Publication: Food Insecurity Erodes Trust
Loading...
Files
184 downloads
11 downloads
Date
2023-02
ISSN
Published
2023-02
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
This study examines the relationship between food insecurity and trust using the 2014-17 waves of the Gallup World Poll and the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Food Insecurity Experience Scale. Trust improves public institutions, social capital, public health interventions, and economic development. Vertical trust is represented as an index of trust in national institutions, while horizontal trust is represented as a measure of trust in friends and family. The findings show that food insecurity is associated with a decrease in both measures of trust. The study further document heterogeneous effects of food insecurity across economic development rankings. The results suggest a need for governments to increase food security to bolster public trust, strengthen the social contract, and enhance the effectiveness of development efforts.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Kassa, Woubet; Smith, Michael D.; Wesselbaum, Dennis. 2023. Food Insecurity Erodes Trust. Policy Research Working Papers;10314. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/39471 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Assessing Food Insecurity in Latin America and the Caribbean Using FAO’s Food Insecurity Experience Scale(Elsevier, 2017-08)The complexity of the operational concept and definition of food insecurity has complicated the study of the ‘food insecure’ and efforts to determine clear policy directions. Previous findings on the prevalence and severity of food insecurity are inconsistent and often depend on the measure used. To overcome limitations in food security measurement, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations developed the Food Insecurity Experience Scale, which is the first survey protocol to measure people’s direct experience of food insecurity on a global scale. Using this new measure, our study contributes to the understanding of the food insecure by examining the determinants of food insecurity within and across countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Using a series of multilevel linear models, we find the three determinants associated with the largest increase in the likelihood of experiencing food insecurity in LAC are: low levels of education, limited social capital, and living in a country with low GDP per capita. Results suggest the need to promote education of the most vulnerable, encourage social interactions that help build individuals’ social capital, and adopt gender-sensitive programs. The results also suggest the need for a shift in policy from short-term strategies to long-term efforts that sustain household productive capacity and employment to promote sustained economic growth.Publication Should the Food Insecurity Experience Scale Crowd Out Other Food Access Measures?(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2022-08)Measurement of food access typically relies on a consensus of different indicators. However, there is a growing list of surveys in which the Food Insecurity Experience Scale is one of the few food access indicators captured, likely because it is an official measure for tracking progress toward the Sustainable Development Goal of zero hunger. This paper uses a nationally representative, multipurpose household survey conducted in Nigeria to investigate the validity of the Food Insecurity Experience Scale. It compares the Food Insecurity Experience Scale to monetary poverty and a widely used food access metric that has been more extensively validated, the Food Consumption Score. Although it is possible for food access metrics to be poorly aligned and capture different dimensions of poor food access, empirically supported assumptions in standard consumption models result in many dimensions of poor food access being concentrated among the poorest segments of the population. However, the paper demonstrates that the Food Insecurity Experience Scale does not appear to correctly identify the population with poor food access—it finds little difference in the share with poor food access among poor and nonpoor Nigerians. Moreover, even the very richest and very poorest households have a similar prevalence of poor food access, according to the Food Insecurity Experience Scale. These patterns are in stark contrast to the Food Consumption Score, which suggests that food access is significantly lower for poorer Nigerians. Combined, the results demonstrate the importance of measuring food access with more than one indicator, and they call into question the notion of using the Food Insecurity Experience Scale alone, despite the measure being a key Sustainable Development Goal food security indicator.Publication Food Insecurity and Conflict(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2010-08-02)This paper provides a synthetic overview of the link between food insecurity and conflict, addressing both traditional (civil and interstate war) and emerging (regime stability, violent rioting and communal conflict) threats to security and political stability. In addition, it addresses the various attempts by national governments, intergovernmental organizations, and civil society to address food insecurity and, in particular, the link with conflict. It begins with a discussion of the various effects of food insecurity for several types of conflict, and discusses the interactions among political, social, and demographic factors that may exacerbate these effects. It then discusses the capabilities of states, international markets, intergovernmental organizations, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to break the link between food security and conflict by focusing on mechanisms that can shield both food consumers and producers from short-term price instability. Finally, it discusses projected trends in both food insecurity and conflict and concludes with some brief comments on policies that can build resilience in light of projections of higher and volatile food prices and a changing climate.Publication Food Insecurity and Public Agricultural Spending in Bolivia : Putting Money Where Your Mouth Is?(2011-03-01)This paper explores the reduction of food insecurity in Bolivia, adopting a supply side approach that analyzes the role of agricultural spending on vulnerability. Vulnerability to food insecurity is captured by a municipal level composite -- developed locally within the framework of World Food Program food security analysis -- that combines welfare outcomes, weather conditions and agricultural potential for all 327 municipalities in 2003, 2006 and 2007. Our econometric results indicate that levels of public agricultural spending are positively associated with high or very high vulnerability. The authors interpret this to indicate that agricultural spending allocation decisions are driven by high or very high vulnerability levels. In other words, more agricultural spending appears to be destined to where it is more needed in line with previous findings in other sectors in Bolivia. This is confirmed through a number of specifications, including contemporaneous and lagged relationships between spending and vulnerability. They also find evidence of public spending on infrastructure and research and extension services having a significant (but very small) effect towards reducing high vulnerability. This indicates the importance of the composition of public agricultural spending in shaping its relationship with vulnerability to food insecurity.Publication Trusting Trade and the Private Sector for Food Security in Southeast Asia(World Bank, 2012)This book challenges policy makers who oversee the rice sector in Southeast Asia to reexamine deep-rooted precepts about their responsibilities. As an essential first step, it calls on them to redefine food security. Fixating on national self-sufficiency has been costly and counterproductive. In its stead, coordination and cooperation can both improve rice production at home and structure expanding regional trade. To enhance regional food security through quantitative and qualitative gains in rice production, policy makers cannot solely rely on government programs. They need to also enlist private investors both as entrepreneurs and as partners who can bring capital, energy, modern technology, and experienced management into sustained efforts to reduce losses and heighten efficiency in supply chains. For such investors and participants to enter vigorously into the rice sector from which they have long held back, they will need a number of incentives, among them a confidence that the regional market for rice will evolve toward a structured, liberalized market shielded from the unilateral government interventions that have distorted it in the past and continue to do so in the present. The study's findings make it clear that current rice sector policies are not achieving their desired goals. Its examination of the 2007-08 food crises found, in fact, that government policies and panicky responses were the primary factors behind soaring (and later diminishing) rice prices. Those policies vary, but they share a common premise: food security depends, first of all, on self-sufficiency in rice. That premise has driven government intervention for decades, and unpredictable government intervention, in turn, has been a significant factor in making the rice sector too risky to attract significant private investment. The transition that this study urges will be difficult and, of necessity, slow to gain momentum. Nevertheless, it is already beginning. The members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are working to liberalize trade in the region. The study is, in fact, intended to assist in implementing policy objectives outlined in the ASEAN Integrated Food Security (AIFS) framework and in the strategic plan of action on food security in the ASEAN Region 2009-2013, in which the heads of member states pledged to embrace food security as a matter of permanent and high priority.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2020(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020-10-07)Previous Poverty and Shared Prosperity Reports have conveyed the difficult message that the world is not on track to meet the global goal of reducing extreme poverty to 3 percent by 2030. This edition brings the unwelcome news that COVID-19, along with conflict and climate change, has not merely slowed global poverty reduction but reversed it for first time in over twenty years. With COVID-19 predicted to push up to 100 million additional people into extreme poverty in 2020, trends in global poverty rates will be set back at least three years over the next decade. Today, 40 percent of the global poor live in fragile or conflict-affected situations, a share that could reach two-thirds by 2030. Multiple effects of climate change could drive an estimated 65 to 129 million people into poverty in the same period. “Reversing the reversal” will require responding effectively to COVID-19, conflict, and climate change while not losing focus on the challenges that most poor people continue to face most of the time. Though these are distinctive types of challenges, there is much to be learned from the initial response to COVID-19 that has broader implications for development policy and practice, just as decades of addressing more familiar development challenges yield insights that can inform responses to today’s unfamiliar but daunting ones. Solving novel problems requires rapid learning, open cooperation, and strategic coordination by everyone: from political leaders and scientists to practitioners and citizens.Publication Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2016(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2016-10-02)Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2016 is the first of an annual flagship report that will inform a global audience comprising development practitioners, policy makers, researchers, advocates, and citizens in general with the latest and most accurate estimates on trends in global poverty and shared prosperity. This edition will also document trends in inequality and identify recent country experiences that have been successful in reducing inequalities, provide key lessons from those experiences, and synthesize the rigorous evidence on public policies that can shift inequality in a way that bolsters poverty reduction and shared prosperity in a sustainable manner. Specifically, the report will address the following questions: • What is the latest evidence on the levels and evolution of extreme poverty and shared prosperity? • Which countries and regions have been more successful in terms of progress toward the twin goals and which are lagging behind? • What does the global context of lower economic growth mean for achieving the twin goals? • How can inequality reduction contribute to achieving the twin goals? • What does the evidence show concerning global and between- and within-country inequality trends? • Which interventions and countries have used the most innovative approaches to achieving the twin goals through reductions in inequality? The report will make four main contributions. First, it will present the most recent numbers on poverty, shared prosperity, and inequality. Second, it will stress the importance of inequality reduction in ending poverty and boosting shared prosperity by 2030 in a context of weaker growth. Third, it will highlight the diversity of within-country inequality reduction experiences and will synthesize experiences of successful countries and policies, addressing the roots of inequality without compromising economic growth. In doing so, the report will shatter some myths and sharpen our knowledge of what works in reducing inequalities. Finally, it will also advocate for the need to expand and improve data collection—for example, data availability, comparability, and quality—and rigorous evidence on inequality impacts in order to deliver high-quality poverty and shared prosperity monitoring.Publication Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2018(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2018-10-17)The World Bank Group has two overarching goals: End extreme poverty by 2030 and promote shared prosperity by boosting the incomes of the bottom 40 percent of the population in each economy. As this year’s Poverty and Shared Prosperity report documents, the world continues to make progress toward these goals. In 2015, approximately one-tenth of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty, and the incomes of the bottom 40 percent rose in 77 percent of economies studied. But success cannot be taken for granted. Poverty remains high in Sub- Saharan Africa, as well as in fragile and conflict-affected states. At the same time, most of the world’s poor now live in middle-income countries, which tend to have higher national poverty lines. This year’s report tracks poverty comparisons at two higher poverty thresholds—$3.20 and $5.50 per day—which are typical of standards in lower- and upper-middle-income countries. In addition, the report introduces a societal poverty line based on each economy’s median income or consumption. Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2018: Piecing Together the Poverty Puzzle also recognizes that poverty is not only about income and consumption—and it introduces a multidimensional poverty measure that adds other factors, such as access to education, electricity, drinking water, and sanitation. It also explores how inequality within households could affect the global profile of the poor. All these additional pieces enrich our understanding of the poverty puzzle, bringing us closer to solving it. For more information, please visit worldbank.org/PSPPublication Doing Business 2020(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020)Doing Business 2020 is the 17th in a series of annual studies investigating the regulations that enhance business activity and those that constrain it. It provides quantitative indicators covering 12 areas of the business environment in 190 economies. The goal of the Doing Business series is to provide objective data for use by governments in designing sound business regulatory policies and to encourage research on the important dimensions of the regulatory environment for firms.Publication The African Continental Free Trade Area(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2020-07-27)The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) agreement will create the largest free trade area in the world, measured by the number of countries participating. The pact will connect 1.3 billion people across 55 countries with a combined GDP valued at $3.4 trillion. It has the potential to lift 30 million people out of extreme poverty by 2035. But achieving its full potential will depend on putting in place significant policy reforms and trade facilitation measures. The scope of the agreement is considerable. It will reduce tariffs among member countries and cover policy areas, such as trade facilitation and services, as well as regulatory measures, such as sanitary standards and technical barriers to trade. It will complement existing subregional economic communities and trade agreements by offering a continent-wide regulatory framework and by regulating policy areas—such as investment and intellectual property rights protection—that have not been covered in most subregional agreements. The African Continental Free Trade Area: Economic and Distributional Effects quantifies the long-term implications of the agreement for growth, trade, poverty reduction, and employment. Its analysis goes beyond that in previous studies that have largely focused on tariff and nontariff barriers in goods—by including the effects of services and trade facilitation measures, as well as the distributional impacts on poverty, employment, and wages of female and male workers. It is designed to guide policy makers as they develop and implement the extensive range of reforms needed to realize the substantial rewards that the agreement offers. The analysis shows that full implementation of AfCFTA could boost income by 7 percent, or nearly $450 billion, in 2014 prices and market exchange rates. The agreement would also significantly expand African trade—particularly intraregional trade in manufacturing. In addition, it would increase employment opportunities and wages for unskilled workers and help close the wage gap between men and women.