinforced racist stereotypes, depicting Chinese immigrants as subservient restaurant workers and associating their cuisine with notions of uncleanliness and inferior status.
This prejudiced rhetoric gained traction, propagating claims that Chinese restaurants used unsavory ingredients such as rats, cats, and dogs as their preferred meat. Media portrayals were often scathing and dehumanizing. The Daily Alta California in 1853 openly declared Chinese immigrants as “nasty foreigners” whose habits “should excite ineffable disgust, and turn the stomachs of the stoutest Anglo-Saxon,” implying their consumption of “Rats, lizards, mud-terrapins, rank and indigestible shellfish” while “flour, beef, and bacon” were available to white folk.
Further fueling these stereotypes, in 1872, Alexander Young of the Daily Alta California cynically stated that “Superficial artists have insisted that the reason why the Chinese are attached to California…is the abundance and superior quality of the rats of the golden gate.” Such grotesque caricatures were not confined to newspaper articles but also permeated advertising. A pest control product, “Rough on Rats,” featured an advertisement depicting “a Chinese man with his mouth open ready to eat a rodent,” personifying him as an “effective rodent exterminator,” cementing a deeply offensive image in the public consciousness.
The culmination of this pervasive bigotry was evident in publications like the American Restaurant magazine, which in 1927, warned readers that “eating chop suey in a Chinese-run, rather than white-owned restaurants…is a definite way to contract a disease – if not commit ‘chop-suey-cide.’” These narratives, initially propagated among white Americans, profoundly shaped perceptions of Chinese food, extending similar stereotypes to other Asian cuisines, marking them as inherently suspicious and unhealthy.
11. **Contemporary Manifestations: The MSG Controversy and Persistent Bias**The historical prejudices against Asian cuisine have unfortunately continued to manifest in contemporary discourse, albeit sometimes in more subtle forms. One prominent example is the long-standing controversy surrounding monosodium glutamate (MSG). Despite decades of scientific studies consistently finding no statistical links between MSG consumption and the purported symptoms of “The Chinese Restaurant Syndrome,” the additive, and by extension Chinese and Asian American cuisine, has been unscientifically blamed for a range of ailments from headaches to fatigue.
This persistent association of MSG with negative health effects, unsupported by scientific evidence, underscores how historical stereotypes of uncleanliness and foreignness continue to resonate within the public consciousness. It highlights a readiness to attribute perceived ill effects to Asian food, even in the absence of factual basis, illustrating the enduring power of biased narratives over scientific consensus.
A more direct and egregious example of this modern bias occurred in 2007, when New York television station CW 11 broadcasted an unsubstantiated news report claiming that a Chinese restaurant in Brooklyn served mouse meat. Despite the restaurant subsequently passing its health inspection and the complete absence of evidence for the claim, its owners endured numerous threats, while the television station never issued an apology. This incident demonstrates how powerful media can still amplify unfounded rumors, causing tangible harm to Asian businesses and their reputations.
These contemporary examples illustrate that the stereotypes of Chinese and Asian American food as unclean, unhealthy, or even dangerous persist, transforming from overt racist propaganda to more nuanced, yet equally damaging, forms of prejudice like the MSG scare or sensationalized, unverified media reports. The underlying bias continues to color perceptions, impacting both consumer choices and, as the present study suggests, even institutional oversight.
12. **The Overlooked Role of Government Institutions: Health Inspectors**While media narratives and public perception significantly shape biases against Asian cuisine, a critical, yet often overlooked, actor in this dynamic is the governmental health inspector. These individuals are not merely regulators but are official agents of the State, tasked with enforcing institutional policies regarding food safety. Their actions play a pivotal role in communicating to the public the level of compliance restaurants maintain with health regulations, particularly in jurisdictions where restaurant grades must be prominently displayed.
The potential for health inspectors to manifest biases, even unconsciously, is substantial. If these biases influence their enforcement decisions, it could result in systematic disadvantages against certain restaurants, exacerbating existing inequalities within the industry. This creates a structural form of inequality, as representatives of the State are directly responsible for carrying out and enforcing laws. The current study specifically addresses this critical gap, investigating how such potential biases shaped the economic livelihoods of Asian restaurants during a period of heightened scrutiny.
It is important to acknowledge that health code laws themselves generally do not contain explicit language related to race, ethnicity, or national origin of food. However, as legal scholars like Crenshaw (1989) have argued, a law or policy can be deemed racist if its enactment or enforcement produces racial or ethnic inequalities, irrespective of its race-neutral phrasing. This framework is crucial for understanding how seemingly objective inspections can become conduits for discriminatory outcomes, especially when underlying societal biases are amplified by events such as a global pandemic.
The implications are profound. Health inspectors, subscribing to or influenced by stereotypes of Asian cuisine as foreign or unclean, may inadvertently perpetuate and intensify racism against Asian food establishments through biased citations. These citations not only penalize businesses but also likely deter customers. For Asian restaurants, already contending with deeply ingrained public prejudices, the effects of such institutional bias can be multiplicative, solidifying negative perceptions and contributing to a cycle of disadvantage.
13. **Research Methodology: NYC Health Inspection Data and Synthetic Control**To rigorously investigate whether patterns of health inspection citations for Asian restaurants changed during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, a comprehensive research methodology was employed, utilizing data from NYC Open data, provided by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH). This dataset contained violation citations from every inspection conducted up to three years prior to the most recent inspection for restaurants with active status.
The study specifically focused on the period between December 2019 and February 2020. December 2019 was chosen as the month preceding widespread public attention to the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. The rise in Google searches for terms like “Coronavirus” rapidly accelerated during the week of January 19–25, 2020, marking the onset of pervasive news. February 2020 served as the latter cutoff, taking into account that many restaurants closed during and after March 2020, thus ensuring the analysis covered a period when businesses were still largely operational despite the emerging public health crisis.
Data aggregation involved creating a dataset that combined citation information by cuisine type. For each cuisine, average citations and the number of records (inspections graded) were calculated monthly from January 2017 to February 2020. Recognizing the potential for monthly fluctuations, the researchers opted to use cumulative citations—the average of monthly citations up to the corresponding month—as the primary outcome measure for their synthetic control analysis. This approach provided a more stable indicator of sustained increases or decreases in ratings, mitigating the impact of random noise or seasonal variations.
Addressing the challenge of finding a suitable comparison group, the study noted the limitations of a traditional difference-in-differences (DID) method, which requires a parallel trends assumption. Visual analysis of citation trends revealed no cuisine perfectly matching the pre-January 2020 trajectory of Asian restaurants. Consequently, the researchers adopted the synthetic control method, a sophisticated statistical tool designed to overcome such limitations by constructing an optimal counterfactual group.
14. **The Synthetic Control Method: A Robust Approach to Causal Inference**The synthetic control method, developed by Abadie and Gardeazabal (2003), offered a robust alternative to traditional comparative case study approaches, particularly given the challenges in identifying a natural control group for Asian restaurants. This innovative statistical tool effectively combines aspects of matching techniques, similar to propensity scores, with difference-in-differences methodologies, by constructing a ‘synthetic’ control group from a weighted combination of other potential control units.
In this study, the synthetic control for Asian cuisine was generated from a “donor pool” that included American, Caribbean, Latin, Italian, and Mexican restaurants. These cuisines were selected as they possessed sufficient citation information during the analyzed period. The process involved identifying a specific vector of weights (W*) that, when applied to the covariates (cumulative citations, monthly ratings, and number of records) of the donor cuisines, would closely replicate the pre-intervention trend of Asian restaurants up to December 2019.
This method offers several distinct advantages. Crucially, it accounts for the effects of other confounders that might change over time, provided these covariates are unrelated to the intervention (in this case, the news of COVID-19). Moreover, the synthetic control is entirely data-driven, meaning the researcher does not arbitrarily select a control group. Instead, the optimal control is empirically derived from the data structure and specified covariates, ensuring the comparison group most accurately resembles the ‘treated’ group before the intervention.
The mathematical framework behind the synthetic control allowed for the estimation of a counterfactual outcome for Asian restaurants—what their citation trends would have looked like in the absence of the COVID-19 news. By meticulously constructing this synthetic counterpart, the researchers were then able to compare its predicted trend with the actual observed trend for Asian restaurants after December 2019, thereby isolating the specific impact of the pandemic news on inspection citations.
15. **Empirical Findings: Increased Citations for Asian Restaurants**The empirical analysis yielded compelling results, indicating a significant and unique increase in health inspection citations for Asian restaurants following the dissemination of COVID-19 news. Initially, descriptive analysis of monthly citations (Figure 1 in the original study) showed that while some cuisines experienced decreases, Asian, Caribbean, and Italian restaurants exhibited consistent increases until February 2020. However, recognizing the inherent variability, the study prioritized the cumulative average of citations (Figure 2), which still revealed a more pronounced increase for Asian restaurants starting in December 2019.
The core finding emerged from the synthetic control analysis, as illustrated in Figure 3. This visual representation demonstrated that the synthetic control for Asian restaurants closely mirrored the actual citation trend up to December 2019, signifying a robust model fit. However, critically, a distinct gap began to appear and subsequently widened after December 2019, continuing through January and February 2020. This divergence unequivocally showed that Asian restaurants received a higher number of citations than predicted by their synthetic counterpart during the period when news of the coronavirus became widespread in the U.S.
To further validate these findings, a robustness check was performed using a three-month moving average of the scores, which yielded consistent results (Appendix Figure 1). A crucial placebo test, comparing the synthetic controls and actual citation numbers for other cuisines (Italian, Mexican, Latin, and American), confirmed that this pattern was unique to Asian establishments. Figure 4 and 5 clearly demonstrated that other cuisines either followed their synthetic predictions closely or even received fewer citations than predicted, showing no similar systematic increase.
The extent of this disparity was quantified: Asian cuisine experienced an increase of 0.66% in citations by February 2020, relative to its synthetic control. In stark contrast, Latin, Italian, and Mexican restaurants showed negative percentages of −0.29%, −0.73%, and −0.69% respectively, indicating that their synthetic controls predicted fewer citations than actually observed. This robust evidence strongly supports the hypothesis that Asian restaurants uniquely received more citations after news of the pandemic became pervasive, suggesting a manifestation of bias within the health inspection process.
These findings highlight a critical intersection where public health crisis meets historical prejudice, mediated by institutional practices. The data suggests that health inspectors, as agents of the state, likely perpetuated and exacerbated racism against Asian food establishments by issuing biased citations. This form of structural inequality is particularly alarming because it is enshrined within governmental enforcement, potentially deterring customers already primed by societal stereotypes to view Asian cuisine as unclean. The research underscores the urgent need for critical examination of how ‘race-neutral’ policies can inadvertently produce and reinforce existing racial and ethnic inequalities, demanding greater vigilance and accountability in public health oversight.
