29 may 2014
Dr Federico Roncarolo
FAO, IFAD and WFP:
The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2013.The
multiple dimensions of food security. Rome, 2013
PROOF Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity
PROOF Research to identify policy options to reduce food insecurity
CHAIRE CACIS - Chaire Approches
Communautaires et Inégalités de Santé
Intervention strategy
Characteristics
Type of relation
Traditional (food banks,
soup kitchens, food boxes)
Interventions based on food
gathering and redistribution, they try
to answer to an immediate and daily
need of food
Food assistance
Food aid
Alternative (collective
kitchens, community
gardens, buying groups)
Interventions developing networks of
mutual aid and social participation
through skills developments
Mutual aid integration
Social integration
Interventions aimed at the
participation in collective actions,
with the objective of increasing
citizens’ empowerment on individual
and collective food security
Empowerment of people
and collectivity
Social transformation
(Community-supported
agriculture, food-related
community economic
development)
To assess the effects of interventions conducted by
community organizations in the Montreal Metropolitan
Region to address the food security and health of their
users, and to generate evidence-based data on the effects
of two different strategies to fight food insecurity
•
•
Longitudinal study of newly recruited
participants in traditional and alternative food
security interventions.
Participants selected in a two stage cluster
sampling frame.
• Sample units: community organizations working on
food security in the Montreal Metropolitan Region
• Analysis units: participants in food security
interventions individuals between 18 and 65 years
of age registered for the first time, and for less than
6 months in selected MMR food security
community organizations
•
Organizations:
• 50 new participants for traditional interventions
• 30 new participants for alternative interventions
• Participants:
• between 18 and 65 years of age
• registered for the first time, and for less than 6
months
30-45 minutes questionnaires administered face to face in French
or in English, according to the preference of participants.
Follow-up nine months after the first interview
• 16 organizations implementing traditional interventions
• 6 organizations implementing alternative interventions
T1
T2
Traditional
interventions
711
372 (52.3%)
Alternative
interventions
113
78 (69%)
Total
824
450 (54.6%)
Traditional
intervention
Alternative
intervention
Total
The organization quit
the study
25 (7.4%)
--
25 (6.7%)
Not found
228 (67.3%)
14 (40%)
242 (64.7%)
Not available/rejected
86 (25.4%)
18 (51.4%)
104 (27.8%)
Not concordant data
--
3 (8.6%)
3 (0.8%)
Total
339 (100%)
35 (100%)
374 (100%)
Traditional
Alternative
interventions interventions n.
n. (%)
(%)
Total n. (%)
Gender*
Male
Female
332 (46.7)
365 (51.3)
22 (19.5)
87 (77.0)
354 (43.0)
452 (54.9)
Age
<30 years
30-49 years
50-65 years
117 (16.5)
370 (52.0)
222 (31.2)
24 (21.2)
58 (51.3)
29 (25.7)
141 (17.1)
428 (51.9)
251 (30.5)
Country of
birth*
Canada
Others
466 (65.5)
241 (33.9)
47 (41.6)
65 (57.5)
513 (62.3)
306 (37.1)
214 (30.1)
340 (47.8)
139 (19.5)
45 (39.8)
34 (30.1)
29(25.7)
259 (31.4)
374 (45.4)
168 (20.4)
197 (27.7)
186 (26.2)
25 (22.1)
25 (22.1)
222 (26.9)
211 (25.6)
196 (27.6)
107 (15.1)
26 (23.0)
34 (30.1)
222 (26.9)
141 (45.2)
1.61 (1.50)
2.20 (1.55)
1.70 (1.52)
Marital status* Married/ common law spouse
Single
Other (separated, divorced, widowed)
Education*
Less than a high school diploma
Secondary (high) school diploma or
equivalent
Less than a bachelor degree
Bachelor’s degree or above
Number of other people in household beside the
respondent, mean (sd)*
*p<0.05
Intervention
Alternative
Traditional
100%
11
23.1
90%
3.8
3.2
5.1
7
20.5
80%
More then 40000$
16
70%
60%
NSP/NRP
27.4
30000-40000$
20000-30000$
24.4
15000-20000$
50%
40%
5000-10000$
32
30%
21.8
20%
14.1
10%
0%
10.5
T1
10000-15000$
33.3
69.9%
10.3
T2
Less than 5000$
46.2%
V. Van Gogh, 1885: The potatoes eaters
Definition of security
10-items adults
food security
scale
Security
(no or 1 indication of
difficulties with incomerelated food access)
Moderate insecurity
(indication of compromise
in quality and/or quantity
of food consumed )
Severe insecurity
(indication of reduced food
intake and disrupted eating
patterns)
0 or 1 positive
answers
2 to 5 positive
answers
≥ 6 positive
answers
8-items adults food
security scale
0 or 1 positive
answers
2 to 4 positive
answers
≥5 positive answers
Household food security
Adult + child in insecurity
Adult OR child in
moderate food insecurity
Adult OR child in severe
food insecurity
Canadian Community Health Survey, Cycle 2.2, Nutrition (2004)— Income-Related Household
Food Security in Canada
Traditional
Interventions
Alternative
100%
90%
80%
49.4
28.2
38.3
p=0.902
70%
60%
39.4
50%
40%
30%
37.3
38.3
39
20%
10%
22.6
11.6
23.4
32.4
40
0%
T1
T2
OR: 0.35 (i.c.95%: 0.23-0.53)
T1
T2
OR: 0.47 (i.c.95%: 0.19-1.15)
Severe
insecurity
Moderate
insecurity
Security
Traditional
100%
90%
17.6
Interventions
Alternative
8.3
11.4
35.3
80%
70%
60%
50%
5.9
51.4
p=0.698
Severe
insecurity
42.8
58.1
Moderate
insecurity
40%
30%
20%
10%
40.3
45.7
61.8
24.3
0%
T1
T2
OR: 0.36 (i.c.95%: 0.18-0.69)
T1
T2
OR: 0.42 (i.c.95%: 0.08-2.15)
Security
Interventions
Alternative
Traditional
100%
90%
80%
49.7
38.9
70%
p=0.738
60%
36.6
50%
38.7
10.5
20.9
Security
32.4
38.7
0%
T1
T2
OR: 0.38 (i.c.95%: 0.27-0.55)
Severe
insecurity
Moderate
insecurity
39.8
20%
10%
22.7
40.2
40%
30%
31
T1
T2
OR: 0.46 (i.c.95%: 0.20-2.02)
Matisse, 1909: The dance
Mental component
Physical component
75
72
70
68
70.62
66.91
66
65
Traditional
Alternative
64
63.97
62
71.1
70
70.59
Percentile scale
66.06
63.86
60
55
58.13
50
60
T1
T2
Beta coeff :
Trad: 2.33 (i.c.95%: -0.25;4.91)
Altern: -2.20 (i.c.95% : -7.87;3.47)
Interaction time-group: p=0.222
T1
T2
Beta coeff :
Trad: 6.01 (i.c.95%: 3.90-8.11)
Altern: 4.09 (i.c.95% : -0.85;9.03)
Interaction time-group: p=0.573
•
Participants in traditional and alternative interventions present significant
differences before starting the interventions
•
Does food insecurity interventions increase inequalities among the most
vulnerable who attend traditional interventions and participants in alternatives?
•
If we just consider T1 and T2 results, it seems that the effects of traditional
interventions are effective in reducing food insecurity and improving mental
health
•
Alternative interventions seem to have some positive effects concerning food
insecurity and mental health although they never reach a statistical significant
level
Thank you!
Giuseppe Arcimboldo, 1573: Summer