scholarly journals Food and You 2: Wales Wave 1-2 Key Findings

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr Beth Armstrong ◽  
Lucy King ◽  
Ayla Ibrahimi ◽  
Robin Clifford ◽  
Mark Jitlal
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Sample Survey ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Consumer Knowledge ◽  
Official Statistic ◽  
Food Shopping ◽  
Household Food ◽  
Food Standards ◽  
Eating Out

Food and You 2 is a biannual representative sample survey, recognised as an official statistic, commissioned by the Food Standards Agency (FSA). The survey measures selfreported consumer knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to food safety and other food issues amongst adults in Wales, England, and Northern Ireland. Food and You 2 uses a methodology, known as ‘push-to-web’, which is primarily carried out online. Fieldwork for Food and You 2: Wave 1 was conducted between 29th July and 6th October 2020. In Wales, 2,100 adults from 1,579 households completed the survey, with 68% of respondents completing the survey online. A total of 9,319 adults from 6,408 households across Wales, England, and Northern Ireland completed the survey. Fieldwork for Food and You 2: Wave 2 was conducted between 20th November 2020 and 21st January 2021. In Wales, 1,366 adults from 1,042 households completed the survey, with 67% of respondents completing the survey online. A total of 5,900 adults from 3,955 households across Wales, England, and Northern Ireland completed the survey. This survey was conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic and so it records the reported attitudes and behaviours under unusual circumstances which have had a significant impact on how and where people buy and eat food, and on levels of household food insecurity. The modules presented in this report include ‘Food we can trust’, ‘Concerns about food’, ’Food security’, ‘Food shopping’, ‘Eating out and takeaways’, ‘Food hypersensitivities’ and ‘Eating at home’. Findings presented in this report refer to data collected in Wales unless otherwise specified.

scholarly journals Food and You 2: Northern Ireland. Wave 1-2 Key Findings

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr Beth Armstrong ◽  
Lucy King ◽  
Ayla Ibrahimi ◽  
Robin Clifford ◽  
Mark Jitlal
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Sample Survey ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Consumer Knowledge ◽  
Official Statistic ◽  
Food Shopping ◽  
Household Food ◽  
Food Standards ◽  
Eating Out

Food and You 2 is a biannual representative sample survey, recognised as an official statistic, commissioned by the Food Standards Agency (FSA). The survey measures selfreported consumer knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to food safety and other food issues amongst adults in Wales, England, and Northern Ireland. Food and You 2 uses a methodology, known as ‘push-to-web’, which is primarily carried out online. Fieldwork for Food and You 2: Wave 1 was conducted between 29th July and 6th October 2020. In Northern Ireland, 2,079 adults from 1,389 households completed the survey, with 57% of respondents completing the survey online. A total of 9,319 adults from 6,408 households across Northern Ireland, Wales, and England completed the survey. Fieldwork for Food and You 2: Wave 2 was conducted between 20th November 2020 and 21st January 2021. In Northern Ireland, 1,566 adults from 997 households completed the survey, with 60% of respondents completing the survey online. A total of 5,900 adults from 3,955 households across Northern Ireland, Wales, and England completed the survey. This survey was conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic and so it records the reported attitudes and behaviours under unusual circumstances which have had a significant impact on how and where people buy and eat food, and on levels of household food insecurity. The modules presented in this report include ‘Food we can trust’, ‘Concerns about food’, ’Food security’, ‘Food shopping’, ‘Eating out and takeaways’, ‘Food hypersensitivities’ and ‘Eating at home’. Findings presented in this report refer to data collected in Northern Ireland unless otherwise specified.

scholarly journals Food and You 2 - Wave 2

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth Armstrong ◽  
Lucy King ◽  
Robin Clifford ◽  
Mark Jitlal
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Food Allergy ◽  
Food Security ◽  
Food Safety ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Food Supply ◽  
Consumer Knowledge ◽  
Food Supply Chain ◽  
Eating Out

Food and You 2 is a biannual survey which measures self-reported consumer knowledge, attitudes and behaviours related to food safety and other food issues amongst adults in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The survey is primarily carried out online using a methodology known as ‘push-to-web’. Fieldwork was conducted between 20 November 2020 and 21 January 2021. A total of 5,900 adults from 3,955 households across England, Wales and Northern Ireland completed the survey. Topics covered in the Food and You 2: Wave 2 Key Findings report include: Trust in FSA and the food supply chain Concerns about food Food security Eating out and takeaways Food allergy, intolerance, and other hypersensitivities Food safety in the home

scholarly journals Refinement of the Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale: Recommendation for a 14-item EBIA

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Maria Segall-Corrêa ◽  
Letícia Marin-León ◽  
Hugo Melgar-Quiñonez ◽  
Rafael Pérez-Escamilla
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Internal Validity ◽  
Sample Survey ◽  
Measurement Scale ◽  
Household Food Security ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Household Food ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
The Impact

OBJECTIVE: To review and refine Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale structure. METHODS: The study analyzed the impact of removing the item "adult lost weight" and one of two possibly redundant items on Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale psychometric behavior using the one-parameter logistic (Rasch) model. Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale psychometric behavior was analyzed with respect to acceptable adjustment values ranging from 0.7 to 1.3, and to severity scores of the items with theoretically expected gradients. The socioeconomic and food security indicators came from the 2004 National Household Sample Survey, which obtained complete answers to Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale items from 112,665 households. RESULTS: Removing the items "adult reduced amount..." followed by "adult ate less..." did not change the infit of the remaining items, except for "adult lost weight", whose infit increased from 1.21 to 1.56. The internal consistency and item severity scores did not change when "adult ate less" and one of the two redundant items were removed. CONCLUSION: Brazilian Household Food Insecurity Measurement Scale reanalysis reduced the number of scale items from 16 to 14 without changing its internal validity. Its use as a nationwide household food security measure is strongly recommended.

scholarly journals Preparing for COVID-19: Household food insecurity and vulnerability to shocks in Nairobi, Kenya

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0259139
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Opiyo Onyango ◽  
Jonathan Crush ◽  
Samuel Owuor
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Multilevel Modelling ◽  
Household Food Security ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Preparedness Plan ◽  
Household Food ◽  
New Policies ◽  
Social Safety Nets

An understanding of the types of shocks that disrupt and negatively impact urban household food security is of critical importance to develop relevant and targeted food security emergency preparedness policies and responses, a fact magnified by the current COVID-19 pandemic. This gap is addressed by the current study which draws from the Hungry Cities Partnership (HCP) city-wide household food insecurity survey of Nairobi city in Kenya. It uses both descriptive statistics and multilevel modelling using General Linear Mixed Models (GLMM) to examine the relationship between household food security and 16 different shocks experienced in the six months prior to the administration of the survey. The findings showed that only 29% of surveyed households were completely food secure. Of those experiencing some level of food insecurity, more experienced economic (55%) than sociopolitical (16%) and biophysical (10%) shocks. Economic shocks such as food price increases, loss of employment, and reduced income were all associated with increased food insecurity. Coupled with the lack of functioning social safety nets in Nairobi, households experiencing shocks and emergencies experience serious food insecurity and related health effects. In this context, the COVID-19 pandemic is likely to have a major negative economic impact on many vulnerable urban households. As such, there is need for new policies on urban food emergencies with a clear emergency preparedness plan for responding to major economic and other shocks that target the most vulnerable.

scholarly journals Association between Household Food Insecurity and Asthma in Korean Adults

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. 2115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seo-Hee Park ◽  
Byung-Jin Park ◽  
Dong-Hyuk Jung ◽  
Yu-Jin Kwon
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Confidence Intervals ◽  
Household Food Security ◽  
Asthma Prevalence ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Confounding Factors ◽  
Odds Ratios ◽  
Korean Adults ◽  
Household Food

Household food insecurity has been associated with noncommunicable diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between household food insecurity and asthma in Korean adults. Household food security statuses were classified into three groups: Food-secure household, food-insecure household without hunger, and food-insecure household with hunger. The odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the presence of asthma according to household food security status were calculated using multiple logistic regression analyses after adjusting for confounding factors. A total of 14,770 participants were included in the analysis. The prevalence of asthma was 2.6% in those with a secure food status, 3.2% in those with an insecure food status without hunger, and 7.6% in those with an insecure food status with hunger (p < 0.001). Compared with that in participants with a household food secure status, the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for asthma were 1.12 (0.73–1.73) in those with a food-insecure household without hunger status and 2.44 (1.33–4.46) in those with a food-insecure household with hunger status after additionally adjusting for confounding factors. We found that household food insecurity with hunger was significantly associated with asthma prevalence in Korean adults. Implementation of household food security screening and public health intervention could be helpful to prevent and reduce asthma in adults.

scholarly journals Comparing measures of urban food security in Accra, Ghana

Food Security ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cascade Tuholske ◽  
Kwaw Andam ◽  
Jordan Blekking ◽  
Tom Evans ◽  
Kelly Caylor
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Poor Correlation ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Urban Food Security ◽  
Household Level ◽  
Household Food ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
Food Insecurity Access

AbstractThe urban population in Sub-Saharan Africa is projected to expand by nearly 800 million people in the next 30 years. How this rapid urban transition is affecting household-level urban food security, and reverberating into broader food systems, is poorly understood. To fill this gap, we use data from a 2017 survey (n = 668) of low- and middle-income residents of Accra, Ghana, to characterize and compare the predictors of household-level food security using three established metrics: the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS); the Household Food Insecurity Access Prevalence (HFIAP); and the Food Consumption Score (FCS). According to HFIAP, 70% of sampled households are food insecure, but only 2% fall below acceptable thresholds measured by FCS. Only one household reported sourcing food from modern supermarkets and fewer than 3% produce food for consumption through gardening, farming, or fishing. Instead, households rely on purchased food from traditional markets, local stalls and kiosks, and street hawkers. Results from a suite of general linear models show that household assets, education, and demographic characteristics are significantly associated with food security outcomes according to HFIAS and HFIAP. The poor correlation and weak model agreement between dietary recall such as FCS, and experience-based food security metrics, like HFIAS and HFIAP, highlight limitations of employing historically rural-centric food security measurement approaches within the urban context. Given that Sub-Saharan Africa’s future is urban, our results add empirical evidence in support of the growing chorus of scholars advocating for comprehensive urban-oriented food security research and policy agendas across Sub-Saharan Africa.

scholarly journals Household Food Insecurity and the Association with Cumulative Biological Risk among Lower-Income Adults: Results from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2007–2010

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cindy W. Leung ◽  
Megan S. Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Household Food Security ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Biological Risk ◽  
Health And Nutrition ◽  
Household Food

Household food insecurity has been associated with adverse health outcomes; however, the mechanisms underlying these associations are not well-defined. Using data from 5005 adults from the 2007–2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), we examined associations between household food insecurity and cumulative biological risk, a measure of the body’s physiological response to chronic stress. Household food security was assessed using the 18-item Household Food Security Survey Module. Marginal food security refers to 1–2 positive responses, and food insecurity refers to ≥3 positive responses. The cumulative biological risk scores were calculated based on the distributions of ten biomarkers from the cardiovascular, metabolic, and immune systems. Elevated biological risk was defined as a risk score of ≥3. Multivariable regression models were used to examine associations between food security and cumulative biological risk scores, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. After multivariable adjustment, food insecurity was associated with a 0.14-unit higher cumulative biological risk score (95% CI 0.05–0.22, p-trend = 0.003) and higher odds of elevated biological risk (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.05–1.37, p-trend = 0.003). These associations differed by gender. Among women, food insecurity was associated with 0.30-unit higher cumulative biological risk score (95% CI 0.14–0.45, p-trend = 0.0004) and higher odds of elevated biological risk (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.29–2.00, p-trend < 0.0001). These associations were not observed in men. Women experiencing food insecurity demonstrated elevated levels of biological risk. These findings support the hypothesis that food insecurity may be associated with women’s chronic health outcomes through the pathway of chronic stress. Further research is needed to understand why these associations were not observed in men.

scholarly journals The assessment of food security in homeless individuals: a comparison of the Food Security Survey Module and the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
pp. 2254-2259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna C Holland ◽  
Matthew C Kennedy ◽  
Stephen W Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Homeless Population ◽  
Household Food Insecurity ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Household Food ◽  
The Us ◽  
Food Insecurity Access

AbstractObjectiveTo compare the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS), the US Food Security Survey Module (US FSSM) and a modified version of the US FSSM in which references to buying food were changed to references to getting food, in terms of their classification of food security levels among homeless individuals, and to determine which of these instruments was most preferred by homeless individuals.DesignA cross-sectional survey.SettingRecruitment of participants took place at seven shelters and from three drop-in programmes that serve homeless individuals in Toronto, Canada.SubjectsFifty individuals who were ≥18 years of age, able to communicate in English and currently homeless.ResultsThe modified US FSSM assigned 20 % of participants to a lower ordinal food security category compared with the US FSSM, and only 8 % to a higher food security category. The HFIAS assigned 30 % of participants to a lower food security category compared with either the US FSSM or the modified US FSSM, and only 10–16 % of participants to a higher food security category. When asked to compare all three instruments, the majority of respondents (62 %) selected the HFIAS as the best instrument for people who are homeless.ConclusionsA majority of homeless individuals selected the HFIAS as the best food security instrument for people who are homeless. Our findings suggest that the HFIAS is a more appropriate instrument than the US FSSM for measuring food security in the homeless population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document