1 / 19

Measuring Food Security: Old Challenges and “New” Thinking

Measuring Food Security: Old Challenges and “New” Thinking . Gero Carletto Development Research Group The World Bank ICABR, Ravello , June 2013. Outline. Describe debate and issues Need for benchmarking/validation Methodological research Improving the measurement of food consumption

coby
Download Presentation

Measuring Food Security: Old Challenges and “New” Thinking

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Measuring Food Security:Old Challenges and “New” Thinking GeroCarletto Development Research Group The World Bank ICABR, Ravello, June 2013

  2. Outline • Describe debate and issues • Need for benchmarking/validation • Methodological research • Improving the measurement of food consumption • A simple example • Final thoughts

  3. THE GOOD: What most agree on … • Multi-dimensional concept • Need suite of indicators • Availability, Access, Utilization and Stability • Proliferation of indicators • White noise • Need validation/benchmarking • Too few indicators at right periodicity and for enough countries

  4. … THE BAD: What most disagree on … • Which indicators? • Calorie intake: yes, but too difficult? • Dietary diversity: yes, but comparable? • FAO undernourishment: yes, but for what? • Benchmarking • Food consumption? • Aggregation into composite index • The FI “dashboard” • What can we learn from the poverty debate?

  5. … and THE UGLY … i.e. reality! “No single indicator can properly capture FNS” “No single survey can collect all needed indicators at right periodicity” “No single institution has mandate/capacity/willingness to collect all needed indicators of FNS …” “Most countries do not have capacity/resources to collect all needed indicators …”  we need multiple (just a few!) indicators from multiple surveys carried out by multiple institutions • But, how to choose? • How do we benchmark/validate?

  6. The Indicators • Caloric intake/Food quantities • Food expenditures • Dietary Diversity/Food Consumption Score • HFIAS/Hunger Scale • Coping Strategy Index • Qualitative, e.g. food adequacy • Anthropometrics

  7. The Instruments • Household Budget Surveys (HBS) • Income and Expenditure Surveys (IES) • Living Standards Measurement Study (LSMS) • Integrated Household Surveys (IHS) • Surveys on Income and Living Conditions (SILC) • Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) • Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS) • Comprehensive Food Security Vulnerability Assessment (CFSVA) • Welfare Monitoring Survey (WMS) • Nutrition Surveys (24-hour)

  8. Lack of standards result in poor comparability! • Take Food Consumption … • Diary vs. recall • Household vs. individual • Reference period • Nomenclature (COICOP) • Bulk purchases • Non-standard units of measure • Food consumed away from home (FAFH) • Valuation of consumed own-production

  9. Two dimensions of poor comparability in food consumption data Reference period Mode of acquisition Source: “Assessment of the reliability and relevance of food data …”, Smith et al.

  10. Instrument design & implicationsfor consumption/poverty • Beegle, Kathleen, Joachim De Weerdt, Jed Friedman, and John Gibson. 2012. “Methods of Household Consumption Measurement through Surveys: Experimental Results from Tanzania.” J of Development Economics 98: 3-18

  11. Take diary vs. recall … • Diary often considered …. • Unfeasible (low literacy rate) • Too onerous for respondents • Too costly • Often, diary converts into short (2-3 day) recall … but no metadata! • Recall considered imprecise (telescoping, recall bias) • 7-day recall most frequent. Most feasible?

  12. Can we improve on 7-day recall? • WB-FAO joint research program • Phase I: review • Phase II: methodological research • Bounding reference period, plus 24-hour recall • Assisting households to recall • Non-Standard unit of measurement • Food item list/disaggregation • Food Consumed Away from Home • Partakers • Annualization • Bulk purchases • Prices/Unit values

  13. Annualization of consumption • Purchases+own-produced+gifts/in-kind pay in last 7 days • Valuation of non-purchased items at median unit values • (Quantity*price)*52 • But prices do change (quantities too!!) • Apply monthly median unit values computed from survey (or price/market survey) • What are the implication in terms of total consumption and poverty?

  14. Method and timing of interview make a difference • Interviewed in DECEMBER • consumed 13.72 kg in last 7 days • Interviewed in MARCH • consumed 13.72 kg in last 7 days

  15. Impact on poverty estimates

  16. Some final thoughts … • Irrespective of indicator, need benchmarking • Need for improved benchmark (food consumption) • Need harmonization • Methods • Efforts • Focus on changes with highest value added • Other issues … • PHL • Net Buyer-net sellers • Technology can help

More Related