Global Food Security Index monitors impact of world agriculture

 Resize text         Printer-friendly version of this article Printer-friendly version of this article

Findings from the annual Global Food Security Index were issued Tuesday by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) that shows food security has improved in some developing nations. The average 2013 Global Food Index Score held flat at 53.5, compared to the 53.6 measured in 2012.

Globe The Index, a first-of-its-kind ranking tool to comprehensively measure food security and monitor the ongoing impact of agriculture investments, collaborations and policies around the world, is commissioned by DuPont.

“Addressing food security is fruitless without measurement tools and global benchmarks, together with a continued commitment, but most important: Action,” said DuPont Pioneer President Paul E. Schickler. “Since we commissioned the first Global Food Security Index last year, governments, NGOs and academics have used the Index as a roadmap to identify critical food security issues and make better informed decisions, develop collaborative partnerships and create effective local policies to address country-specific needs.”

The 2013 Index expands on the 25 previously indentified food security indicators to determine how two new factors, political corruption and urbanization, affect access to safe, nutritious and affordable food. Some key findings include:

  •  Nutrition is Key in Chile and Beyond: The 2013 Global Food Security Index shines a spotlight on nutrition:  More than 3 million children under the age of 5 die from malnutrition each year.  In Latin America, these issues are especially acute since only 53 percent of countries in the region have official policies regarding nutrition in place in primary schools.  “Access to safe, nutritious and affordable food is critical to health and overall development,” said Schickler while speaking alongside NGO and government partners at a nutrition and agriculture roundtable event in Santiago, Chile.  Thanks to decades of strong economic management and political stability, Chile leads Latin America in terms of food availability and affordability and ranks second only to Argentina for its food quality and safety.
  • Developing Nations Make Progress as Industrialized Countries Face Setbacks: Sub-Saharan African nations including Ethiopia, Senegal and Botswana made significant progress this past year, rising an average of nine places in the Index, with improvements attributed to rising incomes, greater access to farmer financing along with heightened emphasis on quality food and nutrition.  The growth in developing nations contrasts a fall in developed European economies, in particular Greece, as it regressed as fallout of financial collapse and lower gross domestic product.
  • Broader Food Security Metrics:  Rather than measure food security in black and white terms, the 2013 Index tracks 27 diverse factors that may explicitly or implicitly affect access to safe, nutritious and affordable food.  New this year, the Index points to political conflicts in Mali, Yemen and Syria as significant contributors to food insecurity in the regions.  With regard to urbanization, emerging markets appear best positioned to respond to the long-term trend and implications for food security: Sierra Leone was the top-ranked country in this new indicator, primarily as a result of its strong urban farming, which has been crucial in supporting the country’s nutritional needs.

 

For more information on the interactive Global Food Security Index, including definitions of the 27 global indicators, food price tracking, multi-country comparisons and more, visit: http://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/

To learn more about how DuPont is committed to driving food security efforts locally, sustainably and collaboratively, visit foodsecurity.dupont.com or follow the conversation on Twitter at #foodsecurity.



Comments (10) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Dan    
MI  |  July, 03, 2013 at 09:27 AM

Funny, Funny. Fox guarding the henhouse comes to mind. Dupont Pioneer measuring food 'security'. More of the "American Ag feeds the world", which means: build market share for American commodities by driving actual food producers out of business. Good news for all you little countries: More twinkies and Coca Cola, and more American drugs to fix your metabolic health problems on down the road.

bob    
iowa  |  July, 03, 2013 at 09:48 AM

Dupont does not drive any farmers out of business, genius. You believe everything u read. Maybe get out in the real world and talk to some real farmers and not those hippies who grow pot in their backyard.

Cal    
S.F. California  |  July, 03, 2013 at 09:59 AM

I think what Dan means is food security for those "little countries" is a waste of resources needed for Dan and his friends in developed countries. Why, don't you realize if the billions of people in 3rd world countries all got refrigerators that would drive global warming? See, if they don't have food they don't need refrigerators and stoves and supermarkets and all that technology they don't deserve. Food insecurity is probably the only thing keeping Dan and his affluent elitist buddies sustainably riding tall astride their high horses. Mustn't risk Dan's proud smug conspicuous consumption, now, can we?

Dan    
MI  |  July, 03, 2013 at 10:27 AM

Actually, I am a small farmer with neither affluence or high horses. I do grow food, however, and not commodities. I don't need Monsanto or Dupont to sell food for me. Nor do I need government subsidies or low priced oil (kept artificially low by tax subsidies among others). I'll bet the other commenters require both to survive. Never smoked pot, but I hear it's pretty good. Probably healthier than the crap we are selling as 'food' overseas. I do apologize if I seem a little smug at times.

Martha    
Arlington  |  July, 03, 2013 at 10:48 AM

How does Dan's model contribute to food security globally or anywhere except in his own kitchen and maybe at the salad bar in some little boutique cafe overtown? When food insecure people struggle does Dan or Alice Waters or Jamie Oliver or Michael Pollan put down their marmalade spoons and rush over with some arugula and heirloom chives to save the day? I don't think food insecurity can be cured with more parsley, garlic and olive oil. Probably will require some "commodities" like grains, beans, stuff like that.

Dan    
MI  |  July, 03, 2013 at 01:02 PM

"Dan's model" is not meant to "contribute to food security globally" (and other tired mantras of the world commodity crowd). I produce actual food for my family and my community. Just like those other cultures did successfully for hundreds, even thousands of years before cheap oil and subsidies allowed us to drive them out of business in the last 50 years. Both are ruining our health and our environment. Now we are mandated to turn oil into food into ethanol at a loss of energy and money. Just to create a 40% market increase for another commodity. Seriously, you people need to read something besides the newsletters funded by Monsanto, NCGA, Farm Bureau, etal. I promise to keep reading my Farm Bureau propaganda if you pick up a book once in a while.

mark    
Ks  |  July, 03, 2013 at 01:28 PM

The ethanol may use 40 percent of the corn, but only 15 percent of that is lost in the process the other 85 percent gets sold as high nutrition anamal feed, which means if I calculate right, we are only using 6 percent of the corn or sorgun to make all this ethanol hmm That does not come from any publications, that comes from someone who works around it. and uses it's coproducts..... in my mind the only thing I hate about ethanol is the water consumption it takes to make it...

Dan    
MI  |  July, 03, 2013 at 02:06 PM

Figured I could rope another subsidy junky with the ethanol crack. You need to pull your nose out of the 2 studies done by the University if Corn, funded by NCGA and FB, and check out the dozen or so done by independent, peer reviewed sources. Just Google it. You in Kansas and NE win, Monsanto wins, Exon wins, we taxpayers lose. Again folks, check out something other than these newsletters paid for by Big Ag. Who do you think funds Drovers? The people who sell you stuff, and want you to use more of it. If you would open your mind a little and read, you would find out that we are not all pot smoking elitists. We care about you and your children. And we care about our farms as much as you do yours.

Jeremy    
Kansas  |  July, 03, 2013 at 02:10 PM

Mark, is that 85% by volume or 85% by cost? I'm just trying to get my mind around your figures. Are you taking subsidy payments into account if using a cost figure? I have a problem with any industry that relies on taxpayers rather than market demand to fund itself. Dan, I'm sympathetic to your original argument, but I don't see how small farms are going to to be a part of the solution, worldwide. Many of these third word countries have underdeveloped agricultural economies because the US buys up grain to support domestic prices, then dumps it on third world economies. This is more of a political problem than an agricultural one. Monsanto isn't to blame. Your congressman is.

mark    
ks  |  July, 03, 2013 at 03:11 PM

85 percent by volume/ nutrient value


ClicRweight

The revolutionary ClicRweight® system provides instant information enabling pork producers to manage their operations more efficiently. The system captures the ... Read More

View all Products in this segment

View All Buyers Guides

Feedback Form
Generate Leads