Food security measurement in a global context: The food insecurity experience scale
Introduction
Food security is said to exist when all people, at all times, have physical, social and economic access to sufficient safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life [1]. Although food security is inherently multi-dimensional, one critical dimension is continued access to adequate food. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has undertaken a project called Voices of the Hungry (VoH) to develop and support a survey-based experiential measure of access to food, called the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES). The approach to measuring households' ability to access food is similar to that of other experience-based food security scales such as the US Household Food Security Survey Module (HFSSM), the Escala Brasileira de Insegurança Alimentar (EBIA), the Escala Latinoamericana y Caribena de Seguridad Alimentaria (ELCSA), the Escala Mexicana de Seguridad Alimentaria (EMSA) and the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) used in the United States, Brazil, Canada, Mexico and several other countries to monitor food security in the context of large national programs [2]. The innovation brought about by the VoH project is the possibility to calibrate the measures with the FIES or with any of these other scales and the thresholds used for classification, against a standard reference scale, thus ensuring proper comparability of the estimated prevalence rates and the possibility to compute consistent estimates at regional and global level, an essential feature for an indicator to be used in the context of global monitoring frameworks. Following a very broad consultation with many stakeholders, the FIES was chosen as the basis to compile indicator 2.1.2, one of the two indicators included in the global SDG indicator framework put forth by the Interagency and Expert Group on SDG indicators (IAEG-SDG) of the United Nations Statistical Commission to monitor Target 2.1 of the recently adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [3].
The FIES measures the severity of food insecurity modelled as a latent trait, broadly conceptualized as the condition of not being able to freely access the food one needs to conduct a healthy, active and dignified life. The measure is based on conditions and behaviors reported by responding to an 8-item questionnaire, the Food Insecurity Experience Scale Survey Module (FIES-SM; see Table 1), resulting from the inability to access food due to lack of money or other resources. These conditions have been selected, among the many possible ones that could be meant to be a direct consequence of the latent condition, as those holding the greater promise to be empirically valid in many different contexts.
The dichotomous (“yes”/“no”) responses to the FIES-SM questions, provide information sufficient to construct a one-dimensional measure, using the Rasch model. Based on the measured severity of food insecurity, each respondent in a representative sample is assigned a probability of being beyond a specified threshold of severity to compile an estimate of the prevalence rate of food insecurity in the reference population. Thresholds used for classification and, thus, prevalence rates of food insecurity, are made comparable across countries by calibrating the measures obtained from estimating the Rasch model parameter separately on each dataset, against a common, global reference scale.
The next sections describe the data used, the statistical modeling and the procedures developed to form the global reference scale and to calibrate the measures, and address validation of the food insecurity prevalence rates estimated in 153 countries for 2014–16.
Section snippets
Data
In proposing the FIES as the basis to compile an SDG indicator, FAO expects that national prevalence rates of food insecurity for monitoring progress toward SDG Target 2.1 will eventually be based on data from national surveys conducted by national statistical agencies in each country, in accordance with the principles that govern the definition of the global SDG indicator framework by the UN Statistical Commission. To develop methods for making prevalence rates across countries comparable,
Statistical modeling of FIES data to produce estimates of the prevalence of food insecurity at comparable levels of severity
The statistical model used for FIES data assessment and scale construction is the single-parameter logistic measurement model, commonly known as the Rasch Model [5]. The Rasch model assumes that the position of a respondent and that of the items can be located on the same one-dimensional scale and postulates that the log-odds of respondent r saying “yes” to item i is a linear function of the difference between the severity of the food insecurity condition experienced by r and the severity of
Development of a global reference and scale calibration
Use of a measure of food insecurity to inform indicators used in a global monitoring framework must ensure that estimated prevalence rates are comparable over time and across countries. To do so, severity thresholds for classification should be defined on a common reference scale and kept constant during the monitoring period, while prevalence rates computed by ensuring that severity measures and thresholds are expressed in the same metric. This can be done either by mapping the national
Scale stability and estimates of food insecurity prevalence rates with small samples
We were concerned that GWP effective sample sizes of non-extreme cases (i.e., after omitting cases that denied or affirmed all items, which provide no information for parameters estimation when using CML) might be too small, in many countries, to provide sufficiently precise parameter estimates. If that is the case, estimation of the scale using data from only one year could be rather unstable for those countries. With data sets from the GWP rounds of 2014, 2015 and 2016, stability over time
Setting thresholds and estimating prevalence rates for global SDG monitoring
For the specific purpose of monitoring progress against Target 2.1 of the SDGs, two thresholds have been set: one that identifies the level of severity beyond which a respondent would be classified as having moderate or severe food insecurity, and one that identifies severe levels only. The definition of a threshold of severity for the latent trait is, to a certain extent, arbitrary, as the only requirement for consistent classification is that whatever threshold is chosen, it is kept constant
Results and assessment of the consistency between FIES-based measures of the prevalence of food insecurity in the world and other development indicators
Based on the above procedure, FImod+sev and FIsev were computed for all countries for which FIES compatible data were available. National prevalence of moderate-or-severe food insecurity in 2014–16 in the adult population ranged from 2.3% to 94%. Severe food insecurity rates ranged from below 0.5% to 83%. Regional prevalence rates were calculated as the population-weighted averages of the prevalence rates of the countries included in each region. Across the continents, food insecurity is found
Conclusions
The analysis of FIES data collected over three years in more than 150 countries worldwide confirms that self-reported evidence on the occurrence of conditions typically associated with the inability to access food due to lack of money or other resources, gathered through simple interviews, can indeed inform the construction of a valid measurement scale of the severity of the food insecurity condition. Rasch model-based analytic procedures, consistent with the item anchoring and scale equating
Acknowledgements
Financial support for the Voices of the Hungry project has been provided by the United Kingdom Department for International Development (DfID) and by the Kingdom of Belgium through the FAO Multipartner Programme Support Mechanism (FMM). The comments, opinions and judgments expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not imply any official position by FAO, the FAO Statistics Division, or the funding partners.
References (17)
Food insecurity and mental health status: a global analysis of 149 countries
Am. J. Prevent. Med.
(2017)- et al.
Assessing food insecurity in Latin America and the Caribbean using FAO’s food insecurity experience scale
Food Policy
(2017) - Declaration of the World Summit on Food Security, World Summit on Food Security, Rome, 16–18 November...
- A. Coleman-Jensen, M. Rabbit, C. Gregory, A. Singh, Household Food Security in the United States in 2014, Economic...
- United Nations, Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, United Nations, Resolution adopted...
- Gallup World Poll,...
Invariant Measurement: Using Rasch Models in the Social, Behavioral, and Health Sciences
(2013)- et al.
Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences
(2015)
Cited by (127)
Rural household livelihood strategies and diet diversification in North Shewa, Central Ethiopia
2022, Journal of Agriculture and Food ResearchFood Insecurity and Mental Well-Being in Immigrants: A Global Analysis
2022, American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Recommended articles (6)
- Research article
A comparative study on machinability of cryo-treated and peak aged 15Cr-5Ni precipitation hardened stainless steel
Measurement, Volume 116, 2018, pp. 162-169 - Research article
An “ad-hoc” modified likelihood function applied to optimization of data analysis in atomic spectroscopy
Measurement, Volume 116, 2018, pp. 140-145 - Research article
Studying the rate of corrosion of the bottom of a jet loop reactor using digital close-range photogrammetric techniques
Measurement, Volume 116, 2018, pp. 153-161 - Research article
How do indicators of household food insecurity measure up? An empirical comparison from Ethiopia
Food Policy, Volume 47, 2014, pp. 107-116 - Research article
Can experience-based household food security scales help improve food security governance?
Global Food Security, Volume 1, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 120-125 - Research article
The measurement of household food security: Correlation and latent variable analysis of alternative indicators in a large multi-country dataset
Food Policy, Volume 68, 2017, pp. 193-205