No abstract

No abstract

Food insecurity is a daily reality for hundreds of millions of people around the world. Although its most extreme manifestations are often obvious, many other households facing constraints in their access to food are less identifiable. Operational agencies lack a method for differentiating households at varying degrees of food insecurity in order to target and evaluate their interventions. This chapter provides an overview of a set of papers associated with a research initiative that seeks to identify more precise, yet simple, measures of household food insecurity. The overview highlights three main conceptual developments associated with practical approaches to measuring constraints in access to food: 1) a shift from using measures of food availability and utilization to measuring "inadequate access"; 2) a shift from a focus on objective to subjective measures; and 3) a growing emphasis on fundamental measurement as opposed to reliance on distal, proxy measures. Further research is needed regarding 1) how well measures of household food insecurity designed for chronically food-insecure contexts capture the processes leading to, and experience of, acute food insecurity, 2) the impact of short-term shocks, such as major floods or earthquake, on household behaviors that determine responses to food security questions, 3) better measurement of the interaction between severity and frequency of household food insecurity behaviors, and 4) the determination of whether an individual's response to survey questions can be representative of the food insecurity experiences of all members of the household.

ObjectiveTo analyse the health and environmental implications of adopting national food based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) at a national level and compared with global health and environmental targets.DesignModelling study.Setting85 countries.ParticipantsPopulation of 85 countries.Main outcome measuresA graded coding method was developed and used to extract quantitative recommendations from 85 FBDGs. The health and environmental impacts of these guidelines were assessed by using a comparative risk assessment of deaths from chronic diseases and a set of country specific environmental footprints for greenhouse gas emissions, freshwater use, cropland use, and fertiliser application. For comparison, the impacts of adopting the global dietary recommendations of the World Health Organization and the EAT-Lancet Commission on Healthy Diets from Sustainable Food Systems were also analysed. Each guideline’s health and sustainability implications were assessed by modelling its adoption at both the national level and globally, and comparing the impacts to global health and environmental targets, including the Action Agenda on Non-Communicable Diseases, the Paris Climate Agreement, the Aichi biodiversity targets related to land use, and the sustainable development goals and planetary boundaries related to freshwater use and fertiliser application.ResultsAdoption of national FBDGs was associated with reductions in premature mortality of 15% on average (95% uncertainty interval 13% to 16%) and mixed changes in environmental resource demand, including a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 13% on average (regional range −34% to 35%). When universally adopted globally, most of the national guidelines (83, 98%) were not compatible with at least one of the global health and environmental targets. About a third of the FBDGs (29, 34%) were incompatible with the agenda on non-communicable diseases, and most (57 to 74, 67% to 87%) were incompatible with the Paris Climate Agreement and other environmental targets. In comparison, adoption of the WHO recommendations was associated with similar health and environmental changes, whereas adoption of the EAT-Lancet recommendations was associated with 34% greater reductions in premature mortality, more than three times greater reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and general attainment of the global health and environmental targets. As an example, the FBDGs of the UK, US, and China were incompatible with the climate change, land use, freshwater, and nitrogen targets, and adopting guidelines in line with the EAT-Lancet recommendation could increase the number of avoided deaths from 78 000 (74 000 to 81 000) to 104 000 (96 000 to 112 000) in the UK, from 480 000 (445 000 to 516 000) to 585 000 (523 000 to 646 000) in the USA, and from 1 149 000 (1 095 000 to 1 204 000) to 1 802 000 (1 664 000 to 1 941 000) in China.ConclusionsThis analysis suggests that national guidelines could be both healthier and more sustainable. Providing clearer advice on limiting in most contexts the consumption of animal source foods, in particular beef and dairy, was found to have the greatest potential for increasing the environmental sustainability of dietary guidelines, whereas increasing the intake of whole grains, fruits and vegetables, nuts and seeds, and legumes, reducing the intake of red and processed meat, and highlighting the importance of attaining balanced energy intake and weight levels were associated with most of the additional health benefits. The health results were based on observational data and assuming a causal relation between dietary risk factors and health outcomes. The certainty of evidence for these relations is mostly graded as moderate in existing meta-analyses.

This paper hypothesizes that there is a common "core" to the household food insecurity experience that goes beyond insufficient food quantity and that transcends culture. The paper for the first time employs an exploratory approach to identify cross-cultural commonalities of the food insecurity experience as captured in 22 scales and related ethnographies derived from 15 different countries. The constant comparative method was used to code elements of the food insecurity experience expressed in the ethnographies and to regroup them into domains and subdomains. This typology was then applied to ascertain which experiential domains and subdomains were measured (or not) across all 22 studies. Survey data from 11 of the studies were then analyzed to assess similarities in the relative frequency with which culturally diverse households responded to questionnaire items related to these common domains/subdomains. The analysis confirmed that insufficient food quantity, inadequate food quality, and uncertainty and worry about food were a significant part of the food insecurity experience in all sampled cultures; concerns about social unacceptability emerged in all ethnographic accounts. Several subdomains were identified, such as concern over food safety and meal pattern disruption, with potentially important consequences for physical and psychological well-being. The comparative survey data showed that the relative frequency at which populations responded to domain-related questionnaire items was similar across all but a few cultures. Future food insecurity assessments should consider these core domains and subdomains as the starting point for measures that can generate rich information to inform food security policies and programs.