this graph was created in R:

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2F99ddcc7060665597ad9b1c263aa8174d%2Fgraph1.gif?generation=1717872782993200&alt=media" alt="">

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2Ff7af5fc372d601a18645c41c37411157%2Fgraph2.gif?generation=1717872788516258&alt=media" alt="">

https://www.googleapis.com/download/storage/v1/b/kaggle-user-content/o/inbox%2F16731800%2Fc85d9de1d5b88949298afa0bab1d9406%2Fgraph3.gif?generation=1717872793749722&alt=media" alt="">

Having enough to eat is one of the fundamental basic human needs. Hunger – or, more formally, undernourishment – is defined as eating less than the energy required to maintain an active and healthy life.

The share of undernourished people is the leading indicator for food security and nutrition used by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

The fight against hunger focuses on a sufficient energy intake – enough calories per person per day. But it is not the only factor that matters for a healthy diet. Sufficient protein, fats, and micronutrients are also essential, and we cover this in our topic page on micronutrient deficiencies.

Undernourishment in mothers and children is a leading risk factor for death and other poor health outcomes.

The UN has set a global target as part of the Sustainable Development Goals to “end hunger by 2030“. While the world has progressed in past decades, we are far from reaching this target.

On this page, you can find our data, visualizations, and writing on hunger and undernourishment. It looks at how many people are undernourished, where they are, and other metrics used to track food security.

Hunger – also known as undernourishment – is defined as not consuming enough calories to maintain a normal, active, healthy life.

The world has made much progress in reducing global hunger in recent decades — we will see this in the following key insight. But we are still far away from an end to hunger. Tragically, nearly one-in-ten people still do not get enough food to eat.

The share of the undernourished population is shown globally and by region in the chart.

You can see that rates of hunger are highest in Sub-Saharan Africa. South Asia has much higher rates than the Americas and East Asia. Rates in North America and Europe are below 2.5%. However, the FAO shows this as “2.5%” rather than the specific point estimate.

The Global Hunger Index (GHI) is a tool designed to comprehensively measure and track hunger globally, regionally, and by country. Each year, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) calculates GHI scores in order to assess progress, or the lack thereof, in decreasing hunger. The GHI is designed to raise awareness and understanding of regional and country differences in the struggle against hunger. Since 2015, GHI scores have been calculated using a revised and improved formula. The revision replaces child underweight, previously the sole indicator of child undernutrition, with two indicators of child undernutrition—child wasting and child stunting—which are equally weighted in the GHI calculation. The revised formula also standardizes each of the component indicators to balance their contribution to the overall index and to changes in the GHI scores over time. The 2016 GHI has been calculated for 118 countries for which data on the four component indicators are available and where measuring hunger is considered most relevant. GHI scores are not calculated for some higher income countries where the prevalence of hunger is very low. The GHI is only as current as the data for its four component indicators. This year's GHI reflects the most recent available country-level data and projections available between 2011 and 2016. It therefore reflects the hunger levels during this period rather than solely capturing conditions in 2016. The 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 GHI scores reflect the latest revised data for the four component indicators of the GHI. Where original source data were not available, the estimates of the GHI component indicators were based on the most recent data available. The four component indicators used to calculate the GHI scores draw upon data from the following sources: 1. Undernourishment: Updated data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) were used for the 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 GHI scores. Undernourishment data and projections for the 2016 GHI are for 2014-2016. 2. Child wasting and stunting: The child undernutrition indicators of the GHI—child wasting and child stunting—include data from the joint database of United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Bank, and additional data from WHO's continuously updated Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition; the most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) reports; and statistical tables from UNICEF. For the 2016 GHI, data on child wasting and child stunting are for the latest year for which data are available in the period 2011-2015. 3. Child mortality: Updated data from the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation were used for the 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 GHI scores. For the 2016 GHI, data on child mortality are from 2015. Resources related to 2016 Global Hunger Index 2016 Global Hunger Index Web App 2016 Global Hunger Index Linked Open Data (LOD) 2016 Global Hunger Index Report

The Current Population Survey Food Security Supplement (CPS-FSS) is the source of national and State-level statistics on food insecurity used in USDA's annual reports on household food security. The CPS is a monthly labor force survey of about 50,000 households conducted by the Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Once each year, after answering the labor force questions, the same households are asked a series of questions (the Food Security Supplement) about food security, food expenditures, and use of food and nutrition assistance programs. Food security data have been collected by the CPS-FSS each year since 1995. Four data sets that complement those available from the Census Bureau are available for download on the ERS website. These are available as ASCII uncompressed or zipped files. The purpose and appropriate use of these additional data files are described below: 1) CPS 1995 Revised Food Security Status data--This file provides household food security scores and food security status categories that are consistent with procedures and variable naming conventions introduced in 1996. This includes the "common screen" variables to facilitate comparisons of prevalence rates across years. This file must be matched to the 1995 CPS Food Security Supplement public-use data file. 2) CPS 1998 Children's and 30-day Food Security data--Subsequent to the release of the April 1999 CPS-FSS public-use data file, USDA developed two additional food security scales to describe aspects of food security conditions in interviewed households not captured by the 12-month household food security scale. This file provides three food security variables (categorical, raw score, and scale score) for each of these scales along with household identification variables to allow the user to match this supplementary data file to the CPS-FSS April 1998 data file. 3) CPS 1999 Children's and 30-day Food Security data--Subsequent to the release of the April 1999 CPS-FSS public-use data file, USDA developed two additional food security scales to describe aspects of food security conditions in interviewed households not captured by the 12-month household food security scale. This file provides three food security variables (categorical, raw score, and scale score) for each of these scales along with household identification variables to allow the user to match this supplementary data file to the CPS-FSS April 1999 data file. 4) CPS 2000 30-day Food Security data--Subsequent to the release of the September 2000 CPS-FSS public-use data file, USDA developed a revised 30-day CPS Food Security Scale. This file provides three food security variables (categorical, raw score, and scale score) for the 30-day scale along with household identification variables to allow the user to match this supplementary data file to the CPS-FSS September 2000 data file. Food security is measured at the household level in three categories: food secure, low food security and very low food security. Each category is measured by a total count and as a percent of the total population. Categories and measurements are broken down further based on the following demographic characteristics: household composition, race/ethnicity, metro/nonmetro area of residence, and geographic region. The food security scale includes questions about households and their ability to purchase enough food and balanced meals, questions about adult meals and their size, frequency skipped, weight lost, days gone without eating, questions about children meals, including diversity, balanced meals, size of meals, skipped meals and hunger. Questions are also asked about the use of public assistance and supplemental food assistance. The food security scale is 18 items that measure insecurity. A score of 0-2 means a house is food secure, from 3-7 indicates low food security, and 8-18 means very low food security. The scale and the data also report the frequency with which each item is experienced. Data are available as .dat files which may be processed in statistical software or through the United State Census Bureau's DataFerret http://dataferrett.census.gov/. Data from 2010 onwards is available below and online. Data from 1995-2009 must be accessed through DataFerrett. DataFerrett is a data analysis and extraction tool to customize federal, state, and local data to suit your requirements. Through DataFerrett, the user can develop an unlimited array of customized spreadsheets that are as versatile and complex as your usage demands then turn those spreadsheets into graphs and maps without any additional software. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: December 2014 Food Security CPS Supplement. File Name: dec14pub.zipResource Title: December 2013 Food Security CPS Supplement. File Name: dec13pub.zipResource Title: December 2012 Food Security CPS Supplement. File Name: dec12pub.zipResource Title: December 2011 Food Security CPS Supplement. File Name: dec11pub.zipResource Title: December 2010 Food Security CPS Supplement. File Name: dec10pub.zip

This dataset measures food availability and access for 76 low- and middle-income countries. The dataset includes annual country-level data on area, yield, production, nonfood use, trade, and consumption for grains and root and tuber crops (combined as R&T in the documentation tables), food aid, total value of imports and exports, gross domestic product, and population compiled from a variety of sources. This dataset is the basis for the International Food Security Assessment 2015-2025 released in June 2015. This annual ERS report projects food availability and access for 76 low- and middle-income countries over a 10-year period. Countries (Spatial Description, continued): Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: CSV File for all years and all countries. File Name: gfa25.csvResource Title: International Food Security country data. File Name: GrainDemandProduction.xlsxResource Description: Excel files of individual country data. Please note that these files provide the data in a different layout from the CSV file. This version of the data files was updated 9-2-2021

More up-to-date files may be found at: https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/international-food-security.aspx

Polygons in this layer represent Census Tracts in the DMV (DC, Maryland, and Virginia). Data are included for each tract which estimate hunger and food insecurity. Data were compiled by the CAFB through internal tracking, and the layer was shared with the DC government as a courtesy. Fields include (all available for 2015 and 2014):15_FI_Rate: The estimated portion of the population in the census tract experiencing food insecurity (by CAFB standards). 15/14 indicates year measured.15_FI_Pop: The estimated number of people in the census tract experiencing food insecurity (by CAFB standards). 15/14 indicates year measured.15_LB_Need: The estimated pounds of food needed by the food insecure population in the census tract. 15/14 indicates year measured.15_Distrib: The number of pounds of food distributed by CAFB and partners in the census tract. 15/14 indicates year in which the distribution took place.15_LB_Unme: The difference between the estimated pounds of food needed and the real pounds of food distributed by CAFB and partners, representing the unmet need for food assistance in the census tract. 15/14 indicates year.The layer was shared with the DC government in May 2016 and is based on 2015 and 2014 data.

The Global Hunger Index (GHI) is a tool designed to comprehensively measure and track hunger globally and by region and country. Calculated each year by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), the GHI highlights successes and failures in hunger reduction and provide insights into the drivers of hunger, and food and nutrition security. The 2014 GHI has been calculated for 120 countries for which data on the three component indicators are available and for which measuring hung er is considered most relevant. The GHI calculation excludes some higher income countries because the prevalence of hunger there is very low. The GHI is only as current as the data for its three component indicators. This year's GHI reflects the most recent available country level data for the three component indicators spanning the period 2009 to 2013. Besides the most recent GHI scores, this dataset also contains the GHI scores for four other reference periods- 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005. A country's GHI score is calculated by averaging the percentage of the population that is undernourished, the percentage of children youn ger than five years old who are underweight, and the percentage of children dying before the age of five. This calculation results in a 100 point scale on which zero is the best score (no hunger) and 100 the worst, although neither of these extremes is reached in practice. The three component indicators used to calculate the GHI scores draw upon data from the following sources: 1. Undernourishment: Updated data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) were used for the 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2014GHI scores. Undernourishment data for the 2014 GHI are for 2011-2013. 2. Child underweight: The "child underweight" component indicator of the GHI scores includes the latest additions to the World Health Organization's (WHO) Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition, and additional data from the joint data base by the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), WHO and the World Bank; the most recent Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey reports; and statistical tables from UNICEF. For the 2014 GHI, data on child underweight are for the latest year for which data are available in the period 2009-2014. 3. Child mortality: Updated data from the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation were used for the 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005, and 2014 GHI scores. For the 2014 GHI, data on child mortality are for 2012. Resources related to 2014 Global Hunger Index

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The Trussell Trust has commissioned 'Hunger in the UK', a multi-year large-scale quantitative and qualitative research project to help support their strategic vision of ending the need for food banks. The Trussell Trust has appointed Ipsos Mori to deliver this research. The project focuses on three elements, each intended to build on existing evidence from research that the Trussell Trust had previously commissioned:1. Exploring the life experiences and socio-demographics of people referred to food banks in the Trussell Trust network through quantitative research. This study includes a survey of people referred to food banks in the Trussell Trust network. The survey collected a broad range of demographic and socioeconomic status information at both the individual and household level.2. A survey of the general population of the United Kingdom to establish benchmarks of, and track over time, the level of destitution, food-aid use, and food insecurity amongst this population. This survey mirrors the survey of people referred to food banks, thereby allowing for a comparative analysis of both populations. 3. Qualitative research with people experiencing food insecurity and destitution to understand their lived experience and enrich understanding of the drivers of food bank use and the impact on individuals and families.**Currently, this study includes only the survey data from elements 1. and 2. of the project.The research aims to contribute to the Trussell Trust’s goal of ending the need for food banks across the UK by providing evidence on the drivers of food insecurity and the need to receive support from a food bank. It allows exploration of the groups of people who are more likely to need support, how these experiences differ across the countries of the United Kingdom and what factors may allow people to escape food insecurity.Further information may be found on The Trussell Trust's Hunger in the UK webpage. Main Topics: The survey data collected includesHousehold composition, activities and employment Attitudinal statements Health and personal support Life events and housing Finance Sources of support and cost of living Food insecurityDemographics Food Bank Survey: Questionnaires were distributed in food parcels by 99 food banks. These food banks were selected at random. General Population Survey: A random probability unclustered address-based sampling method. This means that every household in the UK has a known chance of being selected to join the panel. Self-completion 2022 AGE BASIC NEEDS CHARITABLE ORGANIZA... CHILDREN CONDITIONS OF EMPLO... COST OF LIVING COSTS Consumption and con... DEBILITATIVE ILLNESS DEBTS DISABLED PERSONS ECONOMIC ACTIVITY EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS ETHNIC GROUPS EXPENDITURE Equality FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES FINANCIAL RESOURCES FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOOD AID FOOD AND NUTRITION FOOD RESOURCES FOSTER CARE FREE SCHOOL MEALS GENDER IDENTITY HOMELESSNESS HOUSEHOLD BUDGETS HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSEHOLDS HOUSING BENEFITS HOUSING TENURE HUNGER ILL HEALTH INFORMAL CARE INTERNET ACCESS LIFE EVENTS MARITAL STATUS MENTAL HEALTH PERSONAL DEBT REPAY... POVERTY RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION RESIDENTIAL CHILD CARE SAVINGS SEXUAL ORIENTATION SHOPPING SOCIAL ATTITUDES SOCIAL PARTICIPATION SOCIAL SECURITY BEN... SOCIAL SUPPORT SOCIAL WELFARE Social welfare policy Society and culture UNEMPLOYMENT United Kingdom WAGES WELL BEING HEALTH inequality and soci... Identifier

This year’s Global Hunger Index (GHI) brings us face to face with a grim reality. The toxic cocktail of conflict, climate change, and the COVID-19 pandemic had already left millions exposed to food price shocks and vulnerable to further crises. Now the war in Ukraine, with its knock-on effects on global supplies of and prices for food, fertilizer, and fuel is turning a crisis into a catastrophe. The 2022 global GHI score shows that progress in tackling hunger has largely halted. Other indicators reveal the tragic scale of the unfolding crisis. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022 reported that in 2021 the number of undernourished people, an indicator of chronic hunger, rose to as many as 828 million. Further, according to the Global Report on Food Crises 2022, the number of people facing acute hunger also rose from 2020, reaching nearly 193 million in 2021. These impacts are now playing out across Africa South of the Sahara, South Asia, Central and South America, and beyond. As we face the third global food price crisis in 15 years, it is clearer than ever that our food systems in their current form are inadequate to the task of sustainably ending poverty and hunger. The global food crisis underway now is widely presented as an aftershock caused by the war in Ukraine. The severity and speed of the impacts on hunger have occurred largely, however, because millions of people were already living on the precarious edge of hunger, a legacy of past failures to build more just, sustainable, and resilient food systems. While it is urgent that the international community respond to these escalating humanitarian crises, it must not lose sight of the need for a long-term transformation of food systems. The shocks we have experienced reveal chronic vulnerabilities that will continue to put millions at risk of hunger. Past and current GHI reports highlight these persistent vulnerabilities and shows what actions can address immediate humanitarian needs and kick-start food system transformation. Rather than operating reactively, the international community must take proactive steps to actually make good on its international commitments and pledges, scaling them up and directing them toward emergency measures. Political attention and funding must be targeted toward evidence-based policies and investments that address structural obstacles to food and nutrition security. More high-quality and timely data are also needed so that we can monitor progress in these areas. This year’s GHI report considers one important avenue for food systems transformation: community action that engages local leaders and citizens in improving governance and accountability. The essay by Danielle Resnick provides promising examples from a variety of settings where citizens are finding innovative ways to amplify their voices in food system debates, including by tracking government performance and by engaging in multistakeholder platforms, and keeping decision-makers accountable for addressing food and nutrition insecurity and hunger. Encouragingly, examples of empowerment are just as visible in fragile contexts with high levels of societal fractionalization as they are in more stable settings with longer traditions of local democracy. It is critical to act now to rebuild food security on a new and lasting basis. Failure to do so means sleepwalking into the catastrophic and systematic food crises of the future. Much more can be done to ward off the worst impacts of the current crisis and set deep changes in motion rather than reinforcing the dangerous and unsustainable arrangements we now live with. We must ensure rights-based food systems governance at all levels, building on the initial steps taken at the 2021 United Nations Food Systems Summit. Governments and development partners must harness local voices, match local governance efforts to conditions and capacities on the ground, and support local leadership through capacity building and funding. Governments must enable citizens to participate fully in developing and monitoring public policies affecting food security while upholding a legal right to food. Prevention pays off. Investments made today can avert future crises that may be even more costly and tragic than what we now face. It has been said that the saddest words are “If only.” We may find ourselves saying, “If only past generations had used their time and resources to do what was needed to end hunger and ensure the right to food for all.” May the next generation not say the same of us.

The Hunger Games Dataset provides a comprehensive and detailed compilation of data centered around the events of the Hunger Games, specifically focusing on the 10th, 74th, and 75th editions. Additionally, it includes a historical record of victors from all games. This dataset captures a diverse array of information, offering insights into the tributes, arenas, outcomes, and overarching dynamics of the brutal competition.

Where there is conflicting data from the books and the movies, if not specified and separated, data from the books trump the data from the movies. Note: some data is solely present in the movies and not in the books (i.e. odds-to-one ratios).

Key features of the dataset:

-Game edition: identifies the specific edition of the Hunger Games if the information is available.

-Tributes: includes details about each tribute participating in the games, such as their district, age, and gender. Some missing information may be replaced with general knowledge about The Hunger Games' universe. For example: most of the victors' ages are unknown. However, it is known that their ages are between 15 and 18 (as the youngest winner ever is Finnick Odair at the age of 14). Additionally, after a certain point in The Games (at least the 50th Hunger Games, 2nd Quarter Quell), the career-tributes from districts 1, 2 and 4 who volunteer to participate in The Games are generally aged 18.

-Survival timeline/rank: records the chronological sequence of deaths, from the pre-game to the crowning of the victor.

-Victor's district: the district of the victors (district 1 to district 12).

-Alliances: if the tributes are in an alliance, the alliances are specified.

-and more

Your mission :

You are Chell, a citizen from district 3 (the technology district). You have been tasked by a contact in The Capitol, an eccentric socialite who lives three blocks away from the presidential palace whom you worked for once, to help them better understand the dynamics of the Games. This contact of yours has deep connections in The Capitol and has festered a small but pliable network very close to the Gamemakers. Your objective is to help this connection of yours determine the optimal conditions to ensure the survival of a chosen tribute in the next Hunger Games. You will have to use the data you're provided with as well as your knowledge of the Games to construct a perfect gameplan to help a chosen tribute of yours win in the next games. If you complete your task as intended, who you choose to win will not matter, they will be your pawn in the noblest of causes. It is not expected of you to pinpoint exactly who will win and how. Your connection might be able to help you to some extent, mostly with small bits and pieces of information about the next Games. This will give you a margin of error but I wouldn't bet on the connections your contact in The Capitol has to solely win you the task, as even the tiniest iota of information about the prestigious Hunger Games pre-game will be exceedingly costly. Think of it as this: small arrangements can be made as to bring the tributes closer together by activating a mutt pod, a specific kind of token can be given to the tribute, a Feast can be arranged to initiate a second bloodbath; but nothing of out the ordinary.

Here is an excerpt of the letter you've received:

if we have to play by the book then so be it. My objective is to sow seeds of doubt in the president's mind to create inner conflict in Panem's governing body. Do you succeed at finding a means of helping our chosen tribute triumph, prior to the reaping, I will be personally sending a letter to the capitol with the rebel seal. In this letter will be our future victor's district number as well as an accompanying M or F depending on their gender--or so will the president think. Need I say, we can, under no circumstance, afford such pretentiousness as the president might use his power to cause the purported victor's demise. I will try and conjure up some plan in the meantime to make sure the president knows the winning tribute was of our doing. I expect pandamonium and purges in The Capitol's inner circle after such a revelation. I predict this will weaken The Capitol as a whole and provide us a much-needed edge in the rebel cause. After all, what better then to show The Capitol we control their games, not them.

*I know my share of key players in The Capitol, notably the mistress of a gamemaker and a few district 2 masons and engineers working on the next arena. I might be able to pull a few strings: extort information out of stylists, activate a mutt pod or two on command, who knows maybe even arrange a Feast to bring the tributes together and initiate a second bloodbath if the situation allows it. As long as the cards inconspicuously play in our favor. I've been used by The Capitol enough, tim...

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/.

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2). 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by FAO through GeoPoll. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A sampling quota of at least 200 observations per each Administrative 1 areas is set Exclusions: NA Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

The margin of error is estimated as NA. This is calculated around a proportion at the 95% confidence level. The maximum margin of error was calculated assuming a reported percentage of 50% and takes into account the design effect.

Data appraisal

Since the population with access to mobile telephones is likely to differ from the rest of the population with respect to their access to food, post-hoc adjustments were made to control for the potential resulting bias. Post-stratification weights were built to adjust the sample distribution by gender and education of the respondent at admin-1 level, to match the same distribution in the total population. However, an additional step was needed to try to ascertain the food insecurity condition of those with access to phones compared to that of the total population.

Using FIES data collected by FAO through the GWP between 2014 and 2019, and a variable on access to mobile telephones that was also in the dataset, it was possible to compare the prevalence of food insecurity at moderate or severe level, and severe level only, of respondents with access to a mobile phone to that of the total population at national level.

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/.

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2). 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by FAO through GeoPoll. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A sampling quota of at least 200 observations per each Administrative 1 areas is set Exclusions: NA Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

The margin of error is estimated as NA. This is calculated around a proportion at the 95% confidence level. The maximum margin of error was calculated assuming a reported percentage of 50% and takes into account the design effect.

Data appraisal

Since the population with access to mobile telephones is likely to differ from the rest of the population with respect to their access to food, post-hoc adjustments were made to control for the potential resulting bias. Post-stratification weights were built to adjust the sample distribution by gender and education of the respondent at admin-1 level, to match the same distribution in the total population. However, an additional step was needed to try to ascertain the food insecurity condition of those with access to phones compared to that of the total population.

Using FIES data collected by FAO through the GWP between 2014 and 2019, and a variable on access to mobile telephones that was also in the dataset, it was possible to compare the prevalence of food insecurity at moderate or severe level, and severe level only, of respondents with access to a mobile phone to that of the total population at national level.

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/.

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2). 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by FAO through GeoPoll. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A sampling quota of at least 200 observations per each Administrative 1 areas is set Exclusions: NA Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [CATI]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

The margin of error is estimated as NA. This is calculated around a proportion at the 95% confidence level. The maximum margin of error was calculated assuming a reported percentage of 50% and takes into account the design effect.

Data appraisal

Since the population with access to mobile telephones is likely to differ from the rest of the population with respect to their access to food, post-hoc adjustments were made to control for the potential resulting bias. Post-stratification weights were built to adjust the sample distribution by gender and education of the respondent at admin-1 level, to match the same distribution in the total population. However, an additional step was needed to try to ascertain the food insecurity condition of those with access to phones compared to that of the total population.

Using FIES data collected by FAO through the GWP between 2014 and 2019, and a variable on access to mobile telephones that was also in the dataset, it was possible to compare the prevalence of food insecurity at moderate or severe level, and severe level only, of respondents with access to a mobile phone to that of the total population at national level.

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/.

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2). 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by FAO through GeoPoll. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A Random Digit Dialling (RDD) approach was used to form a random sample of telephone numbers. Stratified phone numbers made available from telephone service providers or administrative registers were also used to integrate RDD when needed. Socio-demographic characteristics collected in the survey were then compared with the available information from recent national surveys to verify the extent to which the sample mirrored the total population structure. In case of discrepancies, post-stratification sampling weights were computed to adjust for the under-represented populations, typically using sex and education level. Exclusions: NA Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [CATI]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

Not Available.

Data appraisal

Since the population with access to mobile telephones is likely to differ from the rest of the population with respect to their access to food, post-hoc adjustments were made to control for the potential resulting bias. Post-stratification weights were built to adjust the sample distribution by gender and education of the respondent at admin-1 level, to match the same distribution in the total population. However, an additional step was needed to try to ascertain the food insecurity condition of those with access to phones compared to that of the total population.

Using FIES data collected by FAO through the GWP between 2014 and 2019, and a variable on access to mobile telephones that was also in the dataset, it was possible to compare the prevalence of food insecurity at moderate or severe level, and severe level only, of respondents with access to a mobile phone to that of the total population at national level.

During the school year, many children receive free and reduced-price breakfast and lunch through the School Breakfast and National School Lunch Programs. What happens when school lets out? Hunger is one of the most severe roadblocks to the learning process. Lack of nutrition during the summer months may set up a cycle for poor performance once school begins again. Hunger also may make children more prone to illness and other health issues. The Summer Food Service Program is designed to fill that nutrition gap and make sure children can get the nutritious meals they need. This data set contains information on summer food service participation, meals served and cash payments provided by state.

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/.

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2). 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by FAO through GeoPoll. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A Random Digit Dialling (RDD) approach was used to form a random sample of telephone numbers. Stratified phone numbers made available from telephone service providers or administrative registers were also used to integrate RDD when needed. Socio-demographic characteristics collected in the survey were then compared with the available information from recent national surveys to verify the extent to which the sample mirrored the total population structure. In case of discrepancies, post-stratification sampling weights were computed to adjust for the under-represented populations, typically using sex and education level. Exclusions: NA Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

Not Available.

Data appraisal

Since the population with access to mobile telephones is likely to differ from the rest of the population with respect to their access to food, post-hoc adjustments were made to control for the potential resulting bias. Post-stratification weights were built to adjust the sample distribution by gender and education of the respondent at admin-1 level, to match the same distribution in the total population. However, an additional step was needed to try to ascertain the food insecurity condition of those with access to phones compared to that of the total population.

Using FIES data collected by FAO through the GWP between 2014 and 2019, and a variable on access to mobile telephones that was also in the dataset, it was possible to compare the prevalence of food insecurity at moderate or severe level, and severe level only, of respondents with access to a mobile phone to that of the total population at national level.

This dataset contains a list of the countries affected by the El Niño as at April 21, 2016 as reported jointly by FAO, the Global Food Security Cluster and WFP on 21 April 2016 in the 2015-2016 El Niño: WFP and FAO Overview update. According to the World Bank, El Niño is likely to have a negative impact in more isolated local food markets, and many countries are already facing increased food prices. Food Security Cluster partners have implemented preparedness activities and are responding in countries where the effects of El Niño have materialised, such as Ethiopia, Papua New Guinea, Malawi and throughout Central America. In Southern Africa, many areas have seen the driest October-December period since at least 1981, and some 14 million people in the region are already facing hunger, which adds to fears of a spike in the numbers of the food insecure later this year through 2017.

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/.

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2). 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by FAO through GeoPoll. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A Random Digit Dialling (RDD) approach was used to form a random sample of telephone numbers. Stratified phone numbers made available from telephone service providers or administrative registers were also used to integrate RDD when needed. Socio-demographic characteristics collected in the survey were then compared with the available information from recent national surveys to verify the extent to which the sample mirrored the total population structure. In case of discrepancies, post-stratification sampling weights were computed to adjust for the under-represented populations, typically using sex and education level. Exclusions: None Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [CATI]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

The margin of error is estimated as NA. This is calculated around a proportion at the 95% confidence level. The maximum margin of error was calculated assuming a reported percentage of 50% and takes into account the design effect.

Data appraisal

Since the population with access to mobile telephones is likely to differ from the rest of the population with respect to their access to food, post-hoc adjustments were made to control for the potential resulting bias. Post-stratification weights were built to adjust the sample distribution by gender and education of the respondent at admin-1 level, to match the same distribution in the total population. However, an additional step was needed to try to ascertain the food insecurity condition of those with access to phones compared to that of the total population.

Using FIES data collected by FAO through the GWP between 2014 and 2019, and a variable on access to mobile telephones that was also in the dataset, it was possible to compare the prevalence of food insecurity at moderate or severe level, and severe level only, of respondents with access to a mobile phone to that of the total population at national level. The variable HEALTHY was not considered in the computation of the published FAO food insecurity indicator based on FIES due to the results of the validation process.

"Food deserts" are defined as areas where residents do not live near supermarkets or other food retailers that carry affordable and nutritious food.

This dataset describes the total and percentage of people in relation to their relative distance to a major grocery store and their poverty level within block groups of the San Diego County. The dataset is curated from multiple sources, such as the Census ACS and the California Economic Development Department, using methodology from the Economic Research Service (ERS) in the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

During the school year, many children receive free and reduced-price breakfast and lunch through the School Breakfast and National School Lunch Programs. What happens when school lets out? Hunger is one of the most severe roadblocks to the learning process. Lack of nutrition during the summer months may set up a cycle for poor performance once school begins again. Hunger also may make children more prone to illness and other health issues. The Summer Food Service Program is designed to fill that nutrition gap and make sure children can get the nutritious meals they need. This data set contains information on summer food service participation, meals served and cash payments provided by state.

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 2.1 commits countries to end hunger, ensure access by all people to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year around. Indicator 2.1.2, “Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity based on the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES)”, provides internationally-comparable estimates of the proportion of the population facing difficulties in accessing food. More detailed background information is available at http://www.fao.org/in-action/voices-of-the-hungry/fies/en/.

The FIES-based indicators are compiled using the FIES survey module, containing 8 questions. Two indicators can be computed:
1. The proportion of the population experiencing moderate or severe food insecurity (SDG indicator 2.1.2). 2. The proportion of the population experiencing severe food insecurity.

These data were collected by FAO through GeoPoll. National institutions can also collect FIES data by including the FIES survey module in nationally representative surveys.

Microdata can be used to calculate the indicator 2.1.2 at national level. Instructions for computing this indicator are described in the methodological document available in the documentations tab. Disaggregating results at sub-national level is not encouraged because estimates will suffer from substantial sampling and measurement error.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Individuals

Universe

Individuals of 15 years or older.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

A Random Digit Dialling (RDD) approach was used to form a random sample of telephone numbers. Stratified phone numbers made available from telephone service providers or administrative registers were also used to integrate RDD when needed. Socio-demographic characteristics collected in the survey were then compared with the available information from recent national surveys to verify the extent to which the sample mirrored the total population structure. In case of discrepancies, post-stratification sampling weights were computed to adjust for the under-represented populations, typically using sex and education level. Exclusions: NA Design effect: NA

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Telephone Interview [cati]

Cleaning operations

Statistical validation assesses the quality of the FIES data collected by testing their consistency with the assumptions of the Rasch model. This analysis involves the interpretation of several statistics that reveal 1) items that do not perform well in a given context, 2) cases with highly erratic response patterns, 3) pairs of items that may be redundant, and 4) the proportion of total variance in the population that is accounted for by the measurement model.

Sampling error estimates

Not Available.

Data appraisal

Since the population with access to mobile telephones is likely to differ from the rest of the population with respect to their access to food, post-hoc adjustments were made to control for the potential resulting bias. Post-stratification weights were built to adjust the sample distribution by gender and education of the respondent at admin-1 level, to match the same distribution in the total population. However, an additional step was needed to try to ascertain the food insecurity condition of those with access to phones compared to that of the total population.

Using FIES data collected by FAO through the GWP between 2014 and 2019, and a variable on access to mobile telephones that was also in the dataset, it was possible to compare the prevalence of food insecurity at moderate or severe level, and severe level only, of respondents with access to a mobile phone to that of the total population at national level.