research topics on food security and nutrition

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology

PLOS Climate

• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health

PLOS Medicine

• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

PLOS Pathogens

PLOS Sustainability and Transformation

• PLOS Collections

Food Security

PLOS publishes a broad range of Open food security research that is essential to global food availability, access, utilization, and stability. Explore pivotal interdisciplinary research across key food security fields including crop science, nutrition, and food systems.

Explore food security research from PLOS

PLOS food security research addresses the global issues of food availability, exacerbated by the compounding impacts of climate change, demographic change, geopolitics and economic shocks.

Our Open Access multidisciplinary research papers showcase innovative approaches and technologies that help address key research areas in line with relevant United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including overcoming boundaries in both crop sciences and food systems.

Through rigorous academic research and engagement with a broad range of societal stakeholders, we aim to effect systemic, evidence-based transformation across all aspects of global food access and security.

Stay up-to-date on food security research from PLOS

Research spotlights

As a leading publisher in the field, these articles showcase research that has influenced academia, industry and/or policy.

Potential of breadfruit cultivation to contribute to climate-resilient low latitude food systems

Factors associated with dietary diversity among pregnant women in the western hill region of Nepal: A community based cross-sectional study

Food security and small holder farming in Pacific Island countries and territories: A scoping review

Food security research topics.

PLOS publishes research across a broad range of topics. Take a look at the latest work in your field.

Climate-smart agriculture

Food prices

Food loss and waste

Sustainable agriculture

Water use in agriculture

Crop science

Crop and livestock disease

Supply chains

Explore the latest research developments in your field

Our commitment to Open Science means others can build on PLOS precision food security research and data to advance the food security field. Discover selected popular food security research below:

A meta-analysis of the adoption of agricultural technology in Sub-Saharan Africa

Climate smart agriculture and global food-crop production

A novel intervention combining supplementary food and infection control measures to improve birth outcomes in undernourished pregnant women in Sierra Leone: A randomized, controlled clinical effectiveness trial

Does agricultural cooperative membership impact technical efficiency of maize production in Nigeria: An analysis correcting for biases from observed and unobserved attributes

Saltwater intrusion and climate change impact on coastal agriculture

Uncontained spread of Fusarium wilt of banana threatens African food security

Estimating impact of food choices on life expectancy: A modeling study

Maximising sustainable nutrient production from coupled fisheries-aquaculture systems

Rapid global phaseout of animal agriculture has the potential to stabilize greenhouse gas levels for 30 years and offset 68 percent of CO 2 emissions this century

Assessment of drinking water access and household water insecurity: A cross sectional study in three rural communities of the Menoua division, West Cameroon

Levels of heavy metals in soil and vegetables and associated health risks in Mojo area, Ethiopia

Combining viral genetic and animal mobility network data to unravel peste des petits ruminants transmission dynamics in West Africa

Browse the full PLOS portfolio of Open Access food security articles

38,630 authors from 175 countries chose  PLOS   to publish their food security  research* 

Reaching a global audience, this research has received over 24,887   news and blog mentions ^ , research in this field has been cited 219,213 times after authors published in a plos journal*, related plos research collections.

Covering a connected body of work and evaluated by leading experts in their respective fields, our Collections make it easier to delve deeper into specific research topics from across the breadth of the PLOS portfolio.

Check out our highlighted PLOS research Collections:

Sustainable Cropping

Domestic Animal Genetics

Future Crops

Stay up-to-date on the latest food security research from PLOS

Related journals in food security

We provide a platform for food security research across various PLOS journals, allowing interdisciplinary researchers to explore food security research at all preclinical, translational and clinical research stages.

*Data source: Web of Science . © Copyright Clarivate 2024 | January 2004 – February 2024 ^Data source: Altmetric.com | January 2004 – February 2024

Breaking boundaries. Empowering researchers. Opening science.

PLOS is a nonprofit, Open Access publisher empowering researchers to accelerate progress in science and medicine by leading a transformation in research communication.

Open Access

All PLOS journals are fully Open Access, which means the latest published research is immediately available for all to learn from, share, and reuse with attribution. No subscription fees, no delays, no barriers.

Leading responsibly

PLOS is working to eliminate financial barriers to Open Access publishing, facilitate diversity and broad participation of voices in knowledge-sharing, and ensure inclusive policies shape our journals. We’re committed to openness and transparency, whether it’s peer review, our data policy, or sharing our annual financial statement with the community.

Breaking boundaries in Open Science

We push the boundaries of “Open” to create a more equitable system of scientific knowledge and understanding. All PLOS articles are backed by our Data Availability policy, and encourage the sharing of preprints, code, protocols, and peer review reports so that readers get more context.

Interdisciplinary

PLOS journals publish research from every discipline across science and medicine and related social sciences. Many of our journals are interdisciplinary in nature to facilitate an exchange of knowledge across disciplines, encourage global collaboration, and influence policy and decision-making at all levels

Community expertise

Our Editorial Boards represent the full diversity of the research and researchers in the field. They work in partnership with expert peer reviewers to evaluate each manuscript against the highest methodological and ethical standards in the field.

Rigorous peer review

Our rigorous editorial screening and assessment process is made up of several stages. All PLOS journals use anonymous peer review by default, but we also offer authors and reviewers options to make the peer review process more transparent.

Food security and nutrition and sustainable agriculture

Related sdgs, end hunger, achieve food security and improve ....

Description

Publications.

As the world population continues to grow, much more effort and innovation will be urgently needed in order to sustainably increase agricultural production, improve the global supply chain, decrease food losses and waste, and ensure that all who are suffering from hunger and malnutrition have access to nutritious food. Many in the international community believe that it is possible to eradicate hunger within the next generation, and are working together to achieve this goal.

World leaders at the 2012 Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) reaffirmed the right of everyone to have access to safe and nutritious food, consistent with the right to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger. The UN Secretary-General’s Zero Hunger Challenge launched at Rio+20 called on governments, civil society, faith communities, the private sector, and research institutions to unite to end hunger and eliminate the worst forms of malnutrition.

The Zero Hunger Challenge has since garnered widespread support from many member States and other entities. It calls for:

• Zero stunted children under the age of two
• 100% access to adequate food all year round
• All food systems are sustainable
• 100% increase in smallholder productivity and income
• Zero loss or waste of food

The Sustainable Development Goal to “End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture” (SDG2) recognizes the inter linkages among supporting sustainable agriculture, empowering small farmers, promoting gender equality, ending rural poverty, ensuring healthy lifestyles, tackling climate change, and other issues addressed within the set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals in the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

Beyond adequate calories intake, proper nutrition has other dimensions that deserve attention, including micronutrient availability and healthy diets. Inadequate micronutrient intake of mothers and infants can have long-term developmental impacts. Unhealthy diets and lifestyles are closely linked to the growing incidence of non-communicable diseases in both developed and developing countries.

Adequate nutrition during the critical 1,000 days from beginning of pregnancy through a child’s second birthday merits a particular focus. The Scaling-Up Nutrition (SUN) Movement has made great progress since its creation five years ago in incorporating strategies that link nutrition to agriculture, clean water, sanitation, education, employment, social protection, health care and support for resilience.

Extreme poverty and hunger are predominantly rural, with smallholder farmers and their families making up a very significant proportion of the poor and hungry. Thus, eradicating poverty and hunger are integrally linked to boosting food production, agricultural productivity and rural incomes.

Agriculture systems worldwide must become more productive and less wasteful. Sustainable agricultural practices and food systems, including both production and consumption, must be pursued from a holistic and integrated perspective.

Land, healthy soils, water and plant genetic resources are key inputs into food production, and their growing scarcity in many parts of the world makes it imperative to use and manage them sustainably. Boosting yields on existing agricultural lands, including restoration of degraded lands, through sustainable agricultural practices would also relieve pressure to clear forests for agricultural production. Wise management of scarce water through improved irrigation and storage technologies, combined with development of new drought-resistant crop varieties, can contribute to sustaining drylands productivity.

Halting and reversing land degradation will also be critical to meeting future food needs. The Rio+20 outcome document calls for achieving a land-degradation-neutral world in the context of sustainable development. Given the current extent of land degradation globally, the potential benefits from land restoration for food security and for mitigating climate change are enormous. However, there is also recognition that scientific understanding of the drivers of desertification, land degradation and drought is still evolving.

There are many elements of traditional farmer knowledge that, enriched by the latest scientific knowledge, can support productive food systems through sound and sustainable soil, land, water, nutrient and pest management, and the more extensive use of organic fertilizers.

An increase in integrated decision-making processes at national and regional levels are needed to achieve synergies and adequately address trade-offs among agriculture, water, energy, land and climate change.

Given expected changes in temperatures, precipitation and pests associated with climate change, the global community is called upon to increase investment in research, development and demonstration of technologies to improve the sustainability of food systems everywhere. Building resilience of local food systems will be critical to averting large-scale future shortages and to ensuring food security and good nutrition for all.

State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020

Updates for many countries have made it possible to estimate hunger in the world with greater accuracy this year. In particular, newly accessible data enabled the revision of the entire series of undernourishment estimates for China back to 2000, resulting in a substantial downward shift of the seri...

Food and Agriculture

Our planet faces multiple and complex challenges in the 21st century. The new 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development commits the international community to act together to surmount them and transform our world for today’s and future generations....

Food Security and Nutrition in Small Island Developing States (SIDS)

The outcome document of Rio+20, “The Future We Want” (United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, June 2012) acknowledged that SIDS remains a special case for sustainable development. Building on the Barbados Programme of Action and the Mauritius Strategy, the document calls for the conv...

Global Blue Growth Initiative and Small Island Developing States (SIDS)

Three-quarters of the Earth’s surface is covered by oceans and seas which are an engine for global economic growth and a key source of food security. The global ocean economic activity is estimated to be USD 3–5 trillion. Ninety percent of global trade moves by marine transport. Over 30 percent of g...

FAO Strategy for Partnerships with the Private Sector

The fight against hunger can only be won in partnership with governments and other non-state actors, among which the private sector plays a fundamental role. FAO is actively pursuing these partnerships to meet the Zero Hunger Challenge together with UN partners and other committed stakeholders. We ...

FAO Strategy for Partnerships with Civil Society Organizations

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) is convinced that hunger and malnutrition can be eradicated in our lifetime. To meet the Zero Hunger Challenge, political commitment and major alliances with key stakeholders are crucial. Only through effective collaboration with go...

FAO and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals

The Sustainable Development Goals offer a vision of a fairer, more prosperous, peaceful and sustainable world in which no one is left behind. In food - the way it is grown, produced, consumed, traded, transported, stored and marketed - lies the fundamental connection between people and the planet, ...

Emerging Issues for Small Island Developing States

The 2012 UNEP Foresight Process on Emerging Global Environmental Issues primarily identified emerging environmental issues and possible solutions on a global scale and perspective. In 2013, UNEP carried out a similar exercise to identify priority emerging environmental issues that are of concern to ...

Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom, We recognize that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for su...

Farmer’s organizations in Bangladesh: a mapping and capacity assessment

Farmers’ organizations (FOs) in Bangladesh have the potential to be true partners in, rather than “beneficiaries” of, the development process. FOs bring to the table a deep knowledge of the local context, a nuanced understanding of the needs of their communities and strong social capital. Increasing...

Good practices in building innovative rural institutions to increase food security

Continued population growth, urbanization and rising incomes are likely to continue to put pressure on food demand. International prices for most agricultural commodities are set to remain at 2010 levels or higher, at least for the next decade (OECD-FAO, 2010). Small-scale producers in many developi...

The State of Food Insecurity in the World

When the 69th United Nations General Assembly begins its General Debate on 23 September 2014, 464 days will remain to the end of 2015, the target date for achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDG). A stock-taking of where we stand on reducing hunger and malnutrition shows that progress in hu...

SDG Global Business Forum 2024

 The 2024 SDG Global Business Forum will take place virtually as a special event alongside the 2024 High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF), the United Nations central platform for the follow-up and review of the SDGs. The Forum will place special emphasis on the SDGs under

Expert Group Meeting on SDG2 and its interlinkages with other SDGs

The theme of the 2024 High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) is “Reinforcing the 2030 Agenda and eradicating poverty in times of multiple crises: the effective delivery of sustainable, resilient and innovative solutions”. The 2024 HLPF will have an in-depth review of Sustainable Development Goa

Expert Group Meetings for 2024 HLPF Thematic Review

The theme of the 2024 High Level Political Forum (HLPF) is “Reinforcing the 2030 Agenda and eradicating poverty in times of multiple crisis: the effective delivery of sustainable, resilient and innovative solutions”. The 2024 HLPF will have an in-depth review of SDG 1 on No Poverty, SDG 2 on Zero Hu

International Workshop on “Applications of Juncao Technology and its contribution to alleviating poverty, promoting employment and protecting the environment”

According to the United Nations Food Systems Summit that was held in 2021, many of the world’s food systems are fragile and not fulfilling the right to adequate food for all. Hunger and malnutrition are on the rise again. According to FAO’s “The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2023

Second Regional Workshop on “Applications of Juncao Technology and its Contribution to the Achievement of Sustainable Agriculture and the Sustainable Development Goals in Africa” 18 - 19 December 2023

Ⅰ. Purpose of the Workshop At the halfway point of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the application of science and technology in developing sustainable agricultural practices has the potential to accelerate transformative change in support of the Sustainable Development Goals. In that r

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World (SOFI) 2023 Launch

On 12 July 2023 from 10 AM to 12 PM (EDT), FAO and its co-publishing partners will be launching, for the fifth time, the State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World (SOFI) report at a Special Event in the margins of the ECOSOC High-Level Political Forum (HLPF). The 2023 edition

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022 (SOFI) Launch

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World is an annual flagship report to inform on progress towards ending hunger, achieving food security and improving nutrition and to provide in-depth analysis on key challenges for achieving this goal in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021 (SOFI)

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021 (SOFI 2021) report presents the first evidence-based global assessment of chronic food insecurity in the year the COVID-19 pandemic emerged and spread across the globe. The SOFI 2021 report will also focus on complementary food system solu

Committee on World Food Security (CFS 46)

Ministerial meeting on food security and climate adaptation in small island developing states.

The proposed meeting will offer SIDS Ministers and Ambassadors the opportunity to explore the implications of the SAMOA Pathway as it relates to food security and nutrition and climate change adaptation. The ultimate objective is to enhance food security, health and wellbeing in SIDS. Ministers an

• January 2015 SDG 2 SDG2 focuses on ending hunger, achieving food security and improved nutrition and promoting sustainable agriculture. In particular, its targets aims to: end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round by 2030 (2.1); end all forms of malnutrition by 2030, including achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, and address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and older persons (2.2.); double,by 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment (2.3); ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality (2.4); by 2020, maintain the genetic diversity of seeds, cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and their related wild species, including through soundly managed and diversified seed and plant banks at the national, regional and international levels, and promote access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, as internationally agreed (2.5); The alphabetical goals aim to: increase investment in rural infrastructure, agricultural research and extension services, technology development and plant and livestock gene banks , correct and prevent trade restrictions and distortions in world agricultural markets as well as adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning of food commodity markets and their derivatives and facilitate timely access to market information, including on food reserves, in order to help limit extreme food price volatility.
• January 2014 Rome Decl. on Nutrition and Framework for Action The Second International Conference on Nutrition (ICN2) took place at FAO Headquarters, in Rome in November 2014. The Conference resulted in the Rome Declaration on Nutrition and the Framework for Action, a political commitment document and a flexible policy framework, respectively, aimed at addressing the current major nutrition challenges and identifying priorities for enhanced international cooperation on nutrition.
• January 2012 Future We Want (Para 108-118) In Future We Want, Member States reaffirm their commitments regarding "the right of everyone to have access to safe, sufficient and nutritious food, consistent with the right to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger". Member States also acknowledge that food security and nutrition has become a pressing global challenge. At Rio +20, the UN Secretary-General’s Zero Hunger Challenge was launched in order to call on governments, civil society, faith communities, the private sector, and research institutions to unite to end hunger and eliminate the worst forms of malnutrition.
• January 2009 UN SG HLTF on Food and Nutrition Security The UN SG HLTF on Food and Nutrition Security was established by the UN SG, Mr Ban Ki-moon in 2008 and since then has aimed at promoting a comprehensive and unified response of the international community to the challenge of achieving global food and nutrition security. It has also been responsible for building joint positions among its members around the five elements of the Zero Hunger Challenge.
• January 2002 Report World Food Summit +5 The World Food Summit +5 adopted a declaration, calling on the international community to fulfill the pledge, made at the original World Food Summit in 1996, to reduce the number of hungry people to about 400 million by 2015.
• January 2000 MDG 1 MDG 1 aims at eradicating extreme poverty and hunger. Its three targets respectively read: halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people whose income is less than $1.25 a day (1.A), achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people (1.B), halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger (1.C).
• January 1996 Rome Decl. on World Food Security The Summit aimed to reaffirm global commitment, at the highest political level, to eliminate hunger and malnutrition, and to achieve sustainable food security for all. Thank to its high visibility, the Summit contributed to raise further awareness on agriculture capacity, food insecurity and malnutrition among decision-makers in the public and private sectors, in the media and with the public at large. It also set the political, conceptual and technical blueprint for an ongoing effort to eradicate hunger at global level with the target of reducing by half the number of undernourished people by no later than the year 2015. The Rome Declaration defined seven commitments as main pillars for the achievement of sustainable food security for all whereas its Plan of Action identified the objectives and actions relevant for practical implementation of these seven commitments.
• January 1992 1st ICN The first International Conference on Nutrition (ICN) convened at the FAO's Headquarters in Rome to identify common strategies and methods to eradicate hunger and malnutrition. The conference was organized by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) and was attended by delegations from 159 countries as well as the European Economic Community, 16 United Nations organizations, 11 intergovernmental organizations, and 144 non-governmental organizations.
• January 1986 Creation of AGROSTAT (now FAOSTAT) Since 1986, AGROSTAT, now known as FAOSTAT, has provided cross sectional data relating to food and agriculture as well as time-series for some 200 countries.
• January 1979 1st World Food Day World Food Day is celebrated each year on 16 October to commemorate the day on which FAO was founded in 1945. Established on the occasion of FAO Twentieth General Conference held in November 1979, the first World Food Day was celebrated in 1981 and was devoted to the theme "Food Comes First".

• Food Security and Nutrition - A Global Issue
• Dag Hammarskjöld Library
• Research Guides
• Introduction
• UN Milestones
• Key UN Bodies
• Consulting the Experts
• UN Publications
• Non-UN Publications
• Databases & E-resources

About this Guide

The  Food Security and Nutrition Guide  provides a platform for available, UN and non-UN resources on Food Security, Nutrition and related topics. 

2022 Global Report on Food Crises

Launch of the 2022 Global Report on Food Crises - Hybrid Press Conference.

Briefing by Arif Husain, World Food Programme’s Chief Economist, and Rein Paulsen, the Food and Agriculture Organization’s Director of Emergencies.

Related Library Research Guides

• Climate Change: A Global Issue
• UN Documentation: Environment

Definition - Food Security

The 1974 World Food Summit defined food security as:

... availability at all times of adequate world food supplies of basic foodstuffs to sustain a steady expansion of food consumption and to offset fluctuations in production and prices. ( Report of the World Food Conference, Rome 5-16 November 1974. New York )

In chapter 2 of the FAO publication, Trade Reforms and Food Security: conceptualizing the linkages, the definition of the term Food Security is presented as a flexible concept which has evolved over time.

The Committee on World Food Security in document CFS 2012/39/4 has provided further official definition to Food Security and related terms.

For more information on how the definition has evolved, see the FAO publication:  Trade Reforms and Food Security: Conceptualizing the Linkages-  Chapter 2:2 

The Food Loss and Waste Accounting and Reporting Standard , (FLW) provide  the first-ever set of global definitions and reporting requirements to quantify and report on food loss and waste.

• Next: UN Milestones >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 3:49 PM
• URL: https://research.un.org/en/foodsecurity

Advertisement

Exploring food security as a multidimensional topic: twenty years of scientific publications and recent developments

• Open access
• Published: 09 August 2022
• Volume 57 , pages 2739–2758, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Maria Stella Righettini 1 &
• Elisa Bordin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0308-1742 2  

3537 Accesses

3 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The scientific literature dealing with food security is vast and fragmented, making it difficult to understand the state of the art and potential development of scientific research on a central theme within sustainable development.

The current article, starting from some milestone publications during the 1980s and 1990s about food poverty and good nutrition programmes, sets out the quantitative and qualitative aspects of a vast scientific production that could generate future food security research. It offers an overview of the topics that characterize the theoretical and empirical dimensions of food security, maps the state of the art, and highlights trends in publications’ ascending and descending themes. To this end the paper applies quantitative/qualitative methods to analyse more than 20,000 scientific articles published in Scopus between 2000 and 2020.

Evidence suggests the need to find more robust links between micro studies on food safety and nutrition poverty and macro changes in food security, such as the impact of climate change on agricultural production and global food crises. However, the potential inherent in the extensive and multidisciplinary research on food safety encounters limitations, particularly the difficulty of theoretically and empirically connecting the global and regional dimensions of change (crisis) with meso (policy) and micro (individual behaviour) dimensions.

Similar content being viewed by others

Criteria for Good Qualitative Research: A Comprehensive Review

Agroecological principles and elements and their implications for transitioning to sustainable food systems. A review

What is a framework? Understanding their purpose, value, development and use

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Food insecurity is a timely and multidimensional problem positioned at the crossroads between the right to food and health in developing and rich, industrialized countries. However, it is unclear how scientific production reflects this multidimensionality overall and whether the recent COVID-19 pandemic has shed new light on the issues at stake. The analysis presented in this article aims to give a systematic review and meta-analysis of the vast amount of scientific food security research produced over the past twenty years. This work aims to offer an overview of the topics that characterize food security’s theoretical and empirical dimensions, map state of the art, and highlight trends in scientific publications’ ascending and descending themes. A systematic literature review sets out quantitative and qualitative aspects which could generate future food security research.

Since the 1960s, with the approval of precursor USA federal anti-poverty programs (Esobi et al. 2021 ; Nestle 2019 ; Swann 2017 ), interest in preventing the adverse effects of poverty has broadened and deepened scientific interest in the field of how to guarantee food access to the neediest people. Since then, various framings, reflecting differences in meaning and problem formulation and coming from different territorial and disciplinary perspectives, have highlighted the contested relationship between social, economic, and environmental circumstances to food access and nutrition experiences (Dowler and O’Connor 2012 ). In the 1960s, creating the World Food Program (WFP) was a prominent example of the institutionalization of the ‘food for development’ framework. The food crisis of 1972–74 marked a turning point in food security insurance schemes and led to better coordination between donor countries. Then, the first official mention of food security was in the United Nations report presented at the World Food Conference in 1974 (McKeon 2014 ). In the 1980s and 1990s, food security was broadened to include physical and economic access to food and consider women’s role in poverty alleviation. Therefore, what has come to be termed food security and nutrition security has been controversial, reflecting multiple, not always coordinated, governmental policies and multifaceted theoretical and research fields.

The most used definition of food security was developed during the 1996 World Food Summit organized by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (Mechlem 2004 ). It resembles the definition of the right to food (Maxwell and Smith 1992 ; Smith et al. 1993 ). Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life (FAO 2003). Food security has become a priority focus for donor states and cooperation with developing countries to reduce poverty and systemic environmental, economic, and social causes of hunger. It has five conceptual dimensions: nutritional status, utilization, accessibility, availability, and stability (Gross et al. 2000). However, unlike food security, nutrition security refers only to the individual’s (mal)nutritional status due to diet regime, food intake, and health status (Gross et al. 2000).

Academic research developed many approaches to food insecurity during the 1980s and 1990s. The right-to-food-based approach to food security suggests that human dignity, rights acknowledgment, transparency, government accountability, citizens’ empowerment, food, and wellbeing should be considered in welfare programs. The right-to-food approach required governments to adopt specific programs and meet precise obligations to combat poverty (Maxwell 1996 ). The right to food was not merely a means to achieve food security; rather, it was seen as a broader, more encompassing, and distinct objective. The seminal works of Amartya Sen on poverty during the 1980s (Sen 1980 , 1981 , 1982 ) raised controversy over nutritional norms and intensified the debate on the interrelations between food access and poverty reduction interventions. Food security is seen as an integral part of social security, understood as the “prevention by social means, of a deficient standard of living irrespectively of whether these are the results of chronic deprivation or temporary adversity” (Burgess and Stern 1991 :4). We should point out that this debate regarded achieving food security in the poorest developing countries and the richest developed ones, where obesity and malnutrition among low-income people increased. The multifaceted nature of food security is entrenched in its measurement complexity (in terms of life expectancy or income). To understand the causes of deprivation and fragility associated with the lives of increasing portions of the population, food security scholars have striven to assess the validity of tools measuring food safety/insecurity and provide valid indications and suggestions to policymakers.

In the 2000 Plan for Action regarding food and diet in Europe, the World Health Organization (WHO) argued that nutrition security in the 21st century depends on production that meets dietary needs and enables equal access to appropriate food while controlling misleading promotional messages (Carlson et al. 1999 ). In addition, food prices, policies, and education can significantly reduce malnutrition risks (Wekerle 2004 ).

Even though rising poverty and hunger levels have been a concern for many countries, acknowledgment and quantification of hunger have been disputed and hindered by the lack of an accepted definition and measure of food security. Before food security can be measured, the potential target of the intervention must be identified.

The first food security measure based on household experiences at the individual level was developed in 1990 by Radimer and colleagues ( 1992 ) and based on a 12-item questionnaire. The ‘hunger index’ was developed through qualitative interviews with women from low-income households (Kendall, Olson, and Frongillo 1995 ). Since 1992, the literature has indicated that food security measurements may vary in their performance across different population groups and cultures and that good practice and policy instruments are difficult to transfer across different contexts (Kendall, Olson, and Frongillo 1995 ; Leyna et al. 2008 ; Radimer and Radimer 2002 ; Zerafati Shoae et al. 2007 ). One of the main problems in rolling out food security interventions is that it is not easy to identify the target (households below the poverty line) (Carlson et al. 1999 ). Although such identification usually lacks accuracy, generalized subsidies (food stamps) – on commodities consumed by both the rich and the poor – have often been an attractive option for policymakers (Besley and Kanbur 1988 ).

The more recent Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES), developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), focuses on food consumption experience, living conditions, and individual contexts (Cafiero et al. 2018 ). It consists of eight dimensions regarding people’s access to adequate food, and it is based on various kinds of population surveys. Its global reference scale is based on results from the application of the FIES survey module in countries covered by the Gallup World Poll in 2014, 2015, and 2016. In addition, food insecurity prevalence rates allow comparison between different countries, and the FIES is designed to measure unobservable traits such as aptitude/intelligence, personality, and a broad range of social psychology- and health-related conditions (Cafiero et al. 2018 ).

The food security issue has gained greater cross-cutting relevance in academic and policy circles in connection to public health issues related to the economic and social crises raised by the COVID-19 pandemic (Ahn and Norwood 2020 ; Arouna et al. 2020 ; Béné 2020 ; Cable et al. 2021 ; Mishra and Rampal 2020 ; Moseley and Battersby 2020 ; O’Hara and Toussaint 2021). Economic and social stresses generated by the pandemic led to the formulation of renewed public interventions in response to food insecurity in developing and rich countries.

The literature review presented in the following sections aims to fill a gap in our knowledge of the vast amount of scientific food security research produced, its theoretical and research dimensions, and trends in the last twenty years. Furthermore, the fully electronic search intends to illustrate the main lines of scientific interest within the topic and indicate the most transversal issues and promising areas of scientific interaction. Therefore, this article is organized as follows.

Section  2 illustrates the research questions and methods adopted to build the dataset of articles addressing food security. Section  3 presents research results regarding publications over time and across scientific areas. Section  4 describes the most recurrent topics and clusters of issues addressed by the food security literature. Section  5 shows their inter-relations and evolution over time. Section  6 presents an in-depth analysis of the thematic cluster on domestic programs. Section  7 shows the impact of COVID-19 in the thematic focus of publications. Finally, Section  8 discusses the main findings and limits of the meta-analysis and evaluates the contribution of the food security literature to unlocking the future research potential of transboundary policies and governance.

2 Research questions and methods

This article aims to answer the three main research questions: in a systematic literature review, what are the main thematic dimensions linked to the issue of food security? How do these dimensions evolve, and how do they relate? Furthermore, does the literature highlight new dimensions of the problem concerning the COVID-19 pandemic?

To achieve its scope, this article combines bibliographic analysis, semi-automatic content analysis, and topic detection to explore the literature on food security. Following research domain analysis (RDA), applied to all publications in a given research domain (Janssen 2007 ; Janssen et al. 2006 ; Janssen and Ostrom 2006 ), we describe multiple strands of literature, in particular interdisciplinary and inter-sectoral ones, to highlight dimensions and research agendas linked to the food security theme. An overview of the scholarly production and its evolution is essential to account for its achievements and gaps and identify the way forward.

There is not a comprehensive literature review on food security so far, but only partial reviews (Candel 2014 ; Chan et al. 2006 ; Haddad et al. 1996 ; Nosratabadi et al. 2020 ; Thompson et al. 2010 ). Therefore, our objective is to conduct an exploratory literature review investigating the multidisciplinary approaches to the issue. Thus, when choosing the most appropriate data source to construct the database of articles, the comprehensiveness of content coverage was the most important criterion to evaluate. Bibliographic databases (DBs) are the leading providers of publication metadata and bibliometric indicators (Pranckute 2021 ). Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) are widely acknowledged as the two most comprehensive DBs (see Pranckute 2021 for a comprehensive review of the studies). However, multiple studies confirmed that Scopus has a more comprehensive overall coverage than WoS. In addition, while the content of the two databases is generally overlapping, Scopus indexes a more significant number of unique sources not covered by WoS, though this variation differs across specific subject fields (Pranckute 2021 ). Hence, we deemed Scopus the most appropriate data source for our literature review given its greater comprehensiveness.

To conduct our bibliometric analysis, we started by compiling a list of words and concepts related to food security based on seminal works in the literature and the authors’ knowledge of the topic. The list included the following terms: food security, food insecurity, food aid, food poverty, nutrition quality, food solidarity, and food stamps. Subsequently, we compiled a list of possible combinations of these terms using Boolean operators, and we used them as search strings to explore the title, abstract, or keywords of publications within the Scopus database. The choice of “food security” (in quotation marks) as a keyword resulted from an iterative process that involved multiple searches using all the compiled combinations and discussions among the authors. As a result, this keyword returned the highest number of articles (over 20,000 results, as opposed to less than 10,000 results for other combinations). Moreover, the articles citing the term “food security” also covered all the other terms and combinations, while the reverse was not valid. Hence, we verified that the concept of “food security” is the most comprehensive and that it contains other relevant frames, such as food poverty, nutrition poverty, and, to a lesser extent, food safety.

Due to the database consistency and the marked increase in the number of articles per year, we decided to focus on literature published during the last two decades, thus analyzing the articles produced between 2000 and 2020. Furthermore, we decided to analyze separately the literature published between January and July 2021 (the current year) to avoid a misinterpretation of the results. The 2021 literature is relevant for identifying a variation in themes and focuses after the COVID-19 pandemic.

A first search using the selected keywords returned 34,931 documents. To narrow the analysis, we decided to focus the search on peer-reviewed articles written in English, as they constitute the core of the international literature. In addition, we cleaned the resulting database by removing articles with no abstract and duplicates. To select which duplicate would be kept in the database, we respected the following criteria: the most recent, the longest abstract, and correct formatting. The final database contained 21,574 articles. For the first fundamental analysis of the database, we used the automatic analyses provided by Scopus and complemented them with analyses made through Microsoft Excel. The aim was to list the academic journals, countries, and scientific areas of the articles published.

The second step of the analysis focused on the thematic dimensions covered in the food security literature. We performed a topic detection on the articles’ abstracts to achieve this aim, using automatic content analysis. Automatic and semi-automatic content analyses are evolving trends in the literature. These methods exploit algorithms and software to apply statistical analysis to textual data in electronic format (Sbalchiero 2018 ). They automate the process of data encoding and analysis, thus combining the advantage of timesaving with the possibility to investigate the main topics and issues discussed in the literature without any prior theoretical or analytical constraints (Sbalchiero and Eder 2020 ; Righettini and Lizzi 2021 ). However, while their application to the analysis of social media and political documents is growing, they remain marginal in literature reviews. Still, this kind of analysis allows researchers to overcome the biases involved in literature reviews when the authors select and analyze articles. In many cases, the selection criteria for the articles are not specified, so there is a risk that essential studies will be left out, and a self-reinforcing mechanism will be perpetuated around a limited number of articles. Conversely, the automatic and semi-automatic analysis considers the whole body of literature, thus allowing researchers to explore the variety of theoretical frameworks and methodologies that unravel undetected patterns.

Topic detection is a text mining technique that allows detecting these patterns in large document corpora and classifying them as recurring topics and themes. The “latent” topics within the corpus’ documents are unveiled through algorithms that use statistical modeling and programming language to analyze the correlation among terms, i.e., words or phrases (El-Taliawi et al. 2021 ). This study employs Reinert’s method (Reinert 1990 , 2001 ), which uses the R-based software Iramuteq to analyze “the co-occurrences of words as they appear in portions of text, and thereby identify lexical worlds, or semantic classes” (Sbalchiero 2018 , p. 202). This method automatically performs most of the operations required to prepare the corpora (lemmatization, spelling harmonization, etc.). It allows for saving time in the process and increasing precision. Moreover, it does not require specifying the number of topics a priori (Sbalchiero and Eder 2020 ). Thus, it appears more fitted for explorative analysis of the literature we aim to do in this study.

The algorithm implemented by Iramuteq constructs a contingency matrix of words-per-abstract based on the co-occurrences of words in each abstract. It then uses a clustering procedure that hierarchically identifies the “factors (clusters) that best represent a lexical world from the distance of the chi-square between the classes” (Sbalchiero 2018 , p. 203). Pearson’s chi-square test (statistical hypothesis test) allows measuring the strength of association between the terms and topics. The greater the Pearson’s chi-square, the more likely the hypothesis of dependence between terms and topic (Carvalho et al. 2020 ). Co-occurrences of words are analyzed in such a way as to understand their relationships in the contexts of scientific discourse and to construct vocabularies of co-occurring words that are specific to each semantic class. Through this analysis, we were able to identify the different thematic dimensions discussed in the literature and the topics covered, and the relationships among different clusters. This analysis allowed us to answer the first research question.

In a subsequent step, we used the semi-automatic text analysis to measure the association grade between the topics and publication year variable. Again, a positive difference, and a threshold of significance set at chi-square, indicated that a topic had received greater attention in a particular year. Hence, by looking at the grade of association between year and clusters, we were able to determine the evolution of the topics over time and, thus, answer the second research question.

To strengthen these analyses, we also studied the keywords authors had listed in the articles. The keywords analysis helped identify the most studied issues related to food security and geographic focuses.

Finally, we investigated the articles published in Scopus between January 2021 and July 11, 2021 (the last search conducted) using the same procedure applied to the main corpus. After the cleaning procedure, the 2021 database consisted of 2,533 articles (out of 3,672 documents resulting from the search). As for the main corpus, we performed the analysis using both Microsoft Excel and Iramuteq software. However, in this case, the application of Reinert’s ( 1983 ) method did not result in a statistically significant analysis, as the percentage of text segments retained (69.16%) was lower than the minimum retention indicated by the literature (70 – 75%). Still, it was possible to use the analysis to identify new topics and trends in the literature on food security after the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, the analysis of the keywords complemented this analysis and allowed us to answer the third research question.

Due to the high number of articles included in the dataset, this review did not aim to investigate the specific content of articles. Instead, it aimed to identify the main trends in the literature and the topics that constitute the core of the theoretical and methodological debate around food security.

3 Publications over time and across scientific areas

The present section describes some characteristics of the dataset analyzed, namely the corpus dimension, science areas, and journals most interested in food security, as well as how food security articles published between 2000 and 2020 developed over time.

Table  1 shows a first analysis of the database on food security. Between 2000 and 2020, 21,574 articles were published in English in 3,817 different journals. The high number of both articles and journals is representative of the attention that this topic has received over the last two decades and the multiple angles adopted for its analysis. The multidisciplinary of the literature is also evident in the distribution among different scientific areas. Agricultural and biological science (ABS) is the most prominent subject area, closely followed by social sciences (SS) and environmental science (ES). An important percentage of articles also deals with medicine and health (MH) and economics (E). Therefore, we can affirm that the issue of food security cuts across disciplinary boundaries. Authors have analyzed the issue from a variety of theoretical and methodological perspectives.

It is also worth noting that geographically, the publications are mainly concentrated in the Anglo-Saxon countries, with U.S. academia producing almost 30% of the literature. Other than the obvious issue of the English language, the strong preponderance of articles published by British and U.S. universities can be linked to the long tradition of these countries in food security and food assistance programs and evaluation. The automatic analyses performed by the Scopus website allowed us to identify the most relevant scientific areas explored in each country. Both the USA and UK distribute their production rather evenly among different scientific areas (USA: 18.3% ABS, 17.7% SS, 14.9% ES, 13.3% MH; UK: 21.4% ABS, 18.9% ES, 18.5% SS).

China represents an exception to the English-speaking countries, being the third most prolific producer. China has seen a rapid increase in articles published since 2009, with more than half of the studies focusing on ES and ABS. This timing in Chinese scientific production may be due both to the first major food security policy document released by the Chinese central government in 2004 to combat food poverty (Ghose 2014 ) and the effects of the global food crisis after the global increase in food prices in 2007. The instability was due to smaller amounts of food being available for human consumption because farmers devoted more of their crops to biofuel production in the USA and Europe (Bohstedt 2016 ).

As shown in Fig.  1 , the number of articles published every year has strongly and steadily increased since the beginning of the century, with rapid growth in the last decade. The number of publications grew from 156 to 2,000 to 658 in 2010 to over 3,500 in 2020. The growth index represented in Fig.  2 (calculated as [(PresentValue – Past Value)/PastValue] *100) shows more clearly a substantial increase in 2006 (global food crisis) and two peaks in 2013 (effects of the second financial crisis) and 2020 (COVID-19 crisis). These figures show how the food security issue has been gaining importance in the literature over time, a trend confirmed by the number of articles published in 2021. In addition, they confirm the critical link between economic and social crises and food security. These crises increase food insecurity, thus sparking new debates and studies on the issue of food security.

Articles on food security published per year (2000–2020)

Yearly growth index of articles on food security (2000–2020)

The attention to food security observed in Fig.  2 gained momentum due to a sharp rise in alimentary prices in 2006 and 2013. The first rise was caused by global financial speculation in agricultural commodities futures (McKeon 2014 ). Moreover, the food crisis that broke out between 2007 and 2008 focused the interest of a broad international scientific debate on agricultural policies, the gaps between the north and the southern countries, and the adequacy of global food security governance’s primary tool: food aids. The second momentum of interest for food insecurity was in 2013. It converges with the new rise in food prices and a growing interest in the social movements and civil society organizations’ role in mitigating the social and health consequences of financial speculation and global food market dynamics on local communities. Finally, from 2019 onwards, the scientific literature has increased interest in the connections between the unstoppable growth of food prices, climate change, and the COVID-19 pandemic on food security. The scientific articles concern, among the others, the challenges posed by climate change on the resilience of local agricultural systems, and finally, the negative impact of policies to combat the COVID-19 pandemic on poverty and the growing fragility of individuals and families in accessing quality food both in developed and developing countries and regions.

As observed in Section  2 , the issue of food security results in many different journals and from various perspectives. The plurality of approaches to the problem is also evident in ranking the journals that have published the most articles. As we can see in Table  2 , the ten most active journals publish literature which is either interdisciplinary or pertaining to different scientific areas. It is interesting to observe that the first journal is Sustainability , thus reflecting the strong link between the issue of food security and sustainability, in particular with regard to the environmental and social aspects of the latter. In addition, food security has a dedicated journal, thus confirming once again its importance in the academic world.

4 Food security thematic dimensions

After mapping publications on food security, we can observe the empirical data that allow us to answer the first research question:

RQ1: What are the main thematic dimensions linked to the theme of food security?

A first attempt to identify the most recurrent issues analyzed by the food security literature can be made by looking at the keywords proposed by the authors, which outline the focus of the articles. As we can see from Table  3 , the focus proposed by the keywords is rather composite. The presence of climate change as the second most frequently used keyword is significant of the importance that adaptation (n. 13), resilience to climate change (n. 15), and the sustainability (n. 6) of food systems play in the academic discourse. Food production, represented by words such as agriculture (n. 4), rice (n. 11), and maize (n. 16), is also an important element of food security. It is also important to note the countries that appear as keywords and, thus, represent the main geographical focuses of the literature. The African continent is represented by three keywords: Africa (n. 8), sub-Saharan Africa (n. 12), and Ethiopia (n. 14). The strong presence of Africa in the literature can be linked to both the problem of food security in the continent and the FAO’s strong focus on the region. It is also interesting to observe that China (n.9) is the first country to appear as a keyword. This finding is in line with the fact that China is among the most prolific publishers and among the most studied countries, alongside Africa and India.

After a first analysis of the most discussed topics in the literature, we proceed to the analysis of the thematic clusters. The application of Reinert’s ( 1983 ) method to the corpus of food security articles resulted in a division into six thematic clusters that represent six different focuses of the literature. As shown in Fig.  3 , the division into clusters follows a hierarchical procedure which divides the texts based on their semantic classes, until the homogeneity of the texts makes a further division impossible. Hence, we can observe a first cluster (domestic programs for diet) isolated from a second macro-cluster that unfolds in three separate sub-clusters (agriculture and biotechnology; research approaches and policy; climate impact).

Descending hierarchy of thematic clusters in the food security literature (2000–2020)

Table  4 shows the percentage of texts that belong to each cluster and the words that best characterize it. The titles were assigned to each cluster by the authors based on the analysis of the content, to simplify their identification.

Below is a short description of the content of each cluster and its perspective on food security:

Cluster 1: “Domestic programs for diet quality” is the biggest thematic cluster in the literature. Moreover, as shown in Fig.  3 , this cluster stands as a separate stream of the literature. It deals with food security programs and diet quality, linking food security to household food security. It focuses on programs designed to secure a good dietary intake, with a specific focus on low-income Footnote 1 families, gender ( woman, female) , and schools . The American Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) receives considerable attention within this cluster, as one of the oldest and broadest national food security programs. Hence, food security is analyzed in its dimension related to nutritional quality ( nutritional status, dietary diversity) , observing the impact of different factors ( income, education, age) on food insecurity at the individual level. The measurement of food insecurity is central in this cluster, as highlighted by words such as survey, score, questionnaire , and interview . Through these methods, the literature aims to measure the impact of food security programs in contrasting food insecurity and improving the nutritional status of the participants. Due to its size and its separateness from the rest of the literature, we analyze this cluster in greater depth in the next section.

Cluster 2: “Agriculture” focuses specifically on agricultural production, investigating the influence of different factors on food production. Specifically, it observes the impact of climatic events ( temperature, season, rainfall ) and agricultural practices ( fertilizers, manure, experiment) on the yield productivity of different crops ( maize, wheat, rice, grains). The approach to food security in this cluster is purely scientific, and it aims to increase and improve food production to guarantee access to food.

Cluster 3: “Bio-technology” is closely related to Cluster 4, as it deals with the genetic and biological aspects of food and its production. The analysis focuses on the genetic modification of plants and species to improve their resistance and tolerance to pathogens and external stress. The approach is purely scientific, and it focuses on improving the resistance of food production to the impact of climate change.

Cluster 4: “Climate impact” relates to a dimension of global demand for food production , mostly related to the impact of climate change and population growth . Agricultural production is essential for ensuring food security and global access to food. However, it is facing challenges on two fronts. On the one hand, it needs to deal with the impact of climate change and how it threatens productivity, biodiversity , and water resources. On the other, it is challenged by changes in land use , both under the pressure of urbanization and about land conversion for producing energy , in the form of biofuel. Thus, this cluster focuses on improving food security through the adoption of strategies that mainly aim to strengthen the resilience, productivity, and sustainability of food production.

Cluster 5: “Research approaches” is a rather composite cluster which includes the different frameworks and perspectives adopted by the food security literature. The approaches and methodologies are very diverse, ranging from political discussions and debates (agenda, discourse) , to social and justice perspectives ( movement, human rights) , to food systems and food sovereignty ( governance). It uses both empirical case studies and theoretical approaches ( theory) to discuss the issue and concept of food security. The diversity of approaches reflects the multidisciplinarity of the literature, as previously observed.

Cluster 6: “Policy” deals with the strategies and policies that governments adopt for food security and adaptation . Agricultural policies are central in this cluster, with natural resources and land management as essential elements of adaptation strategies and farmers’ support. The cluster analyses all phases involved in the policy process, examining the definition of an agenda , the decision-making process, the planning of a strategy , the identification of tools , and the adoption phase, which includes the implementation, strengthening , and building of capacities. Participatory practices, as well as technology and innovation , receive much attention within the cluster. Thus, this cluster focuses on the improvement of food security through the adoption of strategies that mainly aim at strengthening the resilience, productivity, and sustainability of food production.

It is interesting to observe the role “poverty” plays in the food security literature. While it is one of the most used keywords listed by authors, it does not appear as a frequent word in any clusters (Cluster 2 is the one in which it first appears, n. 223). This difference in importance could be that while poverty is considered a central issue in the food security literature, the articles focus on the causes, effects, and different dimensions of poverty, rather than on poverty itself. Causes and effects are treated in different clusters within the literature. Cluster 2 deals with climate change’s impact on the increasing number of people falling into poverty globally. Cluster 6 and, to a lesser extent, Cluster 5 deal with its effects through programs that aim to alleviate food and nutrition poverty.

5 Evolution over time and relation between thematic dimensions

After the analysis of the thematic clusters and their evolution over time, we can answer the second research question:

RQ2: How do these dimensions evolve, and how do they relate?

Figure  4 shows the evolution over time of the different thematic clusters. We can see a relatively stable trend in the evolution of the clusters.

Refer to Sect. 2 for the general meaning of the chi-square value. In the temporal evolution of topics, Pearson’s chi-square indicates the association between the term “year_year of publication” (e.g., “year_2020”) related to each article and the topics. A positive value in the graph suggests over-representation of a topic in a specific year (highly discussed in the literature), while negative values indicate under-representation of the topic in that year (seldomly discussed in the literature)

Figure compiled by authors .

Still, we can observe how the “biotechnology” cluster has started to receive increased attention in the past five years, with a growing trend. Likewise, the “domestic programs for diet quality” cluster saw a spike in attention between 2006 and 2007. This increase is likely to be linked to the global food crisis caused by a shift in land use, from food production for human consumption to biomass production for biofuel. The drop-in food production caused a spike in the prices and a consequent increase in food insecurity, thus putting programs to improve food security high on the policy and scholarly agenda.

The food security literature has seen multiple topics co-exist in the last two decades. The “policy” cluster has had the most stable presence in the literature, while other clusters have seen fluctuating trends. It is worth noting that the “diet quality” cluster received considerable attention in 2006 – 2007 and that a growing strand of literature focuses on the technological and biological aspects of food production for food security.

The Cartesian planes (Fig.  5 ) reflect the relationships between different clusters and among the most frequent words belonging to the clusters themselves. The zero value on the X-axis allows for distinguishing between topics that show a positive correlation among terms and topics that tend to be more isolated. Clusters with a higher co-occurrence appear graphically close, while graphically distant clusters are treated as separate issues in the literature. Moreover, words used most frequently within a cluster appear more prominent in the graph.

Distance and interconnections between thematic clusters related to food security (2000–2020)

As already observed in the descending hierarchy of the cluster (Fig. 3), the six clusters can be grouped into three macro-clusters. The cluster “diet quality programs” stands alone, with little integration with the other clusters. The “agriculture” and “biotechnology” clusters form a macro-cluster dealing with food production. The articles about this macro-cluster focus on improving agricultural production, increasing its resistance to the changing climate, and guaranteeing food security in a world with a fast-growing population. The third macro-cluster includes the methodological aspects and combines the thematic dimension with the impact of global warming. The articles in the macro-cluster, then, focus on the policies that have been implemented to face the challenges proposed by climate change, mainly concerning land management and strategies to prevent and adapt to climate change. The second and third macro-clusters show similarities, but while the second one adopts a techno-biological perspective on the issue, the third employs a socioeconomic perspective.

Hence, the thematic dimensions that can be identified in the food security literature comprise (a) domestic programs to tackle food insecurity; (b) policies to fight the challenges posed to global food security by climate change; and (c) analysis and technological improvements in food production to guarantee global food security.

6 Domestic programs for diet quality: an in-depth analysis

It is interesting to observe Cluster 6 in greater depth, as it represents a consistent part of the literature and a stand-alone cluster. To better understand its content, we applied Reinert’s ( 1983 ) analysis method to its sub-corpus of text segments. The analysis showed a division into five clusters, two dedicated to methodologies and three dedicated to an analytical dimension.

The methodological clusters show a clear division between qualitative methods, which focus on nutrition security (i.e., dietary diversity) at the individual level, and quantitative ones, which deal with food security (i.e., access to food and poverty) at a more macro level. The qualitative methods, which represent the majority, present a solid link to interviews and participatory approaches and a temporal dimension (name of months), highlighting that attention is given to developing countries and the impact of seasonal cycles on agricultural production. Conversely, the quantitative methods investigate the statistical correlation among different phenomena (e.g., food security and obesity) at the macro, and national level.

The analytical clusters unfold into two different streams in the literature: one develops methodological strategies and techniques, and the other devises in-depth substantive analyses of the issue of food security. The first stream of articles analyses how to measure food security and which instruments to assess its causes and effects ought to be used, including the comparative approach. The second stream adopts a policy approach that aims to answer how to intervene by considering food insecurity programs organizational and institutional contexts. Intervention strategies are defined by analyzing of food security’s risk factors, which can be semantically attributed to a health dimension (i.e., obesity, diseases, and mental health), and a behavioral and social dimension (i.e., purchasing habits, income, and education). These two dimensions are discussed together within the literature, showing how they are intrinsically connected in determining food security.

The relevance of the methodological dimension and the attention to risk factors confirm the importance of developing appropriate tools to measure food security, both in terms of causes and effects, to design more appropriate food security programs.

7 New thematic dimensions in the aftermath of COVID-19

The global COVID-19 pandemic has had a consistent impact, from a socioeconomic standpoint and on academic production. Consequently, the COVID-19 impacts (direct and indirect) on the global and local scale increased scholars’ engagement and attention. Hence, it is interesting to analyze the 2021 literature on food security to observe whether the crisis has impacted academic production on the issue and new thematic dimensions have emerged.

Thus, we can answer our third research question:

RQ 3: What new dimensions of the issue do the literature highlight concerning the COVID-19 pandemic?

The articles published in 2021 provide us insights into the COVID-19 impact on the issue of food security and whether the pandemic caused a change in focus in the literature.

In the first six months of 2021, 2,533 food security articles were published in 977 journals. The 2021 data also confirm the saliency of the topic and its multidisciplinary. However, while ABS remains the central area of focus (21.9%), we observed increased attention paid to ES (19%) and a decrease in focus on SS (13.8%). This result is in line with the growing trend in the cluster that deals with biotechnological aspects of food security and emerged by the journals publishing the highest number of articles on food security in 2021. Four out of five of the most active journals deal with ES ( Sustainability , International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , Science of the Total Environment , and Journal of Cleaner Production ). However, it is more likely that these trends are linked to the increased scholarly and public attention paid to climate change. In addition, China has confirmed its importance as a publisher of food security literature.

COVID-19 appears as the fourth most frequent keyword proposed by the authors, after food security, food insecurity, and climate change. This result shows how COVID-19 has become the focus of many articles. Still, climate change remains a more substantial concern for academics dealing with food security, as highlighted by the subject areas and journals.

Reinert’s ( 1983 ) analysis method can better enlighten the impact of COVID-19 on the literature, showing how the topic is treated in articles and how the clusters have changed in the aftermath of the pandemic. Although the disappearance of the methodological cluster, the thematic clusters of 2021 present many similarities with those of the period 2000 – 2020. However, we observe significant differences in topics within the “policy” and “climate impact” clusters. While the 2000 – 2020 “policy” cluster focused on support policies for agricultural adaptation to climate change, the 2021 “policy” cluster has a stronger focus on sustainability policies, with governments seeming to have more importance and the social and environmental dimension being more directly debated. In addition, the 2000 – 2020 “climate impact” cluster became broader in 2021, including different global challenges.

On the one hand, we saw attention paid to the COVID-19 pandemic. On the other, we saw a switch in attention from agriculture to fishery, as an essential source of food for the global population that is currently under threat due to climate change and unsustainable fishing practices. In addition, a warming planet has disrupted and depleted fisheries worldwide, drawing scientific attention to overfishing as a factor increasing the vulnerability of fisheries.

In terms of relations among the different thematic clusters, we can observe that the “bio-technology” cluster has become more separate from the “agriculture” cluster, while the latter has become more closely linked to the “policy” and “climate impact” clusters. The closer link between food production and the global political dimension may be due to the increased public and political attention paid to the issue of climate change, as well as the growing impact of extreme climate events on food production.

Moreover, we observed that the “domestic programs for diet quality” cluster remains an isolated theme in the literature, confirming the silo approach to food insecurity on a domestic scale and the global issue of food production for a growing population and in a warming planet.

8 Discussion and conclusions

The systematic literature analysis addressed by the current article increases our knowledge of the vast and multidisciplinary food security scientific production and its theoretical and research dimensions and trends during the last twenty years. Furthermore, it traces the main lines of scientific interest in the topic and indicates the most transversal issues, weaknesses, and opportunities for future development.

In the period considered, food security becomes increasingly relevant in conjunction with and due to the impact of the economic and financial crises and climate change on the weakest segments of the population, both in developing and rich countries.

The main literature trends highlighted by our research can be summarized as follows:

The number of articles published has increased enormously in the last two decades, with peaks in 2006, 2013, and 2020, all linked to the outbreak of financial and social crises and their effects on agricultural commodities prices and food system dynamics. The place of the issue of food security within the literature has grown in importance over time. This is because it has become sensitive to the increasingly frequent global economic and health crises (Dodds et al. 2020 ; Galanakis 2020 ; O’Hara and Toussaint 2021 ) and the local environmental impact of climate change (Bohle et al. 1994 ; Lang et al. 2009 ).

Domestic programs for diet quality are the most explored dimension of food security and stand as a separate branch of the literature, considerably ahead of the most discussed macro-dimension of food production, which addresses policies, climate impact, and agriculture.

Despite a relatively stable trend in the evolution of the main topics detected, we can observe how the “biotechnology” cluster has started to receive increased attention in the past five years.

The general scientific attention to the “diet quality” issue was highly concentrated in 2006–2007, along with a growing strand of literature focused on the technological and biological aspect of food production for food security.

The household food security measurement and indicators are the most important scientific topics and, at the same time, separate from other arguments addressed by scholars. This separation indicates the difficulty of theoretically and empirically linking the micro nutritional aspects of food security to meso and macro elements, such as government agricultural policy and climatic impact on local diet change. Thus, even though food security is widely recognized as a multidimensional and cross-sectoral issue, academic analyses still seem affected by silo approaches in one of the most important fields of scientific analysis and public intervention.

The analysis of the articles published in 2021 confirms that ABS remains the central area of focus; increased scholarly and public attention to climate change impact on agriculture production and fishing has emerged in 2021.

Our analysis suggests some conclusive reflections concerning the need to link more solidly micro studies on food safety and nutrition poverty to macro changes such as climate change impact on agricultural production. However, the potential inherent in the extensive and multidisciplinary research on food safety has limitations, particularly the difficulty of connecting theoretically and empirically the global and regional dimensions of change (crisis) with the meso (policy) and micro (individual behavior) dimensions. Nevertheless, this greater connection can only benefit the action of governments and policies that have long been committed to this front.

The words that belong to the cluster are written in italics.

Ahn, S., Norwood, F.B.: Measuring Food Insecurity during the Covid-19 Pandemic of Spring 2020. Appl. Economic Perspect. Policy. 43 (1), 162–168 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13069

Article   Google Scholar  

Arouna, A., Soullier, G., Mendez del Villar, P., Demont, M.: Policy Options for Mitigating Impacts of COVID-19 on Domestic Rice Value Chains and Food Security in West Africa. Global Food Security. 26 , 100405 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100405

Béné, C.: Resilience of Local Food Systems and Links to Food Security–A Review of Some Important Concepts in the Context of COVID-19 and Other Shocks. Food Secur. 12 (4), 805–822 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-020-01076-1

Besley, T., Kanbur, R.: Food Subsidies and Poverty Alleviation. Econ. J. 98 (392), 701–719 (1988)

Bohle, H.G., Downing, T.E., Watts, M.J.: Climate Change and Social Vulnerability: Toward a Sociology and Geography of Food Insecurity. Glob. Environ. Change. 4 (1), 37–48 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(94)90020-5

Bohstedt, J.: Food Riots and the Politics of Provisions from Early Modern Europe and China to the Food Crisis of 2008. J. Peasant Stud. 43 (5), 1035–1067 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1170009

Burgess, R., Stern, N.: Social Security in Developing Countries: What, Why, Who, and How? In: Ahmad, E., Dreze, J., Hills, J., Sen, A. (eds.) Social Security in Developing Countries. WIDER studies in development economics, pp. 41–80. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1991)

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Cable, J., Jaykus, L., Hoelzer, K., Newton, J., Torero, M.: The Impact of COVID-19 on Food Systems, Safety, and Security—a Symposium Report. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1484(1), 3–8 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.14482

Cafiero, C., Viviani, S., Nord, M.: Food Security Measurement in a Global Context: The Food Insecurity Experience Scale. Measurement. 116 , 146–152 (2018)

Candel, J.L.: Food Security Governance: A Systematic Literature Review. Food Secur. 6 (4), 585–601 (2014)

Carlson, S.J., Andrews, M.S., Bickel, G.W.: Measuring Food Insecurity and Hunger in the United States: Development of a National Benchmark Measure and Prevalence Estimates. J. Nutr. 129 (2), 510S–516S (1999). https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/129.2.510S

Carvalho, T.S., Mota, D.M., Saab, F.: Utilização do software IRaMuTeQ na análise de contribuições da sociedade em processo regulatório conduzido pela Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Vigilancia Sanitaria Em Debate. 8 (1), 10–21 (2020). https://doi.org/10.22239/2317-269X.01429

Chan, J., To, H., Chan, E.: Reconsidering Social Cohesion: Developing a Definition and Analytical Framework for Empirical Research. Soc. Indic. Res. 75 (2), 273–302 (2006)

Dodds, K., Broto, V.C., Detterbeck, K., Jones, M., Mamadouh, V., Ramutsindela, M., Varsanyi, M., Wachsmuth, D., Woon, C.Y.: The COVID-19 Pandemic: Territorial, Political and Governance Dimensions of the Crisis. Territory, Politics, Governance. 8 (3), 289–298 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2020.1771022

Dowler, E.A., O’Connor, D.: Rights-Based Approaches to Addressing Food Poverty and Food Insecurity in Ireland and UK. Soc. Sci. Med. 74 (1), 44–51 (2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.08.036

El-Taliawi, O.G., Goyal, N., Howlett, M.: Holding out the promise of Lasswell’s dream: Big data analytics in public policy research and teaching. Rev. Policy Res. 38 (6), 640–660 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12448

Esobi, I. C. et al.: Food Insecurity, Social Vulnerability, and the Impact of COVID-19 on Population Dependent on Public Assistance/SNAP: A Case Study of South Carolina. USA. J. Food Secur. 9 (1), 8?18 (2021)

Galanakis, C.M.: The Food Systems in the Era of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Crisis. Foods. 9 (4), 523 (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9040523

Ghose, B.: Food Security and Food Self-Sufficiency in China: From Past to 2050. Food Energy Secur. 3 (2), 86–95 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.48

Haddad, L.J., Peña, C., Nishida, C., Quisumbing, A.R., Slack, A.: Food Security and Nutrition Implications of Intrahousehold Bias: A Review of Literature. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Food Consumption and Nutrition Division. FCND Discussion Paper Number 19. Washington DC. (1996)

Janssen, M.A.: An Update on the Scholarly Networks on Resilience, Vulnerability, and Adaptation within the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. Ecol. Soc. 12 (2), 9 (2007). https://doi.org/10.5751/es-02099-120209

Janssen, M.A., Ostrom, E.: Resilience, Vulnerability, and Adaptation: A Cross-Cutting Theme of the International Human Dimensions Program on Global Environmental Change. Glob. Environ. Change. 16 (3), 237–239 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.003

Janssen, M.A., Schoon, M.L., Ke, W., Börner, K.: Scholarly Networks on Resilience, Vulnerability and Adaptation within the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. Glob. Environ. Change. 16 (3), 240–252 (2006). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02099-120209

Kendall, A., Olson, C.M., Frongillo Jr, E.A.: Validation of the Radimer/Cornell Measures of Hunger and Food Insecurity. J. Nutr. 125 (11), 2793–2801 (1995). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/125.11.2793

Lang, T., Barling, D., Caraher, M.: Food Policy: Integrating health, environment and society. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567882.001.0001

Book   Google Scholar  

Leyna, G.H., Mmbaga, E.J., Mnyika, K.S., Klepp, K.-I.: Validation of the Radimer/Cornell Food Insecurity Measure in Rural Kilimanjaro, Tanzania. Public Health. Nutr. 11 (7), 684–689 (2008). doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980007001267

Maxwell, S.: Food Security: A Post-Modern Perspective. Food policy. 21 (2), 155–170 (1996)

Maxwell, S., Smith, M.: Household Food Security: A Conceptual Review. Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Mimeo (1992)

Google Scholar  

McKeon, N.: Food security governance: Empowering communities, regulating corporations. London, Routledge (2014)

Mechlem, K.: Food Security and the Right to Food in the Discourse of the United Nations. Eur. Law J. 10 (5), 631–648 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2004.00235.x

Mishra, K., Rampal, J.: The COVID-19 Pandemic and Food Insecurity: A Viewpoint on India. World Dev. 135 , 105068 (2020)

Moseley, W.G., Battersby, J.: The Vulnerability and Resilience of African Food Systems, Food Security, and Nutrition in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Afr. Stud. Rev. 63 (3), 449–461 (2020)

Nestle, M.: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): History, Politics, and Public Health Implications. Am. J. Public Health 109 (12), 1631?35 (2019)

Nosratabadi, S., Khazami, N., Abdallah, M.B., Lackner, Z., Band, S., Mosavi, S., Mako, C.: Social Capital Contributions to Food Security: A Comprehensive Literature Review. Foods. 9 (11), 1650 (2020)

O’Hara, S., Toussaint, E.C.: Food Access in Crisis: Food Security and COVID-19. Ecol. Econ. 180 , 106859 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106859

Pranckute, R.: Web of ˙Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World. Publications. 9 , 12 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012

Radimer, K.L., Olson, C.M., Greene, J.C., Campbell, C.C., Habicht, J.-P.: Understanding Hunger and Developing Indicators to Assess It in Women and Children. Journal of Nutrition Education 24(1, Supplement 1), 36S-44S doi: (1992). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3182(12)80137-3

Radimer, K.L., Radimer, K.L.: Measurement of Household Food Security in the USA and Other Industrialised Countries. Public Health. Nutr. 5 (6a), 859–864 (2002)

Reinert, M.: Une méthode de classification descendante hiérarchique: application à l’analyse lexicale par contexte. Cahiers de l’analyse des données. 8 (2), 187–198 (1983)

Reinert, M.: Alceste Une Méthodologie d’analyse Des Données Textuelles et Une Application: Aurelia De Gerard De Nerval. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de méthodologie sociologique 26(1), 24–54 (1990)

Reinert, M.: Alceste Une Méthode Statistique et Sémiotique d’analyse de Discours. Application Aux Rêveries Du Promeneur Solitaire. Revue française de psychiatrie et de psychologie médicale 5(49), 32–36 (2001)

Righettini, M.S., Lizzi, R.: How scholars break down “policy coherence”: The impact of sustainable development global agendas on academic literature. Environ. Policy Gov. 1–12 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1966

Sbalchiero, S.: Topic Detection: A Statistical Model and a Quali-Quantitative Method. In: Tuzzi, A. (ed.) Tracing the Life Cycle of Ideas in the Humanities and Social Sciences, pp. 189–210. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97064-6_10

Sbalchiero, S., Eder, M.: Topic Modeling, Long Texts and the Best Number of Topics. Some Probl. Solutions Qual. Quantity. 54 (4), 1095–1108 (2020). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-00976-w

Sen, A., World Bank: Levels of Poverty: Policy and Change. Washington, DC,. World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 401. (1980)

Sen, A., Issues in the Measurement of Poverty. In: Measurement in Public Choice, Springer, 144–66 (1981)

Sen, A., The Food Problem: Theory and Policy. Third World Quarterly 4(3), 447–59: (1982)

Smith, M., Pointing, J., Maxwell, S.: Household Food Security: Concepts and Definitions: An Annotated Bibliography. Institute of Development Studies Brighton, Sussex (1993)

Swann, C. A.: Household History, SNAP Participation, and Food Insecurity. Food Policy 73 , 1?9 (2017)

Thompson, H.E., Berrang-Ford, L., Ford, J.D.: Climate Change and Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Literature. Rev. Sustain. 2 (8), 2719–2733 (2010)

Wekerle, G.R.: Food Justice Movements: Policy, Planning, and Networks. J. Plann. Educ. Res. 23 (4), 378–386 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X04264886

Zerafati Shoae, N., Omidvar, N., Ghazi-Tabatabaie, M., Houshiar_Rad, A., Fallah, H., Mehrabi, Y.: Is the Adapted Radimer/Cornell Questionnaire Valid to Measure Food Insecurity of Urban Households in Tehran. Iran? Public. Health Nutrition. 10 (8), 855–861 (2007). doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1368980007441465

Download references

Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Milano within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Political Science, Law and International Studies (SPGI), University of Padova, Milan, Italy

Maria Stella Righettini

Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

Elisa Bordin

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elisa Bordin .

Ethics declarations

Declarations.

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

The study conception and design were developed by Maria Stella Righettini. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Elisa Bordin, with the support of Maria Stella Righettini. Both authors participated in the redaction and revision of the manuscript and approved the final version.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Righettini, M.S., Bordin, E. Exploring food security as a multidimensional topic: twenty years of scientific publications and recent developments. Qual Quant 57 , 2739–2758 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01452-3

Download citation

Received : 13 December 2021

Revised : 08 April 2022

Accepted : 25 May 2022

Published : 09 August 2022

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01452-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Food security
• Food policy
• Text mining
• Food poverty
• Food access
• Literature review
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 08 August 2022

Systematic evidence and gap map of research linking food security and nutrition to mental health

• Thalia M. Sparling   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8071-3232 1 ,
• Megan Deeney   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4817-1170 1 ,
• Bryan Cheng 2 ,
• Xuerui Han 2 ,
• Chiara Lier   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0868-1384 2 ,
• Zhuozhi Lin 3 ,
• Claudia Offner 1 ,
• Marianne V. Santoso 4 ,
• Erin Pfeiffer 5 ,
• Jillian A. Emerson 6 ,
• Florence Mariamu Amadi 7 ,
• Khadija Mitu 8 ,
• Camila Corvalan 9 ,
• Helen Verdeli 2 ,
• Ricardo Araya 10 &
• Suneetha Kadiyala   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9101-1471 1  

Nature Communications volume  13 , Article number:  4608 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

8484 Accesses

5 Citations

35 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Epidemiology
• Risk factors

Connections between food security and nutrition (FSN) and mental health have been analytically investigated, but conclusions are difficult to draw given the breadth of literature. Furthermore, there is little guidance for continued research. We searched three databases for analytical studies linking FSN to mental health. Out of 30,896 records, we characterized and mapped 1945 studies onto an interactive Evidence and Gap Map (EGM). In these studies, anthropometry (especially BMI) and diets were most linked to mental health (predominantly depression). There were fewer studies on infant and young child feeding, birth outcomes, and nutrient biomarkers related to anxiety, stress, and mental well-being. Two-thirds of studies hypothesized FSN measures as the exposure influencing mental health outcomes. Most studies were observational, followed by systematic reviews as the next largest category of study. One-third of studies were carried out in low- and middle-income countries. This map visualizes the extent and nature of analytical studies relating FSN to mental health and may be useful in guiding future research.

Similar content being viewed by others

Modelling health and economic impact of nutrition interventions: a systematic review

Association between food insecurity and key metabolic risk factors for diet-sensitive non-communicable diseases in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Effectiveness of food environment policies in improving population diets: a review of systematic reviews

Introduction.

Food security and nutrition (FSN) are key components of global health and development. Internationally, healthy diets are increasingly reported to be out of reach 1 and unaffordable 2 for people of lower socioeconomic status, leading to undernutrition (e.g., wasting, underweight, micronutrient deficiency, growth faltering) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and nutrition-related chronic diseases (NRCD) in both LMIC and high-income countries (HIC) 3 . Despite progress in reducing overall hunger and food insecurity (especially in Asia and Africa), one in ten people were exposed to severe levels of food insecurity in 2019, with areas or populations experiencing much higher prevalence 4 . However, in most regions, improvements in food security have slowed (including West Asia and North Africa) or reversed (including Latin America and the Caribbean) in recent years 5 . Linear growth measures are slow to reduce in line with global development goals 6 , and one in every three people are overweight or have obesity 7 .

Mental health has also been identified as a major cause of disability 8 , although efforts to address global mental health burdens in low-resource settings is not commensurate with the magnitude of that burden 9 . Depressive disorders alone are thought to be the single-most contributor to health loss globally (7.5% of all Years Lived with Disability—YLD) 10 . Anxiety and stress, which along with depression are the common mental health disorders, are also leading causes of disability 11 . Despite improvements in measuring global mental health burdens, estimating the true burden remains a serious challenge. Transcultural identification and underreporting (especially due to stigma and differing social constructs) hinder the ability to make accurate global estimates 12 .

Each of these fields has evolved in the last several decades. Both have shifted from clinical and continuum of care frameworks to include influential factors of wider environments and contexts, leading to an understanding of complex and systems-driven aetiologies 12 . Furthermore, the connections between FSN and mental health have been increasingly investigated. Food insecurity has been shown to lead to poor mental health in many contexts 13 , 14 . There is mixed or poor quality evidence linking distinct nutrients to mental health 15 , 16 , 17 . Dietary patterns and diet quality have been shown to be related to depression and in some instances anxiety, although heterogeneity of different measures and indices hampers the inferences we can make 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 . The association between BMI and mental health has perhaps been the longest-standing topic of inquiry, although this literature is dominated by research carried out in HIC settings 22 , 23 . Poor mental health of parents, particularly mothers, has been associated with low dietary diversity, lack of micronutrients, anthropometric outcomes, and other illness and care measures of their children in several settings 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , but not in others 28 , 29 . Mental health, for instance depression, has also been shown as a factor influencing nutritional risk and malnutrition (the nutritional aspects of frailty) in older adults 30 , 31 . Each of these investigations are further nuanced by their varying populations of interest and settings.

Systematic reviews on these topics are often (by nature) narrow in scope–usually in specific populations, using a particular subset of FSN and mental health indicators. Primary studies are often post-hoc or ad-hoc analyses derived from observational studies where FSN and mental health relationships are not primary outcomes. This limits the breadth and quality of the available evidence. Taking stock of the literature across interrelated aspects of FSN and mental health overall will allow for better identification and use of the strongest available evidence and more systematic efforts to research these intersections. It will also offer the possibility of creating an empirical framework that can guide hypothesis testing and causal identification going forward.

We aimed to systematically identify and map analytical studies associating FSN with mental health resulting in an interactive Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) that can offer both broad and granular views of this diverse body of literature. Our objectives were to describe the nature and range of evidence on (a) a wide range of constructs of food security and nutrition (food security, nutritional risk, diets, nutrient intakes, nutrient biomarkers, infant and young child feeding [IYCF], birth outcomes, and anthropometry), (b) linked to all types of common mental health problems (depression, anxiety, stress, and mental wellbeing), (c) across most healthy populations, settings, and study designs.

Search and screening results

The study selection process is shown in the PRISMA Flowchart (Fig.  1 ). A search of three databases retrieved 40,192 results total, 30,896 of which remained after removing duplicates and were screened on title and abstract. Of these, 3771 were included for full-text review. Most articles excluded at this stage were excluded on FSN measurement, in populations with underlying health conditions, were not analytical, or were non-systematic reviews, theses, comments, or abstracts. Finally, 1945 studies met the inclusion criteria and were mapped, as shown in the HTML map linked to this article . The cells in the EGM are segmented into population groups: children (green), pregnant women and mothers (blue), adults (yellow), and mid- to later-life populations (red). Summary statistics presented here forth are not additive to the total number of reports included, as many studies included multiple measures, populations, and settings. A simplified heat map of FSN and mental health studies is shown in Fig.  2 .

Number of identified studies from search at each stage of screening.

Rows are measures of mental health, columns are measures of food security and nutrition.

Food security and nutrition measures

Proportionally, the FSN measures in studies by group were comprised of: anthropometry (40%), diets (24%), nutrient intakes (14%), birth outcomes (13%), food scarcity (12%), nutrient biomarkers (10%), and IYCF indicators (6%).

Overall, BMI was the main indicator in 703, or 36% of all mapped studies, and was measured in almost 90% of studies including anthropometry. Studies measuring dietary patterns and quality (16%) and specific food groups (12%) were both prevalent. Of the studies measuring nutrient intake – via foods or supplements (14%), most were about macronutrients ( n  = 152/273), of which 94/152 were about polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). The second largest group was vitamin intake ( n  = 110/273 studies). Of 110 studies on vitamins, various B vitamins (65%), calcium (40%), and vitamin C (29%) were most common. Of all nutrient intake studies, 87 measured supplement intake. Studies on nutrition-related birth outcomes ( n  = 245) primarily measured birth weight (84%). The majority of studies on food scarcity ( n  = 230) measured food security (71%) via many different indices. The most popular was the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) scale used in national surveys in the US or adapted to other countries such as Canada or Korea ( n  = 70 including all versions). A small number of studies measured food scarcity through famine exposure ( n  = 9), and nutritional risk was mostly assessed in older populations ( n  = 70). Of the nutrient biomarkers in studies ( n  = 202), about half were on vitamins (55%), particularly for vitamin D (66%), folate (25%), and vitamin B12 (20%). Breastfeeding (including initiation, duration, or exclusivity) was the main FSN measure for nearly all IYCF studies ( n  = 114/124). A count of studies in each category is listed in Supplementary results  1 .

Mental health measures

Depression was by far the most common mental health measure, assessed in 61% of included studies. Hybrid domains of mental health—defined as capturing more than one aspect of mental health (e.g., a combination of depression and anxiety, a clinical interview for all common mental disorders)—were assessed in 26% of studies. Stress (12%), mental well-being (12%), and anxiety (10%) linked to FSN were the least studied.

Most studies (82%) used screening questionnaires to ascertain mental health status. Mental well-being and stress have no clinical diagnosis, so almost all of these were based on established indicators via questionnaires. For depression screening, the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale (CES-D) was the most common tool ( n  = 332), followed by the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS) ( n  = 183), the Geriatric Depression Scale ( n  = 105) and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) ( n  = 104). For hybrid domains, the Global Health Questionnaire (GHQ) was the most used screening tool ( n  = 76), as well as the Child Behavior Checklist (CBC) for measuring mental health in children ( n  = 41), the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) ( n  = 36) and the Depression and Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) ( n  = 33). The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) was by far the most common screening tool for anxiety ( n  = 64), and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and Kessler Stress Inventory (KSI) were the most common stress measures used ( n  = 84 and n  = 46, respectively). For mental wellbeing ( n  = 229), 83 used the Short Form-36 questions, (also known as the Rand questionnaire). Many of these tools have been translated, adapted, and validated for cross-cultural use in LMIC contexts, and some tools have been developed specifically for these settings rather than adapted.

Clinical and diagnostic interviews were carried out in 9% of all studies, almost all of which (96%) were on depression or a general psychological or psychiatric interview which is used to diagnose multiple common mental health problems (hybrid domains). Some studies used a self-reported diagnosis, prescription medication as a proxy for diagnosis or medical records (8% of all studies). Only 14 studies investigated mental health using qualitative or mixed methods. There were 89 reviews or meta-analyses on depression, 58 on hybrid domains, 14 on anxiety, eight on stress, and three on mental wellbeing.

Relationships between FSN and mental health

The number of studies in each FSN and MH category and the proportion investigating linkages between them are presented in the Sankey diagram in Fig.  3 . The largest groups of BMI studies within anthropometry (90%) and overall (36%) were those examining BMI with: depression ( n  = 401, 21%), hybrid mental health measures ( n  = 192, 10%) and mental wellbeing ( n  = 109, 6%). The second largest intersection was diets (food groups, patterns, quality) with: depression ( n  = 278; 14%), hybrid mental health measures ( n  = 121, 6%) and mental wellbeing ( n  = 69, 4%).

Categories of FSN measures on the left are linked to corresponding groups of MH measures listed on the right, with the width of the bands indicating the proportional number of studies connecting the groups.

Despite anthropometry and depression being the largest category, measures other than BMI and mental health besides depression were far less researched. Although there are some studies on child stunting, wasting, and underweight related to depression ( n  = 45 with depression, n  = 23 with hybrid domains), studies reporting relationships with other common mental health disorders such as anxiety and stress were few ( n  = 5).

Although studies measuring nutrient intake were the third largest FSN group, 75% of these were analyzed for their relationship to depression, and an additional 18% to hybrid domains. Most of these studies linked macronutrients and vitamins to depression ( n  = 117 and n  = 77, respectively), while few studies linked to anxiety, stress, or mental well-being ( n  = 56 altogether). Eighty-nine studies linked PUFA intake to depression or hybrid domains, and 32 studies to vitamin D intake and depression. There was almost an identical distribution for nutrient biomarkers, where proportionally almost all studies on biomarkers were linked to depression and hybrid measures. Vitamin D ( n  = 66) was the most common biomarker linked to depression.

Almost 50% of studies about birth outcomes ( n  = 245 total) were about birth weight with depression, and an additional 35% with hybrid domains. Many studies measured multiple nutrition-related birth outcomes (31%) such as birth length and head circumference, however only 28/245 of these included mental health measures other than depression. Only 10 of these studies investigated foetal growth restriction in relationship with mental well-being or stress, for example.

Food scarcity was linked to depression in many studies as well, especially in the studies examining nutritional risk in the elderly ( n  = 56/70). Food security was often studied in relationship to depression ( n  = 72/163), however as food security is also associated with worry, stress, and anxiety, other measures of mental health were relatively more common in the studies than in other groups of FSN (40% measured hybrid domains, 19% measured stress, 9% measured anxiety and 9% measured wellbeing).

Breastfeeding and depression were examined in 91 studies. There were especially few studies on any IYCF measure with anxiety ( n  = 28), stress ( n  = 11), and mental well-being ( n  = 4). Child diets and complementary feeding was linked to depression or hybrid domains in six out of eight child diet studies. For instance, only three studies compared any measure of mental health with child dietary diversity.

Study methods

Hypothesis testing.

We included studies that hypothesized the relationship between FSN and mental health in either direction: with FSN constructs as the ‘exposure’ or independent factor and mental health as the ‘outcome’ or dependent factor and vice versa (shown in each iteration, segmented proportionally by study design, in Fig.  4 ). Most studies ( n  = 1291, 66%) hypothesized FSN constructs as the exposure or equivalent, including cross-sectional studies. Almost 28% of these studies were about BMI associated with depression or hybrid domains of mental health outcomes. Another 25% were about diets related to depression or hybrid domains of mental health.

The top panel is the number of studies with food security and nutrition (FSN) as the hypothesized exposure and mental health as the studied outcome.  The middle panel is the number of studies with mental health as the exposure and FSN as the outcome, and the bottom panel is the number of studies where both hypotheses were investigated.

Mental health was treated as the exposure in 31% of studies ( n  = 600). Of these studies, 39% investigated mental health related to BMI as an outcome, of which 121 studied depression as an exposure, 69 studied hybrid domains of mental health, 60 studied stress, 27 studied anxiety, and 9 studied mental wellbeing. Birth outcomes were the second-largest group of mental health exposure studies, where 119/147 were about birth weight. Where IYCF was the outcome ( n  = 75), almost all were about breastfeeding ( n  = 67). There were relatively fewer studies on diets, nutrient intakes, and biomarkers than in either the EGM overall or where mental health was the outcome.

In a small number of studies ( n  = 54), investigators tested the hypothesis for relationships in both directions over time. For instance in a longitudinal cohort where dietary patterns could be isolated as an exposure among people who develop mental health problems, or alternatively within the same study population, those whose dietary patterns change over time linked to preceding mental health problems. Most of these studies investigated BMI and mental health ( n  = 31/54). These characteristics can be selected through the filter function on the interactive EGM.

Study design

The majority of studies were observational (83%), with 46% cross-sectional and 37% longitudinal (Supplementary results  2 ). An additional 3% of studies were case-control design. There were 142 systematic reviews, of which 48 offered a meta-analysis. Experimental studies were not common —only 65 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were identified, along with 20 quasi-experimental studies (12 of which used Mendelian Randomization or genetic instrumental variable methods). Only ten qualitative studies were identified, and 4 mixed methods studies, despite explicitly including qualitative eligibility and coding parameters.

Cross-sectional studies followed a similar pattern to the EGM as a whole on mental health measures, although regarding FSN there were proportionally more studies on food scarcity and BMI and fewer on birth outcomes and IYCF. There were proportionally more longitudinal studies on birth outcomes (double across all but one mental health category) and more IYCF studies, and less on nutrient intake, nutrient biomarkers, and food scarcity, although mental health measures were similar proportionally to the full EGM.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on diets linked to depression or hybrid domains were most common (reviews without meta-analysis = 28; reviews with meta-analysis = 9, meta-analysis without review = 4), and nutrient intakes with depression or hybrid domains were the second most common (systematic reviews = 42; 15 of these with meta-analyses). Almost all (14/15) meta-analyses on nutrient intakes were about supplements. There were 18 reviews on BMI and depression or hybrid domains (seven of these with meta-analysis), while nine others focused on child growth measures. There were 22 systematic reviews on mental health related to birth outcomes, 17 of which were about mental health of mothers and birth outcomes of their offspring. Of all 69 meta-analyses, 59 of them focused on depression or hybrid domains.

Most experimental studies were RCTs of nutrient intake exposures and mental health outcomes ( n  = 46/65 experimental studies), namely depression ( n  = 26) and hybrid domains ( n  = 16). Half of experimental studies included anxiety, stress, or mental well-being. Nutrient intakes were primarily measuring supplement intake ( n  = 38/47), especially those on B vitamins, Vitamin D, Zinc, and fatty acids. Sixteen RCTs exposed people to fatty acids, and 12 to Vitamin D. Several studies also exposed people to Vitamins A, C, or E and magnesium or manganese minerals. The second most common type of RCTs were those randomizing people to diets and measuring various measures of mental health (six on depression, 10 on hybrid domains, three on anxiety, seven on well-being, but none on stress). Sixteen studies intervened on: Mediterranean diet pattern ( n  = 4), low fat or low-calorie diet ( n  = 4), the DASH diet, high-protein diet, healthy diet, or fish/animal source foods ( n  = 2 each), low glycaemic diet, high protein diet and vegetarian diet ( n  = 1 each). Only three studies had mental health interventions with FSN outcomes: two on stress reduction interventions and BMI or food intake, and one on antenatal depression interventions and birthweight/child growth.

The geographic distribution of studies by country, defined by where the participants were located, is shown through a choropleth map in Fig.  5 . The most saturation (number of studies) was in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom, 521 studies came from across Europe, 418 from Asia, and 81 from Africa. Central and South America were represented in fewer studies ( n  = 18 and n  = 67 respectively). Overall, 23% ( n  = 446) were set in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Eight percent ( n  = 160) were ‘global’ studies, such as those in five or more nations across regions, or those using global datasets, such as the Gallup poll or World Bank data.

The bar plot on the left shows the number of studies by region and political category, and the map on the right shows number of studies by country.

Heat maps segregated into HIC and LMIC evidence is provided in Supplementary results  3 . Overall, there were proportionally more studies on nutrient intakes in HIC (15% vs. 9% of FSN measures), and proportionally more studies on food scarcity in LMIC (18% vs. 10%).

For instance, there were proportionally more studies of BMI in HIC (95% of 611 studies) compared to LMIC (72% of 172 studies). In LMIC studies, there were more studies on relative height (20% vs. 1%) and relative weight (11% vs. 2%) in children. For mental health measurement, 82% of studies using validated diagnostic tools were from HIC. Studies including measures of anxiety, stress, and mental well-being were more common in HIC than LMIC (13% vs. 7% for mental well-being).

Almost all reviews and meta-analyses were global in nature. Eighty percent of experimental studies and 90% of quasi-experimental studies came from HIC. Populations of interest in studies from HIC were proportionally more focused on general or representative adult populations (52% vs. 42% in LMIC studies). LMIC studies shift focus to women (particularly pregnant women and mothers—35% of LMIC studies vs. 26% HIC studies), although only slightly more on children (39% of LMIC studies vs. 35% HIC studies). Studies on mid-to-later-life populations were similar in both HIC and LMIC contexts (21%).

Populations

The EGM linked to this paper is segmented in each cell by broad population categories. We also offer a more granular classification of populations of children, women, men, and pregnant women and mothers (available as filters). Figure  6 shows a bubble diagram proportional to the population groups of included studies. Almost half of studies in the EGM were conducted in general or representative adult populations (49%). Studies including only mid- to later-life populations (usually 60 or 65 years of age and older) made up 21% of the EGM. Of the studies that included children of any age ( n  = 695), 433 included children under 5 years, 221 included children 5 to 12 years old, and 248 focused on adolescents 13 to 18 years old. Children under 5 were not commonly assessed on their mental health status ( n  = 106 vs. 423 studies of under-five measurements of FSN) as these measures are difficult to obtain and not reliable in very young children. Pregnant, perinatal women, mothers, and fathers were studied in 28% of all studies. Far more studies in pregnant women and mothers measured mental health as the exposure than FSN (26% vs. 8%). Pregnant and postpartum women were assessed more on their mental health status (9% pregnant and 5% postpartum) than on their FSN status (3% pregnant and 1% postpartum). Studies with women-only populations (not including perinatal women or mothers) made up an additional 8% ( n  = 158). Studies focusing only on men were fewer ( n  = 42, 2%).

Bubbles are proportional to the frequency of analyses based on each population group. Bubbles for ‘Children’ ( n  = 257), ‘Adolescents’ ( n  = 214), ‘Pregnant Women and Mothers’ ( n  = 149), ‘Adults’ ( n  = 735) and ‘Mid Later Life populations’ ( n  = 408) refer to studies in which the relationship between FSN and mental health is examined within the same study population group. The bubble for ‘Cross-cutting populations’ shows studies in which the FSN measure in one group is hypothesized to affect the mental health of another group or vice versa, this includes interactions between households, parents, and/or children.

Some studies measured FSN in one group (e.g., children) and mental health in another (e.g., parents) (Fig.  7 ) . Amongst these ( n  = 484), the mental health of pregnant women and parents and the FSN of their children through adolescence has been studied the most: 355 total studies, 329 on FSN of children under five years, 44 on FSN of children 5–12, and 17 on FSN of adolescents. Fathers, however, are only included in eight of these studies. Mental health of pregnant women and mothers has mostly been hypothesized as the exposure for FSN outcomes in children ( n  = 314), though far fewer considered an association whereby FSN in children is the exposure and mental health of pregnant women and parents is the outcome ( n  = 54). The association between food security measured in the household with mental health in individuals was reported in 107 studies, most of which were in general adult populations ( n  = 51) and pregnant women and mothers ( n  = 38).

The size of the bubbles and width of the links between them is scaled according to the number of studies and frequency of hypothesized relationships in the literature. The direction of the arrows indicates the hypothesized direction of effect according to the studies, a double arrow in opposite directions shows that both directions have been hypothesised in different studies.

Time trends

Our analysis shows clearly that the overarching body of literature linking FSN to mental health has steadily grown since 2000 (Fig.  8 ). As we concluded our search half-way through 2020, the number of these studies is likely to increase annually, marking a continued interest in this cross-section of fields.

The plotted line shows the increase in studies from 2000 until 2020.  The search concluded half-way through 2020, which accounts for the drop off in this year.

Evidence is steadily growing about links between many of the FSN and mental health constructs measured by included studies, and the EGM makes this clear. Studies on depression and studies on BMI dominated the map overall. Anxiety, stress and mental wellbeing, and IYCF were the least represented in the literature. Given that food insecurity, inaccessibility of healthy, diverse diets, and poor clinical nutrition are all likely to exacerbate worry and stress, the dearth of studies linking FSN to dimensions of anxiety, stress, and well-being, rather than depression alone, is notable. There may be strong evidence on how food security, certain nutrients (e.g., Vitamin D), dietary patterns, and BMI are associated with depression. On the other hand, evidence seems sparse on the relationships between other nutrients (e.g., selenium, antioxidants), IYCF practices, or child growth related to mental health, or vice versa.

Regarding study design, experimental studies were mostly about nutrient intakes; very few intervened on other FSN measures or mental health interventions with FSN outcomes. Overall, experimental, quasi-experimental studies, and systematic reviews with meta-analyses were far less common than the plethora of cross-sectional and cohort studies. Only 34% of systematic reviews were accompanied by a meta-analysis. There was much less qualitative or mixed methods evidence.

Geographically, studies with paticipants from the United States, Australia, and United Kingdom dominated the evidence. Although almost a quarter of studies were carried out in LMIC, 77 of these 446 were conducted in China and 75 in Iran, with few in Arab countries or Latin America. The studies with participants from Africa ( n  = 81) were mostly carried out in three countries (South Africa, Ghana, and Ethiopia). Three-quarters of studies carried out in South America were from Brazil. Of the LMIC countries represented in the EGM, evidence is largely based in industrialised countries, which suggests that the LMIC literature does not capture the diversity of less industrialized, poorer, or more rural countries. It is an especially important gap, given that food insecurity and undernutrition are the highest in the countries least represented by the literature base.

Most studies that measured FSN in one population group and MH in another were about mothers’ mental health and their children’s nutrition or growth status. Very rarely were FSN indicators in children investigated for their effect on parents’ mental health. Fewer studies still focus on fathers or parents together. As studies among women in LMICs can sometimes focus on reproduction, and without sufficient attention to other aspects of womens health, we highlight the lack of studies from LMICs that examine mental health impact on women’s nutritional status and vice versa.

Despite studies showing that FSN and mental health are related in many ways, there are still large gaps across the EGM of studies investigating causal mechanisms of these relationships. There were many studies showing relationships between FSN and mental health, but less with the combined design, contextual factors, and analysis to provide information most needed to design effective programs and policies. For example, there were few qualitative studies identified, even though the ethnographic lens of lived experience can provide important insights into why and how mental health is related to FSN, without relying on nosological distinctions that may be less important in certain contexts. Some of the qualitative studies raised interesting findings, for example the mental health toll from weighing trade-offs in types of food purchases (e.g., healthier options versus volume or calories) 32 , how rising food prices affect not just food security and nutrition, but contribute to multi-fold mental health consequences from constraining cultural practices like funerals and other ceremonies 33 , and the varied role of social support related food insecurity: in some contexts social connectedness increased shame and stigma, whereas in others it helped buffer the negative effects of food insecurity through shared resources 34 .

That said, there is scope to further investigate the shared and underlying determinants of FSN and mental health. From the existing literature, these include poverty (although interestingly poverty alone does not account for these burdens 35 ), lack of women’s agency, other health conditions, environment, and climate change, as well as conditions of violence, conflict, instability, and social strife 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 . Most of these factors have been identified through the respective bodies of literature on each, but some new work on the topic has tried to understand common determinants and mechanisms between FSN and mental health through innovative theoretical framing, study design, and more advanced statistical models 28 , 40 . Recent interventions that at the least measure and at the most include programmatic components of both FSN and mental health have begun to give insight into some of these mechanisms as well 41 .

Through this systematic synthesis and mapping, we were able to combine various intersections of measures, populations, study types, and cross-cultural settings into an interactive resource. This is the first paper to systematize the body of evidence linking FSN to mental health. The EGM can be used in various ways by selecting and describing the nature and extent of literature on this topic.

We employed rigorous, expert-led screening and coding processes, including a search strategy designed by an information specialist using an index list of known literature. We followed state-of-the-art guidance on creating EGMs, which stop short of offering a synthesis effects observed but do include interactive filters to sort evidence according to study characteristics. Conducting a meaningful and feasible quality assessment of almost 2000 studies or pool results was beyond the scope of this EGM.

We also created parameters that limited our analysis in certain ways. We searched only papers published from 2000, did not search non-English repositories or include grey literature, and our chosen databases may not have been as likely to include qualitative reports, all which may have introduced some bias. That said, we are confident that collectively, the large number of studies identified and included serve as a basis from which to draw conclusions about trends, gaps, and characteristics of the available evidence on FSN and mental health.

The most important exclusion criteria were for studies in populations with underlying health problems, such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, HIV, tuberculosis, or hospitalized patients, as well as niche characteristics (e.g., female endurance athletes or male textile factory workers). Although there is literature relevant for these populations, we aimed to identify evidence that minimized the confounding nature of other health conditions or characteristics. We also excluded FSN measures that were not direct measures of food security, intake, or nutrition status, such as eating behaviours, stimulant foods, or breastfeeding intentions.

In line with current trends to measure mental health globally through a symptom-based framework rather than a diagnostic criterion (which can bias and confound locally appropriate constructs of mental health) 42 , 43 , 44 , we included mental well-being and mental health quality of life measures. We also included qualitative literature on the topic, which might not fit within the traditional depression, anxiety, and stress groupings. For instance, a systematic review of qualitative literature about depression experience globally found that DSM model and standard instruments derived from the DSM fall short of capturing the experience of depression worldwide or regionally. Specifically, half of the 15 features of depression identified in non-western populations were not captured in current diagnostic tools 42 . However, measures of mental well-being were often difficult to disentangle from general happiness, life satisfaction, or other physical health quality of life measures. Many were mixed across these domains. We thus relied on expert guidance from Teachers College Global Mental Health Lab, who assessed each measure identified across all categories for eligibility and classified them.

We propose that this EGM is a tool to navigate a diverse literature base that will be primarily driven by the interests and expertise of the user. It can identify key gaps in the literature and thus direct novel efforts in research. This might include planning new primary studies or synthesis of existing primary research. When interpreting cells with fewer studies, it is important to carefully examine the quality of those studies and the clinical or practical relevance of research efforts to fill the gaps. Some research may be less strategic from a policy and planning perspective, for instance conducting new studies on IYCF related to anxiety and stress may have more application than new studies on minerals related to mental wellbeing, both of which appear as gaps on the EGM.

Furthermore, a cluster of studies in a cell (particularly certain study types—such as RCTs and reviews—commonly deemed further up on the hierarchy of evidence) still might prove worthy of further investigation. For instance, the most common subject of studies in the EGM is adiposity and depression, and there are several large, rigorous reviews with meta-analyses included on this topic. However, there is no pooled analysis of this relationship in low-income settings, where the observed effects may be quite different. This example highlights that the EGM as a whole can bring focus to understudied regions or populations: if used to highlight broad contextual factors, this might spur research that changes the conclusions we draw from either combining all available evidence (which may not all act in the same direction) or making assumptions based on the most prevalent literature (e.g., from high-income settings).

The overarching goal of building the EGM was to lay the groundwork for an evidence-based, empirical framework highlighting linkages that are known and hypothesized between FSN and mental health. This would entail selecting and synthesizing the strongest evidence within each cell, insofar as combining certain groups of studies is appropriate. This will serve to direct and support future inquiries into these relationships, as well as systematize our knowledge on the topic (Supplementary discussion  1 , Box 1). Furthermore, a new understanding of and emphasis on these relationships can become part of advocacy, programs, strategic planning, and policy to support progress towards health goals such as the SDGs and others.

Through a systematic literature search, we comprehensively identified analytical studies investigating relationships between a broad array of FSN and mental health constructs. We mapped 1945 eligible studies onto an interactive EGM which can provide visualization of this diverse field of literature. The EGM overall allows readers to step back and take stock of the body of literature, as well as dive into specific intersections of food security, nutritional risk, diets, nutrients, nutrition-related birth outcomes, IYCF indicators, and anthropometry with depression, anxiety, stress, and mental wellbeing. The EGM also allows for narrowing of each intersection through an extensive list of filters that can be combined in various ways to select characteristics of interest.

The analysis and map highlight thematic trends (such as the proliferation of evidence linking BMI and depression) as well as gaps (stress and mental well-being related to nutrients or child diets). It also shows the nature of the literature—an increasing number of studies on the topic that are dominated by observational designs in high-income countries. Studies from Central and South America, Arab nations, and Africa are less prevalent, as well as studies using qualitative, mixed, quasi-experimental and experimental methods. Many different populations are investigated through this wide array of studies, although studies comparing associations between populations are dominated by mothers and their children.

We imagine that this analysis and EGM will serve as a basis for future inquiry, whether it be original research, evidence synthesis, and analysis, funding priorities, or the development of synergistic and integrated public health programmes and policies.

This systematic Evidence and Gap Map, including accompanying analysis, relied on publicly accessible documents as evidence, without including personal, sensitive, or confidential information from participants, thus complying with current ethical standards.

Search strategy

Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic search of three published literature databases: Web of Science, CAB Global Health, and PsychInfo, searching from January 1 2000 until July 28, 2020. We chose the year 2000 as a cut-off as preliminary searches revealed diminishing returns in the eligibility and relevance of previous studies in this area. Broadly, the search was operationalized by including synonyms for mental health, stress, distress, anxiety, depression, or mood disorders, and synonyms for food security, micronutrients, diet, nutrition, or anthropometry, as well as all kinds of study designs. Results from the searches were deduplicated and loaded into EPPI Reviewer 4 and web-based software. All analysis and graphics were produced in Excel version 16 or the web-based Flourish Studio. The full search strategy, designed by an information specialist, is specified in Supplementary methods  1 . The screening and coding guidelines are listed in Supplementary methods  2a–d .

Eligibility—Inclusion

We included only papers published in peer-reviewed journals and in English, from 2000 until July 28, 2020, that presented empirical links between measures of food security and nutrition and mental health in human populations from anywhere in the world. We only included analytical research (studies associating mental health to FSN), excluding descriptive or prevalence studies. We included population-based quantitative and qualitative studies of any design. We included systematic reviews based on their eligibility criteria; to be included, at least one study in the review had to fit our overall eligibility criteria.

We included any quantitative indicator for: food scarcity (including food security, exposure to famine or hunger, and nutritional risk [usually in the elderly]); diets (specific food groups and dietary patterns or quality); nutrient intake (including vitamins, minerals, macronutrients, polyphenols/antioxidants via food intake or supplements); nutrient biomarkers (vitamins, minerals, macronutrients, and polyphenols/antioxidants measured through blood, urine, fat); Infant and Young Child Feeding (standard WHO indicators as well as breastfeeding initiation, duration or exclusivity); nutrition-related birth outcomes (e.g., birth weight, birth length, intrauterine growth restriction [IUGR] or small-for-gestational age [SGA], head circumference); and nutrition-related anthropometry (e.g., BMI, body composition, body ratios, relative weight, relative height). We used ‘relative weight’ as an umbrella group for wasting and weight-for-height z-scores (WHZ) and ‘relative height’ as a group including stunting, height-for-age z-score (HAZ), growth faltering, and other height measures of child growth. We also included studies that measured these elements of food security and nutrition through qualitative methods.

For mental health, we included studies that measured common mental disorders (CMDs) under the International Classification of Diseases version 10 (ICD-10), as well as general distress and mental well-being in order to capture transcultural and qualitative literature on the intersections of mental health and FSN. We used the following broad categories: depression; hybrid domains; anxiety; stress; and mental wellbeing (e.g., mental health-related quality of life). These could be assessed through qualitative interviews, screening questionnaires, self-report of diagnosis, prescription medication (as a proxy for diagnosis), or clinical and/or diagnostic interviews. The list of eligible screening measures was assessed and categorized by the mental health specialists at the Global Mental Health Lab.

Eligibility—Exclusion

We did not include grey literature in our search. Studies in populations with comorbid health conditions, such as hypertension, diabetes, HIV, or surgical patients were excluded as both the nutritional and mental health correlates of these populations is likely to be unique. We also excluded studies in populations where all participants were already identified as overweight or having obesity, low birth weight, or having mental illness. We excluded case reports ( n  < 10), theoretical or simulation-based modelling, studies in solely clinical setting, non-systematic reviews, theses, commentaries, and abstracts.

On FSN, we excluded studies on: dietary practices and attitudes without intake measures (e.g., eating family dinners, dieting); amino acids, hormones, single, specialized or stimulant foods (e.g., arginine, seaweed, walnuts only, coffee, caffeine, alcohol); proprietary or specialized supplement or food formulas; attitudes or preferences related to infant and young child care; preterm birth (as often an outcome of non-nutritional factors); and weight change, loss or trajectories. A full list of included and excluded measures with examples and justification are included in Supplementary methods  3a, b .

On mental health, we excluded mental illnesses other than CMDs (e.g., compulsive disorders, trauma-related stress disorders, phobic anxiety disorders, and developmental disorders). Measures that had no experiential component were excluded. Measures of cortisol were excluded as this hormone fluctuates for various reasons besides experience of stress (e.g., early in the morning, during birth, during exercise), as well as stressful event inventories or circumstances without ascertainment of perceived impact. General happiness or satisfaction measures were excluded as they are not direct measures of mental health, rather an indication of heightened risks or protective factors. We also excluded general health-related quality of life focusing only on physical health without mental health components separated. Lastly, we excluded studies where common mental illness could not be disentangled from other mental illness such as psychosis, bipolar disorder, substance use, eating disorders, or other mental health problems.

Some of our FSN or mental health measures (especially BMI) were included as covariables in studies for which they were not the main outcome or exposure of interest. Studies that did not report results directly linking FSN to mental health were therefore excluded.

Screening and study selection

A team of screeners were trained and double-screened reports on title and abstract until 85% agreement rate was reached, whereafter 85% of reports were single-screened and at least 15% (sometimes more with sensitivity checking) were double-screened by a senior researcher. Patterns and disagreements were discussed and additional written guidance offered. Eligible reports based on title and abstract were reviewed in full text. We undertook a similar training process, whereby once agreement rates were reached, screeners were allowed to single screen. A third of records were double screened to ensure good sensitivity. In addition to this, several iterations of backchecking and targeted searches were re-screened throughout the process.

Data coding and analysis

Data was classified through a mix of a priori and iterative coding strategies. Fields that were decided a priori (e.g., groups of FSN and mental health measures, countries, study designs, etc.) served to identify both trends and gaps. Iterative coding included the specific measures within FSN and mental health groups. For example, although we had pre-identified a list of common and validated measures of anxiety or depression, or food security, there were many more measures that emerged beyond initial lists. These were grouped into a code if more than one study employed the measure. We used a coding form built in EPPI Reviewer to extract data on eligible reports. Only analytical comparisons and their characteristics were considered for data extraction.

We extracted information on publication year, country (or countries) and regions, study design, hypothesized direction of association between FSN and mental health (exposure-outcome relationship) and specific categories of measures and indicators, study population characteristics and sample size, and whether the analysis was adjusted or not (with at least two covariables). For the hypothesized relationship, we coded based on the authors’ stated aims and methods even for cross-sectional and qualitative studies. The ‘adult’ population category included any age range over 18, whereas studies with populations limited to older people (usually 60 or 65+ years old) were coded with ‘mid- to later-life populations only’.

Data extraction was carried out by single coding of included studies with a full review of all data extraction forms by a second researcher and targeted sensitivity checks. Given the breadth of evidence included and the aims of an evidence and gap map, quality appraisal of individual studies was not feasible or meaningful at this stage.

>All studies that met the inclusion criteria were mapped into an EGM using standard methods 45 . The EGM framework consists of columns of categories and sub-categories of FSN constructs, and rows of mental health constructs as well as measurement categories. These rows and columns are collapsed (as the map opens) and then expanded to see all sub-categories. The cells can be segmented into four groups indicated by different colours. The bubbles scale proportionally to the number of studies in the group. The user can scroll over a cell to see a summary of studies or click on the cell to see a classified bibliography of selected studies. There is also a list of filters (codes), which can be used to select studies with specific characteristics for which data was extracted. A full coding structure is provided in Supplementary results  1 .

Reporting summary

Further information on research design is available in the  Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

All scientific reports included in the Evidence and Gap Map were identified via Web of Science, PsychInfo, and CAB Abstracts Global Health repositories. The dataset (essentially included studies) generated during the current study are available within the HTML Evidence and Gap Map, and analysed within the manuscript and supplementary files. The full database (including initial search results and screening codes) can be accessed upon reasonable request from the corresponding author, as this is contained within EPPI Reviewer software which requires a user account.

Kc, K. B. et al. When too much isn’t enough: Does current food production meet global nutritional needs? PLOS One . 13 , e0205683 (2018).

Article   Google Scholar  

Bai, Y., Alemu, R., Block, S. A., Headey, D. & Masters, W. A. Cost and affordability of nutritious diets at retail prices: Evidence from 177 countries. Food Policy 99 , 101983 (2021).

Hawkes, C., Ruel, M. T., Salm, L., Sinclair, B. & Branca, F. Double-duty actions: seizing programme and policy opportunities to address malnutrition in all its forms. Lancet 395 , 142–55. (2020).

FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, WHO. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2020. Transforming food systems for affordable healthy diets. Rome: FAO; 2020.

von Grebmer K., et al. Global hunger index: hunger and food systems in conflict settings. Bonn: Welthungerhilfe. 2021.

2020 Global Nutrition Report: Action on equity to end malnutrition. Bristol, UK: Development Initiatives; 2020.

Swinburn, B. A. et al. The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: The Lancet Commission report. Lancet 393 , 791–846 (2019).

Murray, C. J. L. et al. Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 396 , 1223–1249 (2020).

Vigo, D., Thornicroft, G. & Atun, R. Estimating the true global burden of mental illness. Lancet Psychiatry 3 , 171–178 (2016).

Rehm, J. & Shield, K. D. Global burden of disease and the impact of mental and addictive disorders. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 21 , 10 (2019).

Prince, M. et al. No health without mental health. Lancet 370 , 859–877 (2007).

Sparling, T. M. et al. Global mental health and nutrition: moving toward a convergent research agenda. Front. Public Health 9 , 722290 (2021).

Pourmotabbed, A. et al. Food insecurity and mental health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Nutr. 23 , 1778–90. (2020).

Maynard, M. et al. Food insecurity and mental health among females in high-income countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15 , 1424 (2018).

Moore, K. et al. B-vitamins in relation to depression in older adults over 60 years of age: the Trinity Ulster Department of Agriculture (TUDA) Cohort Study. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 20 , 551–7. e1 (2019).

Sparling, T. M., Nesbitt, R. C., Henschke, N. & Gabrysch, S. Nutrients and perinatal depression: a systematic review. J. Nutr. Sci. 6 , e61 (2017).

Li, G. et al. Efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in depression in adults: a systematic review. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 99 , 757–767 (2014).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Li, Y. et al. Dietary patterns and depression risk: a meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 253 , 373–82. (2017).

Sparling, T. M., Henschke, N., Nesbitt, R. C. & Gabrysch, S. The role of diet and nutritional supplementation in perinatal depression: a systematic review. Matern. Child Nutr. 13 (2017).

Lai, J. S. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of dietary patterns and depression in community-dwelling adults. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 99 , 181–197 (2014).

Quirk, S. E. et al. The association between diet quality, dietary patterns, and depression in adults: a systematic review. BMC Psychiatry 13 , 1–22. (2013).

Google Scholar  

Luppino, F. S. et al. Overweight, obesity, and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 67 , 220–229 (2010).

Lampard, A. M., Franckle, R. L. & Davison, K. K. Maternal depression and childhood obesity: a systematic review. Prev. Med. 59 , 60–67 (2014).

Patel, V., Rahman, A., Jacob, K. S. & Hughes, M. Effect of maternal mental health on infant growth in low-income countries: new evidence from South Asia. BMJ 328 , 820–823 (2004).

Nasreen, H. E., Kabir, Z. N., Forsell, Y. & Edhborg, M. Impact of maternal depressive symptoms and infant temperament on early infant growth and motor development: results from a population-based study in Bangladesh. J. Affect Disord. 146 , 254–261 (2013).

Lindsay, A. C., Mesa, T. & Greaney, M. Associations between maternal depressive symptoms and nonresponsive feeding styles and practices in mothers of young children: A systematic review. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 3 , e29 https://doi.org/10.2196/publichealth.6492 (2017).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Nguyen, P. H. et al. Maternal mental health is associated with child undernutrition and illness in Bangladesh, Vietnam, and Ethiopia. Public Health Nutr. 17 , 1318–1327 (2014).

Adhikari R.P., Williamson R., Sparling T.M., Ferguson E., Cunningham K. Parental depression and nutrition: findings from a cross-sectional household survey in Nepal. Public Health Nutr. 2020:1-11.

Miller, L. C. et al. Maternal depression is associated with less dietary diversity among rural Nepali children. Matern Child Nutr. 2021:e13221.

Jung, S. E., Kim, S., Bishop, A. & Hermann, J. Poor nutritional status among low-income older adults: examining the interconnection between self-care capacity, food insecurity, and depression. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 119 , 1687–94. (2019).

O’Keeffe, M. et al. Potentially modifiable determinants of malnutrition in older adults: A systematic review. Clin. Nutr. 38 , 2477–98. (2019).

Knowles, M., Rabinowich, J., Ettinger de Cuba, S., Cutts, D. B. & Chilton, M. “Do You Wanna Breathe or Eat?”: Parent Perspectives on child health consequences of food insecurity, trade-offs, and toxic stress. Matern. Child Health J. 20 , 25–32 (2016).

Hadley, C., Stevenson, E. G., Tadesse, Y. & Belachew, T. Rapidly rising food prices and the experience of food insecurity in urban Ethiopia: impacts on health and well-being. Soc. Sci. Med. 75 , 2412–2419 (2012).

Piperata, B. A., Schmeer, K. K., Rodrigues, A. H. & Salazar Torres, V. M. Food insecurity and maternal mental health in León, Nicaragua: Potential limitations on the moderating role of social support. Soc. Sci. Med 171 , 9–17 (2016).

Ruel, M. T. & Alderman, H. Maternal, Child Nutrition Study G. Nutrition-sensitive interventions and programmes: how can they help to accelerate progress in improving maternal and child nutrition? Lancet 382 , 536–551 (2013).

Rai, D., Zitko, P., Jones, K., Lynch, J. & Araya, R. Country- and individual-level socioeconomic determinants of depression: multilevel cross-national comparison. Br. J. Psychiatry 202 , 195–203 (2013).

Compton, M. T. & Shim, R. S. The social determinants of mental health. Focus 13 , 419–25. (2015).

Lund, C. et al. Social determinants of mental disorders and the Sustainable Development Goals: a systematic review of reviews. Lancet Psychiatry 5 , 357–69. (2018).

Ruel, M. T., Quisumbing, A. R. & Balagamwala, M. Nutrition-sensitive agriculture: what have we learned so far? Glob. Food Secur. 17 , 128–53. (2018).

Ridley, M., Rao, G., Schilbach, F. & Patel, V. Poverty, depression, and anxiety: Causal evidence and mechanisms. Science 370 , eaay0214 (2020).

Cetrone, H. et al. A participatory agroecological intervention reduces women’s risk of probable depression through improvements in food security in Singida, Tanzania. Curr. Dev. Nutr. 4 , 819 (2020).

Haroz, E. E. et al. How is depression experienced around the world? A systematic review of qualitative literature. Soc. Sci. Med 183 , 151–62. (2017).

Bass, J. K., Bolton, P. A. & Murray, L. K. Do not forget culture when studying mental health. Lancet 370 , 918–919 (2007).

Bolton, P. & Tang, A. M. An alternative approach to cross-cultural function assessment. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 37 , 537–543 (2002).

Snilstveit, B., Bhatia, R., Rankin, K. & Leach, B. 3ie evidence gap maps. A starting point for strategic evidence production and use. New Delhi, India: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). (2017).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the IMMANA team for their ideas, logistical and dissemination support, especially Sylvia Levy for supporting the ANH Academy Mental Health Working Group. Maria Palar, Lambert Felix, Venus Mahmoodi, Vildana Hodzic, Pema Payang, Srishti Sardana, Elliot Golden, and Justine Wright each contributed to the screening and coding of articles and we wholeheartedly thank them for their contributions. Herbert Aimiani and Nadine Seward also contributed to the ANH Academy Working Group on Mental Health which produced this work. Funding for this study was provided by the Innovative Methods and Metrics for Agriculture, Nutrition and Health Actions (IMMANA) Programme, funded by FCDO and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which specifically funded the time of TS, MD, CO, and SK. We received in-kind support from the Global Mental Health Lab at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK

Thalia M. Sparling, Megan Deeney, Claudia Offner & Suneetha Kadiyala

Global Mental Health Lab, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Bryan Cheng, Xuerui Han, Chiara Lier & Helen Verdeli

Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Maryland, MD, USA

Zhuozhi Lin

Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA

Marianne V. Santoso

Independent Consultant, Winston-, Salem, NC, USA

Erin Pfeiffer

Vitamin Angels, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

Jillian A. Emerson

Food for the Hungry, Phoenix, AZ, USA

Florence Mariamu Amadi

Department of Anthropology, University of Chittagong, Chittagong, Bangladesh

Khadija Mitu

Institute of Nutrition and Food Technology, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile

Camila Corvalan

Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK

Ricardo Araya

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

TS conceived of the EGM and led the review, along with support from the ANH Academy Mental Health Working Group, consisting of TS, BC, MD, MS, EP, JE, FMA, KM, CC, HV, RA, and SK. TS, MD, and BC oversaw the methods and training for study identification. Screening and coding of studies was carried out by MD, TS, XH, CL, ZL, CO, and BC. TS drafted the manuscript, map, and figures, supported by CO and MD. The manuscript was reviewed by all authors, with further editing and revision support from CO, MD, BC, and SK.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thalia M. Sparling .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Communications thanks Lesley Weaver and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.  Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information, peer review file, reporting summary, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Sparling, T.M., Deeney, M., Cheng, B. et al. Systematic evidence and gap map of research linking food security and nutrition to mental health. Nat Commun 13 , 4608 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32116-3

Download citation

Received : 28 September 2021

Accepted : 18 July 2022

Published : 08 August 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32116-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

About Grants

The lifecycle of grants and cooperative agreements consists of four phases: Pre-Award, Award, Post-Award, and Close Out.

Access to Data

The National Institute of Food and Agriculture is committed to serving its stakeholders, Congress, and the public by using new technologies to advance greater openness.

Access Data Gateway

The Data Gateway enables users to find funding data, metrics, and information about research, education, and extension projects that have received grant awards from NIFA.

View Resources Page

This website houses a large volume of supporting materials. In this section, you can search the wide range of documents, videos, and other resources.

Featured Webinar

Second annual virtual grants support technical assistance workshop.

Check out this five-day workshop in March 2024 workshop, designed to help you learn about NIFA grants and resources for grants development and management.

The National Institute of Food and Agriculture provides leadership and funding for programs that advance agriculture-related sciences.

Food and Nutrition Security

Advancing food and nutrition security is a core priority of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department is taking a whole-of-Department approach to accelerating progress on the historic  White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health and corresponding  National Strategy goals to end hunger, improve nutrition and physical activity, and reduce diet-related diseases and disparities. Through research, education, and extension, NIFA contributes towards these efforts in the following ways:

By the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Security Four Pillar Approach which is informed by NIFA’s research investments, among other USDA’s  research activities:

• Meaningful Support
• Healthy Food
• Collaborative Action
• Equitable Systems 

By the National Strategy Five Pillar Approach :

• Improve Food Access and Affordability 
• Integrate Nutrition and Health 
• Empower All Consumers to Make and Have Access to Healthy Food 
• Support Physical Activity for All 
• Enhance Nutrition and Food Security Research   

What is Food and Nutrition Security?

Food security  for a household means access by all members at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life. Food security includes at a minimum:

• The ready availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods
• Assured ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways (that is, without resorting to emergency food supplies, scavenging, stealing, or other coping strategies)

Building on and complementing our long-standing efforts to address food security, the USDA is expanding our efforts to advance food and nutrition security .  Nutrition security  means all Americans have consistent and equitable access to healthy, safe, affordable foods essential to optimal health and well-being. Our approach to tackling food and nutrition insecurity aims to:

• Recognize that structural inequities make it hard for many people to eat healthy and be physically active; and
• Emphasize taking an equity lens to our efforts.  

Importance of Food & Nutrition Security

Food insecurity creates enormous strain on worker productivity, healthcare spending, and military readiness and disproportionately impacts racial/ethnic minority populations, lower income populations, and rural and remote populations. The  USDA Economic Research Service (ERS)  noted food insecurity rates peaked at 14.9% in 2011 and dropped slowly to 10.5% in 2019 – illustrating the length of time – about 8 years – that it took to return to pre-recession (2007) levels. During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, the US Census Bureau  reported  how food insecurity and food insufficiency was a challenge and disproportionately impacted communities of color, lower-income communities, and rural/remote communities. Often, food insecurity and diet-related chronic diseases  co-exist . Diet-related chronic diseases are  the leading causes of death  in this country and disproportionately affect communities of color, lower-income communities, and rural/remote communities. Ensuring food and nutrition security for everyone in this country will require a better understanding of the complex causes and corresponding solutions of food insecurity and diet-related illnesses and  disparities . As detailed on our  Nutrition and Food Systems Topic Page , NIFA’s approach to advancing food and nutrition security supports the convergence of science and technology needed to transform our food system to shorten supply chains, optimize agricultural productivity, minimize negative environmental impacts, and ensure a resilient, flexible food system that is safe, affordable, and nutritious. 

NIFA’s Impact

NIFA recognizes nutrition as a cost-effective approach to address many of the societal, environmental, and economic issues faced across the globe today. NIFA works to ensure a safe, nutritious, and secure food supply while also developing, delivering, and disseminating evidence-based  nutrition education  and promotion to prevent chronic diseases, improve health, and prioritize  nutrition security . NIFA partners with the  Land-Grant University System  and government, private, and non-profit organizations to support science. Our agency also invests in developing nutrition scientists across all stages of professional development to use an integrated approach to prioritizing nutrition security and ensuring sustainable agricultural systems through research, education, and extension. NIFA invests more than $220 million in research, education, extension, and innovation to advance USDA’s goal to tackle food and nutrition insecurity.

NIFA aims to help prioritize nutrition security by focusing on:

• Using Innovative Trans-Disciplinary Solutions to Promote Healthy Eating Patterns and Behaviors  to tackle the “whole picture” regarding underlying factors and most promising strategies.
• Production (e.g., agroecology, community and home food gardening, urban agriculture, farmers’ markets, regional food systems)
• Preparation (e.g., ensuring sufficient, safe, and nutritious food preparation in culturally, contextually, and economically sensitive ways including disaster preparedness)
• Promotion (e.g., Fostering a circular economy in rural areas by promoting local and regional food supply chains)
• Consumption (e.g., enabling positive and sustained healthy eating behavior to decrease the health and financial burden of diet-related non-communicable diseases and health disparities)
• Increase access to and improve the nutritional quality of our federal nutrition safety net
• Disposal (e.g., limit food waste while ensuring food safety)
• Integrating with  Climate-Smart Agriculture  on transformative discoveries, education, and engagement.
• Engaging Individual, Family, and Community Agency and Capacity   Building

The following  NIFA Topic pages  further explain our efforts to prioritize nutrition security (stay tuned a few pages are under development):

• Climate Change
• Food Loss and Waste 
• Food Quality
• Food Safety 
• Nutrition and Food Systems
• Sustainable Agriculture
• Global Food Security  

Key NIFA nutrition security programs include:

• Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP)
• Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP)
• Community Food Projects
• Food and Agriculture Service Learning Program (FASLP)
• Agricultural and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) A1344 Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases  

NIFA also supports additional programs that help prioritize nutrition security:

• 4-H Youth Development Program
• 1890 Institution Teaching, Research and Extension Capacity Building Grants (CBG) Program
• Alaska Native-Serving and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions (ANNH) Competitive Education Grants Program
• Capacity Building Grants for Non-Land Grant Colleges of Agriculture Program
• Hispanic-Serving Institutions Education Grants Program (HSI)
• Resident Instruction Grants for Institutions of Higher Education in Insular Areas (RIIA) Programs
• Tribal Extension Grant Program
• Federally-Recognized Tribes Extension Program
• A1364 Novel Foods and Innovative Manufacturing Technologies
• A1531 Biorefining and Bioengineering
• A1641 Economics, Markets and Trade
• A1642 Social Implications of Food and Agricultural Technologies
• A1712 Rapid Response to Extreme Weather Events  
• A1721 Extension, Education & USDA Climate Hubs Partnership
• A1741 Center for Research, Behavioral Economics, and Extension on Food Loss & Waste
• A7401 Research and Extension Experiences for Undergraduates
• A9201 Sustainable Agricultural Systems
• Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP)
• Children, Youth and Families at Risk (CYFAR)
• CYFAR 4-H Military Partnership Professional Development & Technical Assistance (CMPC-PDTA)
• Enhancing Agricultural Opportunities for Military Veterans (AgVets)
• Food and Agricultural Sciences National Needs Graduate and Postgraduate Fellowship (NNF) Grants Program  
• Higher Education Challenge Grants Program
• Higher Education Multicultural Scholars Program
• Master Gardener Program , as well as Master Health and  Master Food Preserver  Programs
• National Center for Home  Food Preservation
• New Technologies for Ag Extension (NTAE)
• Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative
• Regional Rural Development Centers
• Resident Instruction Grants (RIIA) and Distance Education Grants (DEG) for Institutions of Higher Education in Insular Areas  
• Rural Health & Safety Education
• Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
• SPECA Grant Program
• Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) Program
• Urban, Indoor, and Emerging Agriculture 
• WIC Workforce Development Initiative   
• Women and Minorities in STEM (WAMS)

Integrating Youth Perspective

Our efforts aim to foster youth voice and integrate youth perspective where possible. Learn more from these relevant resources:

• NIFA 4-H Youth Development Program  
• National 4-H Conference | National Institute of Food and Agriculture (usda.gov)          
• 2024 National 4-H Conference Information Session | National Institute of Food and Agriculture (usda.gov) 
• ASCEND for Better Health | Nutrition.gov  
• Engagement | Nutrition.gov 
• Youth Perspectives on Food, Nutrition, and Health, Washington, DC | Nutrition.gov  

Indigenous Traditional Ecological Perspective

Across all of our efforts, we are prioritizing the integration of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility principles. We have also elevating the importance of integrating Indigenous Traditional Ecological Perspective. We are also working to help build the evidence base and translate the evidence into action for promoting Indigenous Food Sovereignty. Learn more from these relevant resources:

• USDA-DOI Treaty Database
• Tepary Beans resource  
• Intertribal Buffalo Council
• Returning Buffalo with Native Nations Forum  
• White House Releases First-of-a-Kind Indigenous Knowledge Guidance for Federal Agencies    
• National Park Service Indigenous Knowledge and Traditional Ecological Knowledge  
• First Nations  
• ASCEND for Better Health: Building a Healthy Community Together, Bismarck
• United Tribes Technical College, Health & Wellness
• USDA ARS, North Great Plains Research Laboratory
• Great Plains Tribal Leaders’ Health Board Good Health & Wellness

Learn more listening to our  NIFA Nutrition Security Webinar Series .  

Consumer Resources  –  USA.gov Government Benefits  explains how to apply for and find social support programs, including nutrition assistance.  Nutrition.gov  is a USDA sponsored website that offers credible information to help you make healthful eating choices.

Nutrition Professional Resources  – The  USDA National Agricultural Library’s Food and Nutrition Information Center  provides access to a range of  resources from both government and non-government sources.

Nutrition Security Research Resources  –  The USDA Economic Research Service (ERS)  conducts economic research on numerous topics central to food and nutrition security and provides links to selected ERS research and resources on these topics.

Your feedback is important to us.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

A research vision for food systems in the 2020s: Defying the status quo

Jessica fanzo.

a Berman Institute of Bioethics, Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) and Bloomberg School of Public Health Johns Hopkins University 1717 Massachusetts Ave NW 730 Washington DC 20036 USA

Namukolo Covic

b International Food Policy Research Institute, Poverty, Health and Nutrition Division, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Achim Dobermann

c International Fertilizer Association, Paris, France

Spencer Henson

d University of Guelph Department of Food Agricultural and Resource Economics, Guelph, Ontario, Canada

Mario Herrero

e Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Prabhu Pingali

f Cornell University Charles H Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, Ithaca, New York, United States

Steve Staal

g Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

• • Research and science should not only inform food and environmental policy but should be adopted and mainstreamed into actions at all levels.
• • Food systems are faced with grander and interconnected challenges and constraints that bring about new research questions.
• • Research has a vital role in charting a positive and sustainable direction for global food security, nutrition, and health.
• • The status quo must be challenged to shape food systems transformation to deliver sustainable, healthier diets.
• • Global Food Security provides a platform where evidence is shared in an accessible manner for those who need to act on it.

1. Vision for a future food systems research agenda

As we enter the third decade of the 21st century, the world is at a crossroads. As the Editors of the journal Global Food Security , we share our perspectives on the food security challenges that face humanity and lay out our vision and call for stronger food systems research and science in this decade. The challenges and opportunities for food systems research that lay ahead are significant, requiring that high-quality science be translated into policy and action faster than ever before. Our vision is one in which research and science, and the evidence stemming from their application, not only inform food and environmental policy, but are adopted and mainstreamed into actions at the national, regional, and global levels. Global Food Security provides a platform where such evidence is shared in an accessible manner for those who need to use it and act on it.

2. Food security and nutrition: the path to sustainable development

Food security and nutrition have been prominent features of the international development agenda for decades ( Byerlee and Fanzo, 2019 ). However, over time, development priorities and challenges have fluctuated, and the needed investment has not been sustained ( Fukuda-Parr, 2012 ; Hulme et al., 2015 ). A broader consensus has emerged. One that ensures food security and eliminates hunger and malnutrition in all its forms to achieve thriving economies, human and planetary health, and sustainable development ( Baye, 2017 ; Blesh et al., 2019 ; Schipanski et al., 2016 ). Following the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) era, the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2030 agenda has given the global community a renewed opportunity to end hunger and all forms of malnutrition by integrating related objectives into a more comprehensive and actionable development agenda ( Gödecke et al., 2018 ). Furthermore, tackling global food insecurity and malnutrition can only be achieved in the context of broader food systems thinking and policymaking ( Ericksen et al., 2012 ; Haddad et al., 2016 ; Ingram, 2011 ), particularly in a world that will be increasingly affected by inter-connected, multi-sectoral risks.

The FAO et al., 2019 report Food Security and Nutrition In the World: Safeguarding Against Economic Slowdowns And Downturn highlights that after decades of steady declines, world hunger prevalence remains unchanged, whilst the actual numbers of people suffering from hunger are increasing ( FAO et al., 2019 ). It seems to presage the current global downturn due to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlights the importance of policies and plans to counteract the adverse effects of such shocks ( Barrett, 2020a , Barrett, 2020b ).

Several recent landmark reports focusing on food systems have amplified the message that if we do not address the stark food insecurity and multiple forms of malnutrition that many people still experience, the world will have significant challenges in moving sustainably forward. Numerous bodies including, for example, the Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition and UN High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE), have produced seminal reports that arrive at similar conclusions and have informed the global nutrition and the food system action agenda ( GNR, 2020 ; Haddad et al., 2016 ; High Level Panel of Experts, 2017 ).

The environmental pressures exerted by food systems have increasingly dominated the research agenda on food security, focusing on agricultural and livestock production practices and related sustainability and welfare considerations. On the back of the increased attention to climate change and the momentum of the Convention of Parties (COP), more integrated views of food systems have featured in the reports produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the EAT-Lancet Commission Report on Healthy Diets from Sustainable Food Systems , the Food and Land Use Coalition's Growing Better and the World Resource Institute's Creating a Sustainable Food Future ( FOLU, 2019 ; Searchinger et al., 2019 ; Watson et al., 2000 ; Willett et al., 2019 ). The recent FAO/WHO Sustainable Healthy Diets Guiding Principles have added to these voices ( FAO and WHO, 2019 ). Each of these reports recognizes the need to transform food systems holistically, including addressing all forms of malnutrition without transgressing vital planetary boundaries. Environmental sustainability is now seen as critical to sustaining food security, nutrition and health in the long term, and essential to achieving the Paris Agreement's emissions targets.

Some influential research and development ‘think tanks,’ including the Institute of Development Studies (IDS), Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Brookings Institution and World Economic Forum (WEF), have furthered the case for mainstreaming food security and nutrition in development. The global network of international agricultural research institutes, the CGIAR, is undergoing reform towards a “One CGIAR” approach. Several proposals have advocated for the CGIAR's research agenda to be more inclusive, more focused on nutrition and more sustainable ( Barrett, 2020a , Barrett, 2020b ; Haddad, 2020 ; Lobell, 2020 ).

There are also moments and movements, such as the UN Decade of Action on Nutrition and the Scaling Up Nutrition Movement, that have served to increase attention to food security and nutrition in the UN system. The UN Food Summit in 2021 will hopefully be a pivotal moment within the broader UN system as well as global, regional and country commitments to address food system challenges head-on and with urgency. The theme of the 53rd Session of the UN Commission on Population and Develop for 2020 is “Food Security, Nutrition and Sustainable Development.” The UN Committee of World Food Security has held consultations across the different UN regions on developing Voluntary Guidelines on Food Systems and Nutrition that will hopefully be adopted at the 2020 Committee on Food Security and taken seriously by member states. In Africa, the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program, that many African Union member states are implementing, has a strong sustainability component and has diet diversity as a critical outcome area.

The current COVID-19 pandemic has cast a new light on the governance, efficiency, resilience and functionality of food systems, with potentially long-lasting implications. The pandemic has also highlighted the strong interconnections between food and health. What began as a health crisis quickly became an economic, employment, energy, and social crisis, highlighting the inherent interdependencies of global risks. While it exposed significant vulnerabilities, it may also provide an opportunity for reimagining the system, if bold policies are chosen that accelerate economic, societal, and technological transformations towards a more socially just and sustainable global economy ( WEF, 2020 ). At minimum, there is an urgent need for agri-food policies to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the ‘One Health’ approach.

Food systems and their health, economic, environment and sociocultural outcomes are high on the sustainable development agenda. The key question for research communities then is how to exploit the opportunities that this attention presents? And are we getting the right people's attention? Where are the crucial gaps in knowledge and influence that we still do not understand that stymie policy action? Where can evidence make a difference? How do we generate quality evidence faster as the solution space becomes broader while dealing with grander and more interconnected challenges across food systems?

3. Grander and interconnected challenges and constraints

We are heading on a trajectory that is far from ideal. The global population is forecast to grow by as much as five billion by the end of the century ( UN, 2018 ). At the same time, more people now live in urban rather than rural areas; 55 percent of the world's population resided in urban areas in 2018, rising to a projected 68 percent being urban by 2050 ( UN, 2018 ). Some of the poorest countries will experience high and sustained growth rates, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). On the other hand, Asia's population growth is slowing, while some countries are beginning to see negative population pressure and aging populations as a threat to sustained economic growth ( Bai and Lei, 2020 ; Espenshade and Serow, 2013 ). Food systems will have to feed this ever-growing and shifting population using the same resources that are on hand, but with additional pressure from climate change, environmental degradation and loss ( EU European Commission, 2011 ; Willett et al., 2019 ). Food systems are further challenged by a global pandemic that is like nothing we have witnessed before.

While levels of hunger and undernutrition remain high in many of the world's poorer countries, diets are changing in rapidly-developing parts of the world along with income growth, urbanization, and shifting demographics ( Popkin et al., 2020 , 2012 ). Unhealthy diets are considered a top global risk factor for deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) lost, surpassing other risks such as air pollution, tobacco smoking and high blood pressure ( Afshin et al., 2019 ). Most of these deaths are from non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and are occurring in low- and middle-income contexts ( Ezzati et al., 2018 ; Miranda et al., 2019 ). Many countries, including low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), now face challenges of rapidly increasing rates of overweight, obesity, and diet-related non-communicable diseases alongside persistent undernutrition ( Popkin et al., 2020 ). These multiple burdens of malnutrition are wreaking havoc on already weak health systems. This further limits the capacity to move towards more sustainable development, with crippling consequences for human health, the environment, and social cohesion ( Swinburn et al., 2019 ; Willett et al., 2019 ).

In the context of these broad global trends, food production will need to increase by upwards of 50 percent to meet the nutritional needs of the world's population in 2050 ( FAO, 2018 ). Additionally, rising incomes will likely increase the demand for animal-source foods, some of which tend to have higher negative environmental impacts ( Herrero and Thornton, 2013 ; Keating et al., 2014 ; Perry and Grace, 2015 ). These projections indicate that without new technology and significant transformation towards more sustainable food production practices, less waste and healthier diets, food systems will continue to exert high pressure on critical environmental functions and their currently known boundaries ( Clark et al., 2019 ; Springmann et al., 2018 ). Transgressing these boundaries could constrain food systems' resiliency and the ability to provide safe and sufficient food for all, particularly in times of disturbances and shocks ( Gaupp et al., 2019 ; Steffen, 2016 ). With the COVID-19 pandemic, there are significant new uncertainties and profound implications for achieving and maintaining this resiliency and sustainability across the globe ( Barrett, 2020a , Barrett, 2020b ; Gaupp et al., 2019 ).

Food systems are constantly bombarded by shocks, including climate-related natural disasters, global and local market distortions, and political upheavals and conflict, and now, the COVID-19 pandemic ( Barrett, 2020a , Barrett, 2020b ). The long, insidious shock of climate change is coming into sharp focus ( Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2018 ; Watson et al., 2000 ). Climate change means that the fundamental realities of how the global food system operates will and must shift ( Mbow et al., 2019 ). Every component of food systems, from farm to waste, contributes to climate change and environmental degradation ( Aiking, 2019 ). Food systems account for 21 to 34 percent of global emissions, taking into account land-use changes ( FAOSTAT, 2020 ; Rosenzweig et al., 2020 ; Watson et al., 2000 ). Expanding agricultural land use, in particular, is a significant contributor to rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and biodiversity loss due to deforestation and the draining of wetlands ( Foley et al., 2005 ).

The intensification paradigm, which has been in place since the 1950s, has been tremendously successful in increasing agricultural productivity and keeping food prices low. However, it also led to a global imbalance, including many unintended consequences for the environment and health. During 1960–2000, in the developing countries across the world, every half-ton increase in staple yields generated a 14 to 19 percent higher GDP per capita and a 4.6 to 5.6 percent lower labor share in agriculture five years later, suggesting a strong role for agricultural productivity as a driver of structural change ( McArthur and McCord, 2017 ). Increases in agricultural productivity have helped save some forests and vulnerable land, but the reality is also that deforestation and land-use change is accelerating ( WRI, 2019 ).

Substantial progress has been made in many countries to increase nutrient efficiency in agriculture, while in others, this has not happened yet ( Zhang et al., 2015 ). In most of SSA, the lack of fertilizer is the primary driver for insufficient crop yields and continuing mining of soils for nutrients. On the other hand, in other world regions, the excessive use of fertilizers or manure is responsible for nutrient pollution of rivers, lakes, or marine estuaries ( Glibert et al., 2018 ; Nixon et al., 2008 ). Eutrophication can cause toxic algae blooms and hypoxia resulting in substantial environmental harm to aquatic wildlife and reducing water quality ( Hester et al., 1996 ; O'Neil et al., 2012 ).

Impacts on the health system can have dramatic consequences for food systems as the world is currently witnessing in the COVID-19 pandemic ( Fanzo, 2016 ). At the same time, we must contend with shifting biosecurity and emerging diseases and pests that can present new risks to public health and threaten food production ( Drummond et al., 1978 ; Evans and Inglesby, 2019 ). Examples of threats include Fall Armyworm, African Swine Fever, and the desert locust infestation in the Horn of Africa. As the pandemic has demonstrated, a crowded, more connected, more mobile world provides a perfect ground for the faster spread of such biotic threats ( Gilbert, 2020 ). This is further complicated by insufficient preventative measures to contain the spread, which presents a challenge for many people not accustomed to their freedoms being limited.

The broader economic and political context is a critical influence on the operation of food systems. Some of the worst food insecurity problems today are seen in countries under conflict or conditions of political instability ( Breisinger et al., 2015 ; FAO, 2018 ; Hendrix and Brinkman, 2013 ). Indeed, much of the increase in undernutrition in recent years can be attributed to acute food insecurity in unstable situations, for example in Central and West Africa and the Middle East ( Dunn, 2018 ; Dureab et al., 2019 ; Kah, 2017 ). Furthermore, many countries are currently struggling with large-scale migration. Because food and nutrition insecurity can be both a cause and a consequence of instability and conflict, global chronic undernutrition has become increasingly concentrated in fragile countries ( Harttgen and Klasen, 2013 ; Taylor et al., 2015 ).

Food systems are under pressure not only to deliver adequate quantity, safe, and quality food, but to also help address poverty by creating jobs and sustainable livelihoods ( Mullen et al., 2020 ). Poverty remains the leading underlying cause of persistent hunger. While rural poverty is expected to decline faster than urban poverty due to the rural-urban migration, there are significant pockets of poverty in poorly designed urban slums which often go uncounted ( Glaeser, 2014 ; Lucci et al., 2018 ). Many of the extremely poor are the producers of food; particularly smallholder farmers living in rural places where two out of three people are living in extreme poverty ( Kharas et al., 2019 ; World Poverty Clock, 2020 ). In addition to farming, many of the resource-poor are involved in other roles in food systems, such as processing and packaging, transport, and retail and marketing ( Tomich et al., 2019 ). In poorer countries, many of these roles and the markets they operate within are informal, lack investment or training, and are atomized ( Dorward, 2006 ; Grace et al., 2014 ; Poulton et al., 2006 ). The foods needed to improve dietary quality in LMICs are also the ones that have increasingly become unaffordable to the poor ( Headey and Alderman, 2019 ; Hirvonen et al., 2020 ). Food systems must ensure healthy foods are affordable even for the poor by improving supply chain infrastructure and supporting the competitiveness of smallholder farmers and fishers.

Modernizing food systems with targeted public support and partnership with private actors can increase the human capital of all participants, which is a primary means out of poverty. Rapid innovations in mobile data systems and technology, and financial services and partnership models are beginning to accelerate this change, and these new learnings need to be better understood and replicated with inclusivity in mind ( Reardon et al., 2012 ; Reardon and Berdegué, 2002 ; Reardon and Hopkins, 2006 ).

The role of the private sector and the large role of multinational agri-food corporation voices and actions in the global food system is an important issue, although it tends to be clouded by entrenched positions and ideological perspectives ( Swinburn et al., 2019 ). Global corporations have indeed played a role in the selling of unhealthy, highly-processed foods globally, and both their past and continuing behaviors in the nutrition space are issues of contention ( Stuckler et al., 2012 ). At the same time, however, small rural farm and agricultural enterprises and large corporations often work closely together and are significant contributors to food system functioning and rural livelihoods and thus food security through various forms of contract farming. For many in the research community addressing food and nutrition, however, there is a reluctance to engage with the private sector due to real or perceived conflicts of interest ( Brownell and Warner, 2009 ; Haddad, 2018 ), but often also due lack of knowledge about what the private sector actually does and their motivating factors. Such a lack of trust does not provide fertile grounds for partnership with the private sector in research or in practice ( Brownell, 2012 ; Freedhoff and Hébert, 2011 ; Garrett et al., 2019 ). Research must support continued evolution of positive food corporation impacts on diet quality and consumption patterns, and positive innovative arrangements on food production and value chain developments for smallholder farmers. This support should, together with public service partners, lead to more constructive and balanced engagement and impacts across food systems.

We encourage researchers working in the public or ‘not-for-profit’ world in food and nutrition to become better informed about the private sector and its role as an agent of change concerning sustainability standards and practices, and the behavior of billions of people across the world. Whilst it is right that researchers should question the motivations and behaviors of commercial enterprises and highlight transgressions, they also need to be open-minded in order to find desirable solutions in areas of contention. Arguably, it will be difficult to achieve the true transformation of global or national food systems without more public-private collaboration ( Fanzo et al., 2020 ). Many of the major companies operating in the food sector have already embraced the new SDGs as a framework for transforming their businesses, often in the face of consumer and investor demand. While we are yet to see the concrete impacts of many of these commitments, they do present new opportunities for researchers to engage with both small and large enterprises within the private sector.

4. Turning challenges into moments of opportunity

Ensuring food systems are equitable, sustainable, and healthy on all counts is impossible if the status quo is not significantly challenged. While the world often seems to be on its knees, when we look at the whole picture and try not to react to the sensationalized news feed that inundates us 24/7, things have improved for many people in the world.

Steven Pinker, the author of The Better Angels of Our Nature , argues that we are doing better than we did 30 years ago and that the number of conflicts and genocides has declined since the end of the Second World War ( Pinker, 2011 ). Furthermore, several countries have recovered since the end of the conflict. At the height of the Rwandan genocide in 1994, for example, the child mortality rate was 282 children per 1000 live births. The child mortality rate has since declined enormously, to 35 deaths per 1000 births in 2018 ( UNICEF, 2019 ). In the book Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World--and Why Things Are Better Than You Think , Hans Rosling, likewise, argues that there are reasons to be hopeful. He contends that, by looking at data over time and in the right way, one can see that the world is making huge strides overall ( Rosling et al., 2018 ). It is just a matter of looking at the bigger picture and the broader trends over time. Indeed, many argue that there has never been a time in history as there is now when progress can be made towards a better world in the context of communication and other technologies, innovation, big data, and global integration.

Pre-COVID 19, the number of extremely poor people (those that live on less than $1.90 a day) had declined from 36 percent of the global population in 1990 to 10 percent in 2015 (The World Bank estimates that 40 million to 60 million people will fall into extreme poverty in 2020 as a result of COVID-19, depending on the magnitude of the global economic shock) ( Bank, 2019 ; Mahler et al., 2020 ; Maloney and Taskin, 2020 ). Over the same period, premature mortality amongst children under the age of five has fallen by more than half from 93 per 1000 live births in 1990 to 38 in 2018 (Unicef, 2019). Chronic undernutrition, as indicated by rates of stunting, has also been declining. In 2000, 33 percent of children under the age of five were stunted, compared to 21 percent in 2019 ( UNICEF et al 2019 ). However, this progress is too slow for the 2030 SDG to be met for many LMICs, especially in SSA. Research must provide innovative policy and program actions to accelerate progress.

Of course, progress in food security and nutrition is far from a finished agenda, even when there is sustained and substantial economic development, it is often distributed unevenly. Hunger numbers have risen over the last three years, and overweight and obesity continue to increase around the world ( FAO et al., 2019 ; GNR, 2020 ). The gains of economic growth are diverge greatly. As a result, inequality has increased almost everywhere, suggesting that even more considerable progress would have occurred if the gains of economic development had been shared more equally. Indeed, in many contexts, these inequities come to bear in food systems - resulting in the poorest of the poor, the disadvantaged and marginalized, taking on the brunt of food insecurity and malnutrition ( GNR, 2020 ).

Positive change comes through an almost unnoticed series of multiple, small changes as often as large-scale and dramatic advances that are instantly noticeable. Failures that counteract historic gains are also a frequent occurrence, although all too often, these are disguised and rarely diagnosed and analyzed. The task of researchers is to seek out where and how progress has (or has not) been made, to learn from what has (or has not) worked, and to make valid extrapolations to other contexts. Arguably, we know a lot about what has worked and why, particularly in places where hunger and undernutrition have rapidly declined; China, Brazil, and Ethiopia are all examples of where significant progress has been made to reduce hunger and malnutrition, yet much remains to be done ( Chen et al., 2015 ; Headey and Others, 2014 ; Monteiro et al., 2009 ; Singh, 2014 ; Yosef and Pandya-Lorch, 2016 ).

We can also point to the success of policy efforts to tackle poor diets to combat overweight and obesity, including a tax on sugary beverages in Mexico ( Colchero et al., 2017 ) and front of the pack labels on unhealthy foods in Chile ( Taillie et al., 2020 ). There are other successes across food systems to improve food security, nutrition and livelihoods. In China, new agricultural policies focus on a greener development model with millions of smallholder farmers changing their management practices towards more sustainable crop production ( Cui et al., 2018 ). In Western Europe and North America, productivity gains in crop production in the past 20–30 years have largely been achieved without parallel increases in fertilizer consumption ( Cui et al., 2018 ). There have been advances in biofortification and the wide acceptance of its potential contribution to addressing selected micronutrient deficiencies ( Bouis and Saltzman, 2017 ).

Shifts in aquaculture towards low-trophic species, those feeding lower on the food chain, have increased efficiency of resource use ( Waite et al., 2014 ). A recent paper by Belton and colleagues ( Belton et al., 2020 ) proposes three pillars of action to support sustainable commoditization of the current and future supply of seafood including sustainable intensification, supply chain transformation, and policy and regulation that the Global North and South could invest and scale.

The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) of the African Union now includes dietary indicators in the Results Framework ( NEPAD, 2015 ). This means that the 44 member states currently implementing CAADP must ensure that agriculture works to improve dietary quality providing an opportunity for research to support the desired progress. The world is changing rapidly and there are essential contextual differences that need to be taken into account when translating evidence into policy and program actions.

We also have the tools, innovations and knowledge that are backed by decades of research on how to adapt to and mitigate climate change, and how to protect natural resources and biodiversity ( Herrero et al., 2020 ; Rosenzweig et al., 2020 ). The Food Systems Dashboard is a tool that brings together 170 plus indicators representing most countries and territories in the world, to better describe, diagnose and decide on actions to improve food systems ( Fanzo et al., 2020a , Fanzo et al., 2020b ). FAO has developed two innovative tools, SmartForms and Calipseo, that collect and review fishery data and integrate and streamline fisheries data along the national data supply chain respectively ( FAO, 2020 ). These are just a few of the many tools and databases available to better inform decision making. Innovations extend to circular economy thinking and technologies to reduce food loss and waste, nutrition value chains, and agriculture technologies such as artificial intelligence, robotics, drones, algae feedstocks and bioplastics ( El-Gayar and Ofori, 2020 ; Jurgilevich et al., 2016 ; Klerkx and Rose, 2020 ). Cultivated meats, crowd farming and 3D printing are no longer future technologies but “now” technologies. These innovations could be game-changers for food security and nutrition when responsibly implemented ( Downs and Fanzo, 2016 ; Neff et al., 2015 ). We cannot forget about the importance of knowledge, in particular, indigenous peoples’ expert traditional knowledge on ecosystems, biocultural and biodiversity. It is a matter of translating their evidence into practice and scaling up solutions, focusing on food system actors who need the most technical assistance for rapid transformation ( Reardon et al., 2019 ).

While we tend to think of technological advancements in high-income countries (HICs), there are many advances in LMICs that improve the lives of the poor. Kenya, for example, is a demonstrated leader within SSA in electronic transactions using mobile telephones, where the M-Pesa service has addressed many of the common challenges that the poor face in accessing banking services ( Deichmann et al., 2016 ). The recent and widespread uptake of cellular telephones across SSA as a whole has been phenomenal. When technology meets a recognized need and is cost-effective for the intended beneficiary, uptake can be rapid. This should challenge researchers to foster innovation to bring about the positive transformation of food systems and related livelihoods.

Women are essential players in food systems, especially in LMICs. They not only make up a significant proportion of the food system labor force but are also the care custodians including the preparation of food for families and feeding of infant and young children ( Quisimbing et al., 2000 ; Quisumbing et al., 2005 ; van den Bold et al., 2013 ). Attention to women's empowerment is an important element in fostering household food security and nutrition ( Meinzen-Dick et al., 2019 ; Sraboni et al., 2014 ). The #MeToo and the Black Lives Matter movements that began in the United States could serve as powerful vehicles to address systemic injustices across food systems. Extending their message to address equity across resources, including land, extension and finance as well as education, law and health services, is critical ( Rasanathan and Rasanathan, 2020 ). Cutting-edge research could highlight the interrelated and compounded nature of disadvantages and inequities that perpetuate across food systems. For example, food and nutrition policies and interventions should effectively address inequities faced by women and not only women as mothers, but also women across the life course and as entrepreneurs ( Fox et al., 2019 ).

Food safety and zoonotic borne diseases are critical issues for food security, as COVID-19 has so vividly demonstrated. The world has seen several zoonotic disease outbreaks; HIV-AIDS, MERS, SARS and now the COVID-19 pandemic that is thought to have emanated from a wet market in China ( Wu et al., 2020 ). Zoonotic diseases are infectious diseases that cross over from animals to humans or vise-versa. For some time, One Health advocates warned of the need to consider the interrelationship between humans and animals on zoonotic diseases ( National Research Council et al., 2010 ). They have called for addressing food safety concerns around animal source foods. Scaling up a “One Health” approach is one way to prevent future pandemics by integrating animal, human and environmental connections. Humans coexist with animals - as companions for our overall well-being, as producers of food, and as a source of livelihoods. This interface between animals and humans and their shared environments can be a source of disease too ( Deem et al., 2019 ). There is a need for smart crop and animal solutions grounded in agroecological and food systems thinking ( Di Marco et al., 2020 ).

5. Research and innovation remain essential

Given the above information, it is clear that research has a vital role in charting a positive and sustainable direction for global food security, nutrition, and health. The needed research will require a creative, holistic approach across disciplines, bringing knowledge together into publications that inform action at different levels from sub-national, national, regional, global.

At a time when facts, science, and evidence are under ever greater scrutiny, and even openly disregarded as suspect by some political and business leaders, the rigors of research have never been more critical ( Oreskes and Conway, 2011 ). It is also important not to become disheartened by the slow speed of change in policy and practice, even when the appropriate course of action is clear ‘to us.’ Research can and does bring about wholesale changes in attitudes, political thought, and action, but change takes time ( Higgins, 2019 ). We have seen this with climate change science. It may have taken 40 years for scientists to convince political leaders, but we are now approaching consensus at a global level on the need for near-term action to combat climate change and many countries have taken some positive actions that would have been unthinkable in the not too distant past to change the behavior of their citizens ( Rich, 2018 ). Researchers must continue to generate evidence that can help speed progress in time to sustain planetary integrity and human development.

At the same time, researchers need to better communicate their research findings to the wider world ( Miller et al., 2006 ; Rowe, 2002 ). For too many researchers, the sole focus is on academic publishing. Researchers need to see their role in terms of knowledge generation and the translation of this knowledge into a form that is understandable and relevant to decision-makers in government, business, and civil society. Those who design, shape and enact policies and practices at the subnational, national and international levels need to access the research they need in a digestible and accessible way. Failure to achieve this brings a very considerable risk of being ignored. Researchers must learn to sit at policy dialogue tables not set for them, but for the users of their research – that is, the policymakers. By listening to challenges policymakers face, the research community can better design studies that result in practical and relevant findings that policymakers look forward to receiving and using ( Fracassi et al., 2020 ; Sogoba et al., 2014 ).

Food systems is often viewed as a source of problems needing innovative solutions ( Béné et al., 2019 ). This view belies the fact that food systems themselves can be a source of innovations, and that many of the fundamental food security and nutrition problems facing the world are behavioral and require systemic change, including the perspective of the social sciences ( Tallis et al., 2019 ). Embracing this more inclusive perspective on solutions to food security and nutrition challenges requires a fundamental cultural shift on the part of researchers, funders and business and policy decision-makers, and shifts in incentives ( Karp et al., 2015 ). There is a need for research to be problem-focused and systems-based. Research and their funding agencies should embrace multiple perspectives (including those of individuals who live and work within food systems), and integrate natural and social science, innovation, policy, institutions and practice ( Herrero et al., 2020 ). Taking this approach requires consideration for both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Generalizability is not always what is most desired in research, as many food system challenges require contextual solutions.

One of the most significant weaknesses in research on food security, nutrition, and food systems across the globe is the muted voice of LMIC researchers ( Lachat et al., 2014a , 2014b ). A simple scan of any of the key academic journals in this area will reveal the considerable bias towards researchers coming from HICs and contexts and universities with substantive resources. Indeed, much of the diagnoses of food security and nutrition problems facing poorer parts of the world come from researchers from HICs or work in institutions funded by HIC donors. Many LMIC researchers struggle to gain access to these journals, lack support or incentive systems to publish refereed journal articles, or simply do not have the infrastructure or resources to undertake cutting-edge research ( Van Royen et al., 2013 ). The reality is that we very much have an elite HIC view of food security and nutrition for those living in LMICs. This situation presents not only huge questions over democracy and equity of research in this area, but also serves to ignore LMIC knowledge, experiences, and perspectives of their challenges ( Lawrence et al., 2016 ). HIC bias has also meant that there has been significant underinvestment in research and technology development for crops and livestock important to poor farmers living in low-income contexts. Advances made in some institutions in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, for example, have not been as well recognized globally or have been under-funded. This must change.

Accessing cutting edge research is also problematic. The Global Food Security offers two options to publish. One is gold access in which open access is immediate and permanent to everyone to read and download. The article publishing costs are covered by the author or by their institution on their behalf. The other option is the green access in which an article published under a subscription model in which no fee is payable by the author because publishing costs are covered by subscriptions and only subscribed readers can access these articles. As the editors, we acknowledge that the high cost of subscribing to the Journal excludes many in poorer parts of the world from accessing the work that we publish. Furthermore, the high cost of fully open access prevents many researchers from ensuring their publications are available to all. This situation both maintains and perpetuates the North-South divide in research on food security and nutrition we highlight above. The Global Food Security, which belongs to an Elsevier, has not found an equitable way with the parent company in which to overcome these barriers. As editors, however, we remain committed to reducing these barriers, for the good of all in the research community, and wider society.

Perhaps the most welcome and vital trend in research related to food security and nutrition is the breaking down of disciplinary silos and the shift to more multi-disciplinary, multi-sectoral research. There is also evidence that this multi-sectoral approach is influencing policy and development practice. For example, efforts to promote nutrition and agricultural development and environmental sustainability are arguably better aligned today than ever before. Nevertheless, there are still knowledge gaps in how to scale-up and improve the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of interventions and programs that bridge nutrition and agriculture ( Pingali, 2015 ; Ruel et al., 2018 ).

6. Challenging the status quo to shape food systems transformation

While the challenges we face are daunting, the opportunities are also vast. Food systems must adapt and transform to deliver sustainable, healthier diets, and durable livelihoods without decimating the planet. The research community should rise to this challenge, and we provide a platform to challenge the status quo and take food system transformation in a direction we have not yet imagined.

Global Food Security strives to publish evidence-informed strategic views of experts from a wide range of disciplinary perspectives on prospects for ensuring food security, nutrition, and health across food system issues. We wish to publish reviews, perspectives articles, and debates that synthesize, critique and extend findings from the rapidly growing body of original publications on global food security, nutrition, food systems, and related areas; and special issues on critical topics across food security, food systems, and nutrition including how these are impacted by climate and environmental dynamics.

There are still many areas that require more research, evidence, and knowledge. Some of these topics need a jumpstart or a fresh look. The Journal has had several special calls on high-tech agriculture 4.0, sustainable diets, and zoonotic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Journal has also hosted several special issues including price volatility and food security; social protection and agriculture; ethics and global food security; food security governance in Latin America; stories of change in nutrition; measuring food and nutrition security; biofuels and food security, drivers of dietary choice; and biodiversity, ecosystem services, and food security.

Through this vision paper, we are making a call to action to researchers to challenge the status quo and bring forth knowledge syntheses that can inform the desired actions across food systems. We encourage strategic reviews and perspectives submissions that synthesize lessons and recent learnings, ask critical questions that challenge the status quo, and foster new ways of thinking that can propel new research questions to drive progress. We are looking for key research papers that will disrupt and move the field forward and impact policies and programs.

Positively transforming food systems to ensure that the food we produce is accessible, sustainable, safe, healthy, and equitable for all is our moral imperative. At the same time, food systems should continue to be a vehicle to reduce poverty, directly improving food security for everyone. Current food system transformation is creating significant sustainability and equity gaps that will make future food security and continuity of life on the planet difficult. As global citizens, we will have to fill in those gaps: We all have a role to play in ensuring we meet the demands of a growing population sustainably while co-existing in amity with the planet. We need to find the stitched pockets of progress and small glimmers of hope as the basis of our knowledge to move forward; ever-changing and ever-evolving in the remarkable pattern of human endeavor.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

• Afshin A., Sur P.J., Fay K.A., Cornaby L., Ferrara G., Salama J.S., Mullany E.C., Abate K.H., Abbafati C., Abebe Z., Afarideh M. Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet. 2019; 393 (10184):1958–1972. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aiking H. Environmental Nutrition (pp. 123–138) Academic Press; 2019. Environmental degradation—An undesirable output of the food system. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bai C., Lei X. New trends in population aging and challenges for China's sustainable development. China Econ. J. 2020; 13 :3–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bank W., World Bank . World Bank Annual Report; Washington DC: 2019. The World Bank Annual Report 2019: Ending Poverty, Investing in Opportunity. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barrett C.B. Actions now can curb food systems fallout from COVID-19. Nature Food. 2020; 1 :319–320. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barrett C.B. 2020. On Research Strategy for the New One CGIAR: Editor's Introduction. [ Google Scholar ]
• Baye K. The Sustainable Development Goals cannot be achieved without improving maternal and child nutrition. J. Publ. Health Pol. 2017; 38 :137–145. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Belton B., Reardon T., Zilberman D. Sustainable commoditization of seafood. Nat Sustain. 2020 [ Google Scholar ]
• Béné C., Oosterveer P., Lamotte L., Brouwer I.D., de Haan S., Prager S.D., Talsma E.F., Khoury C.K. When food systems meet sustainability--Current narratives and implications for actions. World Dev. 2019; 113 :116–130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blesh J., Hoey L., Jones A.D., Friedmann H., Perfecto I. Development pathways toward “zero hunger. World Dev. 2019; 118 :1–14. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bouis H.E., Saltzman A. Improving nutrition through biofortification: a review of evidence from HarvestPlus, 2003 through 2016. Glob Food Sec. 2017; 12 :49–58. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Breisinger C., Ecker O., Trinh Tan J.-F., Others Conflict and food insecurity: how do we break the links? IFPRI Book Chapt. 2015:51–60. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brownell K.D. Thinking forward: the quicksand of appeasing the food industry. PLoS Med. 2012; 9 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brownell K.D., Warner K.E. The perils of ignoring history: big Tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is Big Food? Milbank Q. 2009; 87 :259–294. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Byerlee D., Fanzo J. The SDG of zero hunger 75 years on: turning full circle on agriculture and nutrition. Global Food Sec. 2019; 21 :52–59. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen K.Z., Fan S., Babu S.C., Rue C. Achieving food and nutrition security under rapid transformation in China and India. China Agric. Econ. Rev. 2015; 7 (4):530–540. 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark M.A., Springmann M., Hill J., Tilman D. Multiple health and environmental impacts of foods. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2019; 116 :23357–23362. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Colchero M.A., Rivera-Dommarco J., Popkin B.M., Ng S.W. In Mexico, evidence of sustained consumer response two years after implementing A sugar-sweetened beverage tax. Health Aff. 2017; 36 :564–571. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cui Z., Zhang H., Chen X., Zhang C., Ma W., Huang C., Zhang W., Mi G., Miao Y., Li X., Gao Q., Yang J., Wang Z., Ye Y., Guo S., Lu J., Huang J., Lv S., Sun Y., Liu Y., Peng X., Ren J., Li S., Deng X., Shi X., Zhang Q., Yang Z., Tang L., Wei C., Jia L., Zhang J., He M., Tong Y., Tang Q., Zhong X., Liu Z., Cao N., Kou C., Ying H., Yin Y., Jiao X., Zhang Q., Fan M., Jiang R., Zhang F., Dou Z. Pursuing sustainable productivity with millions of smallholder farmers. Nature. 2018; 555 :363–366. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deem S.L., Lane-deGraaf K.E., Rayhel E.A. John Wiley & Sons; 2019. Introduction to One Health: an Interdisciplinary Approach to Planetary Health. [ Google Scholar ]
• Deichmann U., Goyal A., Mishra D. The World Bank; 2016. Will Digital Technologies Transform Agriculture in Developing Countries? [ Google Scholar ]
• Di Marco M., Baker M.L., Daszak P., De Barro P., Eskew E.A., Godde C.M., Harwood T.D., Herrero M., Hoskins A.J., Johnson E., Karesh W.B., Machalaba C., Garcia J.N., Paini D., Pirzl R., Smith M.S., Zambrana-Torrelio C., Ferrier S. Opinion: sustainable development must account for pandemic risk. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2020; 117 :3888–3892. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dorward A. Markets and pro-poor agricultural growth: insights from livelihood and informal rural economy models in Malawi. Agric. Econ. 2006; 35 :157–169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Downs S., Fanzo J. Good Nutrition: Perspectives for the 21st Century. Karger Publishers; 2016. Managing value chains for improved nutrition. good nutrition: perspectives for the 21st century. [ Google Scholar ]
• Drummond R.O., Bram R.A., Konnerup N. Animal pests and world food production. World Food, Pest Losses and the Environment. 1978:63–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dunn G. The impact of the Boko Haram insurgency in Northeast Nigeria on childhood wasting: a double-difference study. Conflict Health. 2018; 12 (1):6. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dureab F., Al-Sakkaf M., Ismail O., Kuunibe N., Krisam J., Müller O., Jahn A. Diphtheria outbreak in Yemen: the impact of conflict on a fragile health system. Conflict Health. 2019; 13 (1):19. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• El-Gayar O.F., Ofori M.Q. AI and Big Data's Potential for Disruptive Innovation. IGI Global; 2020. Disrupting agriculture: the status and prospects for AI and big data in smart agriculture; pp. 174–215. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ericksen P., Stewart B., Dixon J., Barling D., Loring P., Anderson M., Ingram J. The value of a food system approach. Food Secur. Global Environ. Change. 2010; 25 :24–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Espenshade T.J., Serow W.J., editors. The Economic Consequences of Slowing Population Growth. Elsevier. Academic Press; New York: 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• European Commission Sustainable food consumption and production in a resource-constrained world: 3rd SCAR foresight exercise. 2011. https://ec.europa.eu/research/scar/pdf/scar_3rd-foresight_2011.pdf Brussels, Belgium.
• Evans N., Inglesby T. Biosecurity and Public Health Ethics Issues Raised by Biological Threats. In: Mastroianni Anna C., Kahn Jeffrey P., Kass Nancy E., editors. The Oxford Handbook of Public Health Ethics. 2019. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ezzati M., Pearson-Stuttard J., Bennett J.E., Mathers C.D. Acting on non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income tropical countries. Nature. 2018; 559 :507–516. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fanzo J. International Food Law and Policy. Springer; Cham. UK: 2016. Food policies' roles on nutrition goals and outcomes: connecting of food and public health systems; pp. 213–251. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fanzo J., Haddad L., McLaren R., Marshall Q., Davis C., Herforth A., Jones A., Beal T., Tschirley D., Bellows A., Miachon L., Gu Y., Bloem M., Kapuria A. The Food Systems Dashboard is a new tool to inform better food policy. Nat Food. 2020; 1 :243–246. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fanzo J., Shawar Y.R., Shyam T., Das S., Shiffman J. GAIN; Geneva Switzerland: 2020. Food System PPPs: Can They Advance Public Health and Business Golas at the Same Time? [ Google Scholar ]
• FAO . 2018. The Future of Food and Agriculture – Alternative Pathways to 2050; p. 224. Rome. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. [ Google Scholar ]
• FAO The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2020. Sustainability in action. 2020. Rome. [ CrossRef ]
• FAO and WHO . FAO; Rome: 2019. Sustainable Healthy Diets – Guiding Principles. http://www.fao.org/3/ca6640en/ca6640en.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• FAOSTAT, 2020, FAO, Rome. Access faostat.org June 5, 2020.
• Foley J.A., Defries R., Asner G.P., Barford C., Bonan G., Carpenter S.R., Chapin F.S., Coe M.T., Daily G.C., Gibbs H.K., Helkowski J.H., Holloway T., Howard E.A., Kucharik C.J., Monfreda C., Patz J.A., Prentice I.C., Ramankutty N., Snyder P.K. Global consequences of land use. Science. 2005; 309 :570–574. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• FOLU . Food and Land Use Coalition; London, UK: 2019. Growing Better: Ten Critical Transitions to Transform Food and Land Use. https://www.foodandlandusecoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/FOLU-GrowingBetter-GlobalReport.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund. World Health Organization, World Food Programme, International Fund for Agriculture Development . Food & Agriculture Org; Rome: 2018. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2018: Building climate resilience for food security and nutrition. FAO. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fox E.L., Davis C., Downs S.M., Schultink W., Fanzo J. Who is the woman in women's nutrition? A narrative review of evidence and actions to support women's nutrition throughout life. Current Developments in Nutrition. 2019; 3 (1):nzy076. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fracassi P., Siekmans K., Baker P. Galvanizing political commitment in the UN decade of action for nutrition: assessing commitment in member-countries of the scaling up nutrition (SUN) movement. Food Pol. 2020; 90 :101788. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2019.101788. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Freedhoff Y., Hébert P.C. Partnerships between health organizations and the food industry risk derailing public health nutrition. CMAJ. 2011; 183 (3):291–292. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110085. February 22, 2011. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fukuda-Parr S. Should global goal setting continue, and how, in the post-2015 era? In: Alonso J.A., Cornia G.A., Vos R., editors. Alternative Development Strategies for the Post-2015 Era. Bloomsbury Publishing; UK: 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Garrett G.S., Platenkamp L., Mbuya M.N.N. Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN). Discussion Paper 2; Geneva, Switzerland: 2019. Policies and Finance to Spur Appropriate Private Sector Engagement in Food Systems. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaupp F., Hall J., Hochrainer-Stigler S., Dadson S. Changing risks of simultaneous global breadbasket failure. Nat. Clim. Change. 2019; 10 :54–57. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gilbert G.L. SARS, MERS and COVID-19—new threats; old lessons. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2020; 2020 :1–3. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyaa061. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glaeser E.L. A world of cities: the causes and consequences of urbanization in poorer countries. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 2014; 12 :1154–1199. [ Google Scholar ]
• Glibert P.M., Beusen A.H.W., Harrison J.A., Dürr H.H., Bouwman A.F., Laruelle G.G. Changing land-, sea-, and airscapes: sources of nutrient pollution affecting habitat suitability for harmful algae. In: Glibert P.M., Berdalet E., Burford M.A., Pitcher G.C., Zhou M., editors. Global Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2018. pp. 53–76. [ Google Scholar ]
• GNR . Development Initiatives; Bristol, UK: 2020. Global Nutrition Report: Action on Equity to End Malnutrition. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gödecke T., Stein A.J., Qaim M. The global burden of chronic and hidden hunger: trends and determinants. Global Food Sec. 2018; 17 :21–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Grace D., Roesel K., Lore T. 2014. Poverty and Gender Aspects of Food Safety and Informal Markets in Sub-saharan Africa. ILRI (Aka ILCA and ILRAD) [ Google Scholar ]
• Haddad L. Reward food companies for improving nutrition. Nature. 2018; 556 :19–22. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haddad L. Food Policy; 2020. A View on the Key Research Issues that the CGIAR Should Lead on 2020–2030. 101824. [ Google Scholar ]
• Haddad L., Hawkes C., Waage J., Webb P., Godfray C., Toulmin C. Global Panel on Agriculture and Food Systems for Nutrition; London, UK: 2016. Food Systems and Diets: Facing the Challenges of the 21st Century. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harttgen K., Klasen S. Do fragile countries experience worse MDG progress? J. Dev. Stud. 2013; 49 :134–159. [ Google Scholar ]
• Headey D.D., Alderman H.H. The Relative Caloric Prices of Healthy and Unhealthy Foods Differ Systematically across Income Levels and Continents. J. Nutr. 2019; 149 (11):2020–2033. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Headey D. No 70 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); Washington DC: 2014. An Analysis of Trends and Determinants of Child Undernutrition in Ethiopia, 2000–2011. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.671.7196&rep=rep1&type=pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Hendrix C., Brinkman H.-J. Food insecurity and conflict dynamics: causal linkages and complex feedbacks. Stabil. Int. J. Secur. Dev. 2013; 2 [ Google Scholar ]
• Herrero M., Thornton P.K. Livestock and global change: emerging issues for sustainable food systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2013; 110 :20878–20881. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Herrero M., Thornton P.K., Mason-D’Croz D., Palmer J., Benton T.G., Bodirsky B.L., Bogard J.R., Hall A., Lee B., Nyborg K., Pradhan P., Bonnett G.D., Bryan B.A., Campbell B.M., Christensen S., Clark M., Cook M.T., de Boer I.J.M., Downs C., Dizyee K., Folberth C., Godde C.M., Gerber J.S., Grundy M., Havlik P., Jarvis A., King R., Loboguerrero A.M., Lopes M.A., McIntyre C.L., Naylor R., Navarro J., Obersteiner M., Parodi A., Peoples M.B., Pikaar I., Popp A., Rockström J., Robertson M.J., Smith P., Stehfest E., Swain S.M., Valin H., van Wijk M., van Zanten H.H.E., Vermeulen S., Vervoort J., West P.C. Innovation can accelerate the transition towards a sustainable food system. Nat Food. 2020; 1 :266–272. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hester R.E., Harrison R.M., Ferguson A.J., Pearson M.J., Reynolds C.S. Eutrophication of natural waters and toxic algal blooms. Agricul Chem and the Environ. 1996:27–42. [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins P. Routledge; New York, NY: 2019. Knocking on doors in the policy corridor – can research in outdoor studies contribute to policy change? Research Methods in Outdoor Studies. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hirvonen K., Bai Y., Headey D., Masters W.A. Affordability of the EAT-Lancet reference diet: a global analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2020; 8 :e59–e66. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• High Level Panel of Experts . FAO; Rome: 2017. Nutrition and Food Systems. A Report by the High Level Panel of Experts of the UN World Committee on Food Security. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7846e.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoegh-Guldberg O., Jacob D., Bindi M., Brown S., Camilloni I., Diedhiou A., Djalante R., Ebi K., Engelbrecht F., Guiot J., Others . 2018. Impacts of 1.5 C Global Warming on Natural and Human Systems. Global Warming of 1. 5° C. An IPCC Special Report. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hulme D., Savoia A., Sen K. Governance as a global development goal? Setting, measuring and monitoring the post‐2015 development agenda. Global Pol. 2015; 6 (2):85–96. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ingram J. A food systems approach to researching food security and its interactions with global environmental change. Food Security. 2011; 3 (4):417–431. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jurgilevich A., Birge T., Kentala-Lehtonen J., Korhonen-Kurki K., Pietikäinen J., Saikku L., Schösler H. Transition towards circular economy in the food system. Sustain. Sci. Pract. Pol. 2016; 8 :69. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kah H.K. “Boko Haram is losing, but so is food production”: conflict and food insecurity in Nigeria and Cameroon. Afr. Dev. 2017; 42 :177–196. [ Google Scholar ]
• Karp A., Beale M.H., Beaudoin F., Eastmond P.J., Neal A.L., Shield I.F., Townsend B.J., Dobermann A. Growing innovations for the bioeconomy. Native Plants. 2015; 1 :15193. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Keating B.A., Herrero M., Carberry P.S., Gardner J., Cole M.B. Food wedges: framing the global food demand and supply challenge towards 2050. Global Food Sec. 2014; 3 :125–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kharas H., McArthur J.W., Ohno I. Brookings Institution Press; 2019. Leave No One behind: Time for Specifics on the Sustainable Development Goals. [ Google Scholar ]
• Klerkx L., Rose D. Dealing with the game-changing technologies of Agriculture 4.0: how do we manage diversity and responsibility in food system transition pathways? Global Food Sec. 2020; 24 :100347. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lachat C., Kolsteren P., Roberfroid D. Let poor countries into rich research. Nature. 2014; 515 (7526) pp.198-198. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lachat C., Nago E., Roberfroid D., Holdsworth M., Smit K., Kinabo J., Pinxten W., Kruger A., Kolsteren P. Developing a Sustainable Nutrition Research Agenda in Sub-Saharan Africa—Findings from the SUNRAY Project. PLoS Med. 2014; 11 (1):e1001593. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lawrence M., Naude C., Armstrong R., Bero L., Covic N., Durao S., Ghersi D., Macdonald G., MacLehose H., Margetts B., Tovey D., Volmink J., Young T. A call to action to reshape evidence synthesis and use for nutrition policy. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2016; 11 :ED000118. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lobell D.B. Principles and priorities for one CGIAR. Food Pol. 2020; 91 (C) doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101825. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lucci P., Bhatkal T., Khan A. Are we underestimating urban poverty? World Dev. 2018; 103 :297–310. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahler D.G., Lakner C., Aguilar R.A.C., Wu H. World Bank blog; 2020. The Impact of COVID-19 (Coronavirus) on Global Poverty: Why Sub-saharan Africa Might Be the Region Hardest Hit. April 20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Maloney W., Taskin T. World Bank; Washington DC: 2020. Determinants of Social Distancing and Economic Activity during COVID-19: A Global View. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mbow C., Rosenzweig C., Barioni L.G., Benton T.G., Herrero M., Krishnapillai M., Liwenga E., Pradhan P., Rivera-Ferre M.G., Sapkota T.B. Climate Change and Land: an IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems. IPCC; 2019. Food security; pp. 437–550. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/11/08_Chapter-5.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• McArthur J.W., McCord G.C. Fertilizing growth: agricultural inputs and their effects in economic development. J. Dev. Econ. 2017; 127 :133–152. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meinzen-Dick R.S., Rubin D., Elias M., Mulema A.A., Myers E. Intl Food Policy Res Inst; Washington DC: 2019. Women’s empowerment in agriculture: Lessons from qualitative research. [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller G.D., Cohen N.L., Fulgoni V.L., Heymsfield S.B., Wellman N.S. From nutrition scientist to nutrition communicator: why you should take the leap. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2006; 83 :1272–1275. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miranda J.J., Barrientos-Gutiérrez T., Corvalan C., Hyder A.A., Lazo-Porras M., Oni T., Wells J.C.K. Understanding the rise of cardiometabolic diseases in low- and middle-income countries. Nat. Med. 2019; 25 :1667–1679. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Monteiro C.A., Benicio M.H.D., Konno S.C., Silva A.C.F. da, Lima A.L.L. de, Conde W.L. Causes for the decline in child under-nutrition in Brazil, 1996-2007. Rev. Saude Publica. 2009; 43 :35–43. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mullen Food system stress-test. Nat Food. 2020; 1 :186. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Research Council . 2010. Division on earth and life studies, board on agriculture and natural resources, institute of medicine, board on global health, committee on achieving sustainable global capacity for surveillance and response to emerging diseases of zoonotic origin. Sustaining Global Surveillance and Response to Emerging Zoonotic Diseases. National Academies Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Neff R.A., Kanter R., Vandevijvere S. Reducing food loss and waste while improving the public's health. Health Aff. 2015; 34 :1821–1829. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• NEPAD . NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency; 2015. The CAADP Results Framework (2015-2025) [ Google Scholar ]
• Nixon S.W., Buckley B.A., Granger S.L., Harris L.A., Oczkowski A.J., Fulweiler R.W., Cole L.W. Science for Ecosystem-Based Management. Springer; New York, NY: 2008. Nitrogen and phosphorus inputs to Narragansett Bay: past, present, and future; pp. 101–175. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oreskes N., Conway E.M. Bloomsbury Publishing USA; 2011. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Neil J.M., Davis T.W., Burford M.A., Gobler C.J. The rise of harmful cyanobacteria blooms: The potential roles of eutrophication and climate change. Harmful Algae. 2012; 4 :313–334. [ Google Scholar ]
• Perry B.D., Grace D.C. How Growing Complexity of Consumer Choices and Drivers of Consumption Behaviour Affect Demand for Animal Source Foods. EcoHealth. 2015; 12 (4):703–712. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pingali P. Agricultural policy and nutrition outcomes--getting beyond the preoccupation with staple grains. Food Security. 2015; 7 :583–591. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pinker S. Penguin uk; 2011. The Better Angels of Our Nature: the Decline of Violence in History and its Causes. [ Google Scholar ]
• Popkin B.M., Adair L.S., Ng S.W. Global nutrition transition and the pandemic of obesity in developing countries. Nutr. Rev. 2012; 70 :3–21. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Popkin B.M., Corvalan C., Grummer-Strawn L.M. Dynamics of the double burden of malnutrition and the changing nutrition reality. Lancet. 2020; 395 :65–74. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Poulton C., Kydd J., Dorward A. Overcoming market constraints on pro-poor agricultural growth in Sub-Saharan Africa. Dev. Pol. Rev. 2006; 24 :243–277. [ Google Scholar ]
• Quisimbing A., Brown L.R., Feldstein H.S., Haddad L., Peńa C. 2000. Women: the Key to Food Security. Looking into the Household. [ Google Scholar ]
• Quisumbing A.R., Meinzen-Dick R.S., Smith L.C. 2020 Africa Conference Brief 4 (No. 566-2016-38941) The International Food Policy Institute; Washington DC: 2005. Increasing the effective participation of women in food and nutrition security in Africa; pp. 1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rasanathan K., Rasanathan J.J.K. Reimagining global health as the sharing of power. BMJ Glob Health. 2020; 5 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reardon T., Berdegué J.A. The rapid rise of supermarkets in Latin America: challenges and opportunities for development. Dev. Pol. Rev. 2002; 20 :371–388. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reardon T., Hopkins R. The supermarket revolution in developing countries: policies to address emerging tensions among supermarkets, suppliers and traditional retailers. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2006; 18 :522–545. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reardon T., Timmer C.P., Minten B. Supermarket revolution in Asia and emerging development strategies to include small farmers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012; 109 :12332–12337. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reardon T., Echeverria R., Berdegué J., Minten B., Liverpool-Tasie S., Tschirley D., Zilberman D. Rapid transformation of food systems in developing regions: highlighting the role of agricultural research & innovations. Agric. Syst. 2019; 172 :47–59. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rich N. vol. 1. New York Times Magazine; 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html (Losing Earth: the Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change). [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenzweig C., Mbow C., Barioni L.G., Benton T.G., Herrero M., Krishnapillai M., Liwenga E.T., Pradhan P., Rivera-Ferre M.G., Sapkota T., Tubiello F.N., Xu Y., Contreras E.M., Portugal-Pereira J. Climate change responses benefit from a global food system approach. Nat Food. 2020; 1 :94–97. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosling H., Rönnlund A.R., Rosling O. Flatiron Books; New York: 2018. Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong about the World–And Why Things Are Better than You Think. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rowe S.B. Communicating science-based food and nutrition information. J. Nutr. 2002; 132 :2481S–2482S. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ruel M.T., Quisumbing A.R., Balagamwala M. Nutrition-sensitive agriculture: what have we learned so far? Global Food Sec. 2018; 17 :128–153. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schipanski M.E., MacDonald G.K., Rosenzweig S., Chappell M.J., Bennett E.M., Kerr R.B., Blesh J., Crews T., Drinkwater L., Lundgren J.G., Schnarr C. Realizing resilient food systems. Bioscience. 2016; 66 :600–610. [ Google Scholar ]
• Searchinger T., Waite R., Hanson C., Ranganathan J., Dumas P., Matthews E., Klirs C. World Resources Institute; Washington DC: 2019. Creating a Sustainable Food Future: A Menu of Solutions to Feed Nearly 10 Billion People by 2050. Final Report. https://research.wri.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/WRR_Food_Full_Report_0.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Singh A. Why are economic growth and reductions in child undernutrition so weakly correlated—and what can public policy do? The Lancet Global Health. 2014; 2 (4):e185–e186. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sogoba B., Ba A., Zougmoré R.B., Samaké O.B. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security; Copenhagen, Denmark: 2014. How to Establish Dialogue between Researchers and Policymakers for Climate Change Adaptation in Mali: Analysis of Challenges, Constraints and Opportunities. Working Paper No. 84. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/56669 [ Google Scholar ]
• Springmann M., Clark M., Mason-D’Croz D., Wiebe K., Bodirsky B.L., Lassaletta L., de Vries W., Vermeulen S.J., Herrero M., Carlson K.M., Jonell M., Troell M., DeClerck F., Gordon L.J., Zurayk R., Scarborough P., Rayner M., Loken B., Fanzo J., Godfray H.C.J., Tilman D., Rockström J., Willett W. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature. 2018; 562 :519–525. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sraboni E., Malapit H.J., Quisumbing A.R., Ahmed A.U. Women's empowerment in agriculture: what role for food security in Bangladesh? World Dev. 2014; 61 :11–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• Steffen W. Qatar University Life Science Symposium 2016: Biodiversity, Sustainability and Climate Change, with Perspectives from Qatar (Vol. 2016, No. 4, p. 5) Hamad bin Khalifa University Press (HBKU Press); 2016, November. Climate change, the Anthropocene and planetary boundaries. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stuckler D., McKee M., Ebrahim S., Basu S. Manufacturing epidemics: the role of global producers in increased consumption of unhealthy commodities including processed foods, alcohol, and tobacco. PLoS Med. 2012; 9 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Swinburn B.A., Kraak V.I., Allender S., Atkins V.J., Baker P.I., Bogard J.R., Brinsden H., Calvillo A., De Schutter O., Devarajan R., Ezzati M., Friel S., Goenka S., Hammond R.A., Hastings G., Hawkes C., Herrero M., Hovmand P.S., Howden M., Jaacks L.M., Kapetanaki A.B., Kasman M., Kuhnlein H.V., Kumanyika S.K., Larijani B., Lobstein T., Long M.W., Matsudo V.K.R., Mills S.D.H., Morgan G., Morshed A., Nece P.M., Pan A., Patterson D.W., Sacks G., Shekar M., Simmons G.L., Smit W., Tootee A., Vandevijvere S., Waterlander W.E., Wolfenden L., Dietz W.H. The global syndemic of obesity, undernutrition, and climate change: the lancet commission report. Lancet. 2019; 393 :791–846. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taillie L.S., Reyes M., Colchero M.A., Popkin B., Corvalán C. An evaluation of Chile's Law of Food Labeling and Advertising on sugar-sweetened beverage purchases from 2015 to 2017: a before-and-after study. PLoS Med. 2020; 17 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tallis H., Kreis K., Olander L., Ringler C., Ameyaw D., Borsuk M.E., Fletschner D., Game E., Gilligan D.O., Jeuland M., Kennedy G., Masuda Y.J., Mehta S., Miller N., Parker M., Pollino C., Rajaratnam J., Wilkie D., Zhang W., Ahmed S., Ajayi O.C., Alderman H., Arhonditsis G., Azevedo I., Badola R., Bailis R., Balvanera P., Barbour E., Bardini M., Barton D.N., Baumgartner J., Benton T.G., Bobrow E., Bossio D., Bostrom A., Braimoh A., Brondizio E., Brown J., Bryant B.P., Calder R.S.D., Chaplin-Kramer B., Cullen A., DeMello N., Dickinson K.L., Ebi K.L., Eves H.E., Fanzo J., Ferraro P.J., Fisher B., Frongillo E.A., Galford G., Garrity D., Gatere L., Grieshop A.P., Grigg N.J., Groves C., Gugerty M.K., Hamm M., Hou X., Huang C., Imhoff M., Jack D., Jones A.D., Kelsey R., Kothari M., Kumar R., Lachat C., Larsen A., Lawrence M., DeClerck F., Levin P.S., Mabaya E., Gibson J.M., McDonald R.I., Mace G., Maertens R., Mangale D.I., Martino R., Mason S., Mehta L., Meinzen-Dick R., Merz B., Msangi S., Murray G., Murray K.A., Naude C.E., Newlands N.K., Nkonya E., Peterman A., Petruney T., Possingham H., Puri J., Remans R., Remlinger L., Ricketts T.H., Reta B., Robinson B.E., Roe D., Rosenthal J., Shen G., Shindell D., Stewart-Koster B., Sunderland T., Sutherland W.J., Tewksbury J., Wasser H., Wear S., Webb C., Whittington D., Wilkerson M., Wittmer H., Wood B.D.K., Wood S., Wu J., Yadama G., Zobrist S. Aligning evidence generation and use across health, development, and environment. Current Opinion in Environ Sustain. 2019; 39 :81–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor S.A.J., Perez-Ferrer C., Griffiths A., Brunner E. Scaling up nutrition in fragile and conflict-affected states: the pivotal role of governance. Soc. Sci. Med. 2015; 126 :119–127. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tomich T.P., Lidder P., Coley M., Gollin D., Meinzen-Dick R., Webb P., Carberry P. Food and agricultural innovation pathways for prosperity. Agric. Syst. 2019; 172 :1–15. [ Google Scholar ]
• UNICEF . UNICEF; New York: 2019. The State of the World's Children 2019. Children, Food and Nutrition: Growing Well in a Changing World. [ Google Scholar ]
• United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division . 2018. The World's Cities in 2018—Data Booklet (ST/ESA/SER.A/417) [ Google Scholar ]
• United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), World Health Organization, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank . World Health Organization; Geneva: 2019. Levels and Trends in Child Malnutrition: Key Findings of the 2019 Edition of the Joint Child Malnutrition Estimates. [ Google Scholar ]
• Van den Bold M., Quisumbing A.R., Gillespie S. The International Food Policy Institute; Washington DC: 2013. Women S Empowerment and Nutrition: an Evidence Review. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01294. [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Royen K., Lachat C., Holdsworth M., Smit K., Kinabo J., Roberfroid D., Nago E., Orach C.G., Kolsteren P. How Can the Operating Environment for Nutrition Research Be Improved in Sub-Saharan Africa? The Views of African Researchers. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8 (6):e66355. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Waite R., Beveridge M., Brummett R., Castine S., Chaiyawannakarn N., Kaushik S., Mungkung R., Nawapakpilai S., Phillips M. World Resources Institute; Washington DC: 2014. Improving productivity and environmental performance of aquaculture. [ Google Scholar ]
• Watson R.T., Noble I.R., Bolin B., Ravindranath N.H., Verardo D.J., Dokken D.J. 2000. IPCC Special Report on Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry. [ Google Scholar ]
• WEF . World Economic Forum; Geneva, Switzerland: 2020. COVID-19 Risk Outlook: A Preliminary Mapping and its Implications. Insight Report. [ Google Scholar ]
• Willett W., Rockström J., Loken B., Springmann M., Lang T., Vermeulen S., Garnett T., Tilman D., DeClerck F., Wood A., Jonell M., Clark M., Gordon L.J., Fanzo J., Hawkes C., Zurayk R., Rivera J.A., De Vries W., Majele Sibanda L., Afshin A., Chaudhary A., Herrero M., Agustina R., Branca F., Lartey A., Fan S., Crona B., Fox E., Bignet V., Troell M., Lindahl T., Singh S., Cornell S.E., Srinath Reddy K., Narain S., Nishtar S., Murray C.J.L. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet. 2019; 393 :447–492. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• World Poverty Clock World data lab. 2020. https://worldpoverty.io/
• WRI . World Resources Institute; Washington DC: 2019. Creating a Sustainable Food Future. https://www.wri.org/publication/creating-sustainable-food-future [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu Y.-C., Chen C.-S., Chan Y.-J. The outbreak of COVID-19: an overview. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2020; 83 :217–220. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yosef S., Pandya-Lorch R. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); Washington, D.C: 2016. Nourishing millions: Stories of change in nutrition: Synopsis. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang X., Davidson E.A., Mauzerall D.L., Searchinger T.D., Dumas P., Shen Y. Managing nitrogen for sustainable development. Nature. 2015; 528 :51–59. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Further reading

• FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WHO and WFP . FAO; Rome: 2019. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World. Safeguarding against Economic Slowdowns and Downturns. http://www.fao.org/3/ca5162en/ca5162en.pdf [ Google Scholar ]

Food Security Update | World Bank Response to Rising Food Insecurity

• Our Projects
• Data & Research
• News & Opinions
• What is Food Security

Latest Update – April 29, 2024

Domestic food price inflation remains high. Inflation higher than 5% is experienced 57.1% of low-income countries (no change since the last update on April 11, 2024), 63.8% of lower-middle-income countries (no change), 33% of upper-middle-income countries (3.0 percentage points lower), and 12.7% of high-income countries (9.1 percentage points lower). In real terms, food price inflation exceeded overall inflation in 48.8% of 166 countries where data is available.

Download the latest brief on rising food insecurity and World Bank responses

Compared to two weeks ago, the agriculture and cereal price indices closed 1% higher, respectively, and the export price index closed 3% higher. Among cereals, maize and wheat prices closed 2% higher, respectively, while rice closed 1% lower. On a year-on-year basis, maize prices are 34% lower and wheat prices are 17% lower. Rice prices on the other hand are 24% higher. Compared to January 2020, maize prices are 15% higher, wheat prices are 3% higher, and rice prices are 47% higher. (See “ pink sheet”  data for agricultural commodity and food commodity prices indices, updated monthly.)

According to the USDA Economic Research Service,  global wheat ending stocks for the 2023/24 period are anticipated to hit an eight-year low, dropping 0.6 million metric tons (MMT) to 258.3 million metric tons (MMT). This decline is primarily attributed to India's diminished wheat stocks, forecasted to decrease by 2.1 MMT to 6.9 MMT due to faster consumption rates than previously estimated. India's ending stocks will have plummeted by over 20 MMT from their peak in 2020/21, reflecting a substantial reduction. Overall, global stocks have seen a decline of 39 MMT from their peak in 2019/20, with China contributing 18 MMT to this decrease.

According to the latest Global Report on Food Crises (GRFC) , nearly 282 million people in 59 countries and territories experienced high levels of acute hunger in 2023 - a worldwide increase of 24 million from the previous year. This rise was due to the report’s increased coverage of food crisis contexts as well as a sharp deterioration in food security, especially in the Gaza Strip and the Sudan. For four consecutive years, the proportion of people facing acute food insecurity has remained persistently high at almost 22 percent of those assessed, significantly exceeding pre-COVID-19 levels. The Global Network Against Food Crises urgently calls for a transformative approach that integrates peace, prevention, and development action alongside at-scale emergency efforts to break the cycle of acute hunger which remains at unacceptably high levels.

According to new research published by the International Food Policy Research Institute  (IFPRI), international fertilizer prices have fallen by 50%  from their peak in April 2022. Factors such as an increase in demand in the post-COVID economic recovery, disruptions to the global supply chain, Russia's invasion of Ukraine caused global fertilizer prices to increase significantly from 2021 to 2022. These events raised concerns that fertilizer application would be reduced, which could decrease production and increase food insecurity, but price shocks appear to have had a limited impact on fertilizer use.

As highlighted in a recent IFPRI blog , parts of Southern Africa have been reeling under the grip of a severe drought since late 2023, exacerbated by the ongoing El Niño Southern Oscillation. This has resulted in plummeting harvests; prompted disaster declarations in Malawi, Zambia, and Zimbabwe; and affected countries across the region. Dwindling maize yields pose a grave threat to food security for millions of households reliant on this staple for a significant portion of their daily calorie intake.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, trade-related policies imposed by countries have surged. The global food crisis has been partially made worse by the growing number of food and fertilizer trade restrictions put in place by countries with a goal of increasing domestic supply and reducing prices. As of April 22, 2024, 16 countries have implemented 22 food export bans, and 8 have implemented 15 export-limiting measures.

World Bank Action

In May 2022, the World Bank made a commitment of making available $30 billion over a period of 15 months to tackle the crisis. We have surpassed that goal. The World Bank has scaled up its food and nutrition security response, to now making $45 billion available through a combination of $22 billion in new lending and $23 billion from existing portfolio.

Our food and nutrition security portfolio now spans across 90 countries. It includes both short term interventions such as expanding social protection, also longer-term resilience such as boosting productivity and climate-smart agriculture.

The Bank's intervention is expected to benefit 335 million people, equivalent to 44% of the number of undernourished people. Around 53% of the beneficiaries are women – they are disproportionately more affected by the crisis. Some examples include:

• In Honduras, the Rural Competitiveness Project series (COMRURAL II and III) aims to generate entrepreneurship and employment opportunities while promoting a climate-conscious, nutrition-smart strategy in agri-food value chains. To date, the program is benefiting around 6,287 rural small-scale producers (of which 33% are women, 15% youth, and 11% indigenous) of coffee, vegetables, dairy, honey, and other commodities through enhanced market connections and adoption of improved agricultural technologies and has created 6,678 new jobs.
• In Honduras, the Corredor Seco Food Security Project (PROSASUR) strives to enhance food security for impoverished and vulnerable rural households in the country’s Dry Corridor. This project has supported 12,202 extremely vulnerable families through nutrition-smart agricultural subprojects, food security plans, community nutrition plans, and nutrition and hygiene education. Within the beneficiary population, 70% of children under the age of five and their mothers now have a dietary diversity score of at least 4 (i.e., consume at least four food groups).
• The $2.75 billion  Food Systems Resilience Program for Eastern and Southern Africa , helps countries in Eastern and Southern Africa increase the resilience of the region’s food systems and ability to tackle growing food insecurity. Now in phase three, the program will enhance inter-agency food crisis response also boost medium- and long-term efforts for resilient agricultural production, sustainable development of natural resources, expanded market access, and a greater focus on food systems resilience in policymaking.
• A  $95 million credit from IDA for the Malawi Agriculture Commercialization Project (AGCOM) to increase commercialization of select agriculture value chain products and to provide immediate and effective response to an eligible crisis or emergency.
• The  $200 million IDA grant for Madagascar  to strengthen decentralized service delivery, upgrade water supply, restore and protect landscapes, and strengthen the resilience of food and livelihood systems in the drought-prone ‘Grand Sud’ .
• A $60 million credit for the Integrated Community Development Project that works with refugees and host communities in four northern provinces of Burundi to improve food and nutrition security, build socio-economic infrastructure, and support micro-enterprise development through a participatory approach.
• The $175 million Sahel Irrigation Initiative Regional Support Project is helping build resilience and boost productivity of agricultural and pastoral activities in Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, and Senegal. More than 130,000 farmers and members of pastoral communities are benefiting from small and medium-sized irrigation initiatives. The project is building a portfolio of bankable irrigation investment projects of around 68,000 ha, particularly in medium and large-scale irrigation in the Sahel region.
• Through the $50 million Emergency Food Security Response project , 329,000 smallholder farmers in Central Africa Republic have received seeds, farming tools and training in agricultural and post-harvest techniques to boost crop production and become more resilient to climate and conflict risks.
• The $15 million Guinea Bissau Emergency Food Security Project is helping increase agriculture production and  access to food to vulnerable families. Over 72,000 farmers have received drought-resistant and high-yielding seeds, fertilizers, agricultural equipment; and livestock vaccines for the country-wide vaccination program. In addition, 8,000 vulnerable households have received cash transfer to purchase food and tackle food insecurity.
• The $60 million Accelerating the Impact of CGIAR Research for Africa (AICCRA) project has reached nearly 3 million African farmers (39% women) with critical climate smart agriculture tools and information services in partnership with the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR). These tools and services are helping farmers to increase production and build resilience in the face of climate crisis. In Mali, studies showed that farmers using recommendations from the AICCRA-supported RiceAdvice had on average 0.9 ton per hectare higher yield and US$320 per hectare higher income.
• The $766 million West Africa Food Systems Resilience Program is working to increase preparedness against food insecurity and improve the resilience of food systems in West Africa. The program is increasing digital advisory services for agriculture and food crisis prevention and management, boosting adaption capacity of agriculture system actors, and investing in regional food market integration and trade to increase food security. An additional $345 million is currently under preparation for Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo.
• A $150 million grant for the second phase of the Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project, which will help address food insecurity, strengthen resilience and protect livelihoods.
• $50 million grant of additional financing for Tajikistan  to mitigate food and nutrition insecurity impacts on households and enhance the overall resilience of the agriculture sector.
• A $125 million project in Jordan aims to strengthen the development the agriculture sector by enhancing its climate resilience, increasing competitiveness and inclusion, and ensuring medium- to long-term food security.
• A  $300 million project in Bolivia  that will contribute to increasing food security, market access and the adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices.
• A  $315 million loan to support Chad, Ghana and Sierra Leone  to increase their preparedness against food insecurity and to improve the resilience of their food systems.
• A  $500 million Emergency Food Security and Resilience Support Project  to bolster Egypt's efforts to ensure that poor and vulnerable households have uninterrupted access to bread, help strengthen the country's resilience to food crises, and support to reforms that will help improve nutritional outcomes.
• A  $130 million loan for Tunisia , seeking to lessen the impact of the Ukraine war by financing vital soft wheat imports and providing emergency support to cover barley imports for dairy production and seeds for smallholder farmers for the upcoming planting season.

In May 2022, the World Bank Group and the G7 Presidency co-convened  the Global Alliance for Food Security , which aims to catalyze an immediate and concerted response to the unfolding global hunger crisis. The Alliance has developed the publicly accessible Global Food and Nutrition Security Dashboard , which provides timely information for global and local decision-makers to help improve coordination of the policy and financial response to the food crisis.

The heads of the FAO, IMF, World Bank Group, WFP, and WTO released a Third Joint Statement on February 8, 2023. The statement calls to prevent a worsening of the food and nutrition security crisis, further urgent actions are required to (i) rescue hunger hotspots, (ii) facilitate trade, improve the functioning of markets, and enhance the role of the private sector, and (iii) reform and repurpose harmful subsidies with careful targeting and efficiency. Countries should balance short-term urgent interventions with longer-term resilience efforts as they respond to the crisis.

Last Updated: Apr 29, 2024

Global Food and Nutrition Security Dashboard

World bank scales up food and nutrition security crises response to benefit 335 ..., second update on food and nutrition security (fns), coming together to address the global food crisis, world bank announces planned actions for global food crisis response, second joint statement by the heads of fao, imf, wbg, wfp, and wto on the global ..., interviews with food security experts, the impact of the war in ukraine on food security | world bank expert answers, stay connected.

• Nicolas Douillet Washington, D.C. [email protected]
• Nugroho Nurdikiawan Sunjoyo Washington, D.C. [email protected]

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

Food Security: Sustainability and Accessibility

Loading... Editorial 04 January 2024 Editorial: Food security: sustainability and accessibility Sumit Chakravarty , Arun Jyoti Nath  and  Gopal Shukla 314 views 0 citations

Loading... Original Research 21 February 2023 Caught off guard and beaten: The Ukraine war and food security in the Middle East Mohammad Al-Saidi 5,135 views 16 citations

Loading... Systematic Review 13 February 2023 Sustainable intensification of agriculture as a tool to promote food security: A bibliometric analysis Sinazo Ajibade ,  2 more  and  Csaba Balint 4,889 views 4 citations

Original Research 12 January 2023 Impact of the Productive SafetyNet Program on the minimum acceptable diet in the rural community of South Gondar Zone, Northwest Ethiopia Melaku Tadege Engidaw ,  4 more  and  Yalelet Fentaw Shiferaw 744 views 0 citations

Original Research 14 December 2022 Does income imply food security in coffee growing communities? A case study in Yayu, Southwestern Ethiopia Omarsherif M. Jemal ,  1 more  and  Meine van Noordwijk 1,748 views 0 citations

Original Research 14 December 2022 A study on agricultural investment along the Belt and Road Jiajun Tian  and  Youjin Liu 2,535 views 2 citations

Original Research 08 December 2022 Effect of artificial insemination in comparison to natural mating on the reproductive performance and profitability of smallholder pig production system in Indian Himalaya Mahak Singh ,  8 more  and  V. K. Mishra 5,693 views 0 citations

Original Research 05 December 2022 Impacts of urban safety net on income, food expenditure and intake capacity of poor households in Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia, 2021 Kassa Moges Tareke 2,841 views 2 citations

Original Research 23 November 2022 Improvement in nutritional quality of traditional unleavened flat bread using Quality Protein Maize Navjot Kaur ,  8 more  and  Baljit Singh 1,657 views 2 citations

Systematic Review 03 November 2022 Getting ahead of the pandemic curve: A systematic review of critical determining factors for innovation adoption in ensuring food security Ammar Redza Ahmad Rizal  and  Shahrina Md Nordin 1,676 views 1 citations

Original Research 26 October 2022 Household decision-making, women's empowerment, and increasing egg consumption in children under five in rural Burkina Faso: Observations from a cluster randomized controlled trial Emily V. Moore ,  2 more  and  Sarah L. McKune 1,905 views 3 citations

Original Research 21 October 2022 Co-implementation of conservation tillage and herbicides reduces weed and nematode infestation and enhances the productivity of direct-seeded rice in North-western Indo-Gangetic Plains Rishi Raj ,  10 more  and  Sonaka Ghosh 1,108 views 2 citations

• Program Finder
• Admissions Services
• Course Directory
• Academic Calendar
• Hybrid Campus
• Lecture Series
• Convocation
• Strategy and Development
• Implementation and Impact
• Integrity and Oversight
• In the School
• In the Field
• In Baltimore
• Resources for Practitioners
• Articles & News Releases
• In The News
• Statements & Announcements
• At a Glance
• Student Life
• Strategic Priorities
• Inclusion, Diversity, Anti-Racism, and Equity (IDARE)
• What is Public Health?

Food/Nutrition

Nutrition issues and food system safety and security to influence programs, systems, policies, and education

Food/Nutrition Planning Headlines

Explore the latest public health research and insights about Food/Nutrition.

The Hunger Gap

Food programs tend to target adults and younger kids. What about adolescents?

Cooking Skills: The Missing Ingredient in Nutrition Efforts

If we want to help people eat better, we need to teach them how to cook. 

To Protect Human Health, We Must Protect the Earth’s Health

The damage humans have done to the Earth is coming back to harm us.

Research Gaps Around Type 1 Diabetes

Recent research has highlighted disparities in research between Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, with Type 1 long—and mistakenly—associated only with childhood onset. Elizabeth Selvin and Michael Fang challenge previously held assumptions about Type 1 diabetes.

A South African Soup Kitchen Is Bringing Relief to Caregivers

In a white shipping container converted into a community soup kitchen, Vusi Msomi provides meals for children in need in Alexandra, South Africa. It helps, but it’s not enough to address community hunger—which worsened after the pandemic started.

Wendy Bennett Empowers Women and Families Through Research 

• View more Headlines

Food/Nutrition Faculty Experts

Looking for prominent public health experts in the field of Food/Nutrition? They’re here at the Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Martin W. Bloem

Martin Bloem, MD, PhD, has devoted his career to improving the effectiveness of public health and nutrition programs through applied research, focusing particularly on low- and middle-income countries.

Parul Christian

Parul Christian, DrPH '96, MSc, studies how to improve maternal and child nutrition and prevent micronutrient deficiencies with effective solutions in low-income settings.

Roni A. Neff

Roni Neff, PhD '06, ScM, researches ways to cut food waste and address climate change through more resilient, equitable, and healthy food systems.

Keeve E. Nachman

Keeve Nachman, PhD ’06, MHS ’01, aims to generate the scientific evidence needed to support decisions that mitigate human exposures to chemical and microbial hazards associated with food production.

Departments

Environmental Health and Engineering

International Health

Population, Family and Reproductive Health

Centers & Institutes

Center for Human Nutrition

Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future (CLF)

Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC)

Upcoming Events

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Food Security

USDA supports global food security through in-country capacity building, basic and applied research, and support for improved market information, statistics and analysis. With 870 million people around the world who do not have access to a sufficient supply of nutritious and safe food, establishing global food security is important not only to hundreds of millions of hungry people, but also to the sustainable economic growth of these nations and the long-term economic prosperity of the United States.

As we help countries become more food secure and raise incomes, we also expand markets for American producers. U.S. agricultural exports to developing countries in Southeast Asia, Central America, and Sub-Saharan Africa have grown at more than twice the annual rate as compared to developed countries. U.S. poultry meat exports to Sub-Saharan Africa expanded 180 percent from 2009 to 2011.

Given population growth and rising incomes, it is estimated that the demand for food will rise by 70 to 100 percent by 2050. To meet this need, the United Nations estimates that production in developing countries will need to almost double.

Building Local Capacity, Increasing Productivity, and Improving Markets and Trade

USDA is strategically placed in over 80 countries constantly monitoring agricultural matters globally. Since 2010, USDA has aligned appropriate programs to Feed the Future plans to support agriculture development in target countries and regions: Ghana, Kenya, East Africa, Bangladesh, Haiti, Guatemala and Central America. plans to support agriculture development in target countries and regions: Ghana, Kenya, East Africa, Bangladesh, Haiti, Guatemala and Central America. Our international food aid programs benefited about 34 million individuals globally with assistance valued at nearly $1.6 billion.

The McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program supported the education, child development, and food security of more than 16 million of the world's poorest children. The program provides U.S. agricultural products, as well as financial and technical assistance, for school feeding and maternal and child nutrition projects.

The Borlaug Fellowship Program brought 272 scientists to the U.S. and focuses on research topics such as food safety, soil fertility, post harvest technology, biotechnology, animal health, and rural development.

The Cochran Fellowship Program trained 1,732 individuals worldwide in topics such as regulatory and certification systems, agricultural production, biotechnology, and plant and animal disease control.

In 2011, the annual Food Security Assessment was expanded to include 77 countries; completed assessments of agricultural statistics and market information in 10 Feed the Future countries and identified key areas where improvement is needed; and conducted in-depth assessments of the capacity of the statistical systems of Ghana, Haiti, Tanzania, and Bangladesh.

We have undertaken significant efforts to build local in-country capacity to confront food security, including:

• Training small farmers and foreign officials on plant and animal health systems, risk analysis, and avoiding post harvest loss;
• Completing assessments on climate change;
• Increasing agricultural productivity.

In the targeted Feed the Future countries and regions, nearly 60,000 individuals have received USDA agricultural productivity or food security training, 7 critical policy reforms have been adopted with USDA assistance, and $20 million in microloans have been disbursed.

Feed the Future - A Government-Wide Effort to Combat Global Hunger

In 2009, G8 nations committed to "act with the scale and urgency needed to achieve sustainable global food security" and to be accountable and coordinate with country development plans. In the subsequent three years, the United States invested over $3.7 billion to address global food security, exceeding the President's commitment, and launched his Feed the Future Initiative.

In 2010, the U.S. helped launch the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program, an international, multilateral trust fund that has already awarded $658 million to finance country development plans in 18 low-income countries, with 8.2 million beneficiaries.

Driving Innovative Research and Technologies

Under Feed the Future, research investments specifically designed for global food security have more than doubled, from $50 million in 2008 to $120 million in 2011. The Feed the Future Research Strategy, developed by USAID and USDA, focuses on the four agro-climatic zones where global poverty and hunger are concentrated, and targets two-to-four major problems in each zone to maximize impact on poor families.

In 2010, the USDA and USAID Norman Borlaug Commemorative Research Initiative launched a new era of partnership on research. Under this initiative, USDA is conducting research on wheat rust, a major threat to wheat production worldwide, and on aflatoxin, a toxic fungus that infects groundnuts and other crops, and causes illness in humans. Other research includes developing a vaccine for East Coast fever, a major killer of cattle in East Africa, and supporting research to enhance animal, grain and legumes production. In Guatemala, Haiti, Bangladesh, Kenya, and Ghana, USDA has a number of new technologies under research, 12 of which are being field tested and 4 have been introduced locally.

USDA researchers sequenced the genome of the wheat, as well as the wheat stem rust pathogen which threatens to destroy wheat crops worldwide and distributed new wheat germplasm globally to ensure productive harvests. USDA researchers have also released 1,575 genetic variations in beans.

Learn more about agriculture and food security efforts underway at the U.S. Agency for International Development .

Tools and Resources for Food Security

• Community Food Security Assessment Toolkit
• Emergencies and Food Safety
• Measuring Household Food Security

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Food Security and Access

Learn more about food access in the U.S and explore resources including food assistance programs, food availability, nutrition security and hunger.

Learn about how USDA supports global food security through building local capacity, improving markets, funding research and more.

Get information on food assistance programs for certain individuals and groups. Programs include SNAP , WIC, the National School Lunch Program  and more.

Find tips for eating healthy on a budget and saving money when food shopping.

Call the USDA National Hunger Hotline at 1-866-3-HUNGRY or 1-877-8-HAMBRE to speak with a representative who will find food resources near you.

Get ideas of budget-friendly foods and ways to prepare them. Plus, find savings and stores that accept Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits near you.

Download this guide for tips on what to donate to a food pantry and how to organize a community food drive.

Learn about factors contributing to lack of food access and programs that support local food access.

Learn what to expect at a food pantry or food bank and how to select nutritious foods while you are there.

Enter your address to identify local food services, including soup kitchens, food pantries, and meal delivery. Filter results by availability in Spanish, for seniors, for Halal or Kosher diets, or other options.

NIFA advances food and nutrition security through their programs.   Review program information, learn about general food and nutrition security, and listen to NIFA’s webinar series.