Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023;12(1):10.
doi: 10.1186/s40066-023-00415-7. Epub 2023 May 5.

A systematic literature review of indicators measuring food security

Affiliations
Review

A systematic literature review of indicators measuring food security

Ioannis Manikas et al. Agric Food Secur. 2023.

Abstract

Measurement is critical for assessing and monitoring food security. Yet, it is difficult to comprehend which food security dimensions, components, and levels the numerous available indicators reflect. We thus conducted a systematic literature review to analyse the scientific evidence on these indicators to comprehend the food security dimensions and components covered, intended purpose, level of analysis, data requirements, and recent developments and concepts applied in food security measurement. Data analysis of 78 articles shows that the household-level calorie adequacy indicator is the most frequently used (22%) as a sole measure of food security. The dietary diversity-based (44%) and experience-based (40%) indicators also find frequent use. The food utilisation (13%) and stability (18%) dimensions were seldom captured when measuring food security, and only three of the retrieved publications measured food security by considering all the four food security dimensions. The majority of the studies that applied calorie adequacy and dietary diversity-based indicators employed secondary data whereas most of the studies that applied experience-based indicators employed primary data, suggesting the convenience of collecting data for experience-based indicators than dietary-based indicators. We confirm that the estimation of complementary food security indicators consistently over time can help capture the different food security dimensions and components, and experience-based indicators are more suitable for rapid food security assessments. We suggest practitioners to integrate food consumption and anthropometry data in regular household living standard surveys for more comprehensive food security analysis. The results of this study can be used by food security stakeholders such as governments, practitioners and academics for briefs, teaching, as well as policy-related interventions and evaluations.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40066-023-00415-7.

Keywords: Data; Food insecurity; Index; Indicators; Measurement; Scale.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial competing interests to disclose.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Literature searching and screening criteria
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Number of articles per journal (total number of articles: 78)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Summary of articles by country (Note: Some articles focus on more than one country, resulting in 89 articles by study area)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Summary of the publications by the type of food security indicators employed
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Summary articles by the number of indicators used per article (N = 78)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Summary of studies by country and indicators applied [Note: Multiple indicators could be used per study, and a study may cover multiple countries]
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Summary of studies by country and indicators applied [Note: Multiple indicators could be used per study, and a study may cover multiple countries]
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Summary of indicators used by country and data source [Note: Multiple indicators could be used per study, and a study may cover multiple countries]
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Summary of indicators used by country and data source [Note: Multiple indicators could be used per study, and a study may cover multiple countries]
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Summary of indicators used by data source [Note: Multiple indicators could be used per study]
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Summary of the retrieved indicators according to the level of analysis and food security dimensions
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
High frequency food security measurement for better food security analysis.

References

    1. Abu B, Oldewage-Theron W. Food insecurity among college students in West Texas. Br Food J. 2019;121(3):738–754. doi: 10.1108/BFJ-12-2018-0804. - DOI
    1. Ahn S, Norwood FB. Measuring food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic of spring 2020. Appl Econ Perspect Policy. 2021;43(1):162–168. doi: 10.1002/aepp.13069. - DOI
    1. Ahn S, Smith TA, Norwood FB. Can internet surveys mimic food insecurity rates published by the US government? Appl Econ Perspect Policy. 2020;42(2):187–204. doi: 10.1002/aepp.13002. - DOI
    1. FAO (2009). Declaration of the world summit on food security. Rome. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/Summit/Docs/Final_Declaratio... Accessed 24 Feb 2021.
    1. FAO (2006). Food Security: FAO policy brief. http://www.fao.org/forestry/13128-0e6f36f27e0091055bec28ebe830f46b3.pdf. Accessed 25 Feb 2021.

LinkOut - more resources