Food security indicators after humanitarian interventions including food aid in Zimbabwe
Food security indicators after humanitarian interventions including food aid in Zimbabwe
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/156482651003100405
复制
发表时间：
2010-12-01
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Faber, Mieke
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gandure, Sithabiso;Drimie, Scott;Faber, Mieke
背景当代津巴布韦农村家庭面临不同程度的粮食不安全和脆弱性宏观经济条件恶化、政治环境脆弱、降雨少、收入低、环境条件恶化，艾滋病毒和艾滋病的影响是他们生计的特点非政府组织通过一些粮食干预措施对这种情况作出反应，以缓解粮食不安全和贫困目的提供用于评估2006年津巴布韦受益于粮食干预的家庭的粮食安全指标分析方法从三个地区(乌祖姆巴-马拉姆巴-普加格韦[UMP]、Chivi和Tsholotsho)每个区选择60户家庭，根据问卷调查计算的家庭食品安全指数，包括家庭膳食多样性评分(HDDS)、食品短缺月数和家庭食品不安全获取量表(HFIAS)，采用方差分析和Tukey事后分析进行比较。结果不同地区之间HDDS的平均值不同，Chivi的家庭消费的食物种类比Tsholotsho和UMP的家庭更多(4 7vs27和3 0，p<；76.4%的家庭经历了前一年的食物短缺，其中UMP的食物短缺发生率最低(56.7%)，Tsholotsho的家庭全年经历饥饿的比例最高(95%)，对于UMP和Chivi的家庭来说，10月至1月是家庭经历饥饿最严重的关键月份。Spearman相关分析表明，HFIAS与HDDS之间呈负相关(r=-0425，p<；01)前一年经历食物短缺的家庭的平均HDDS较低(32vs3.9，p=013)，而HFIAS的平均水平较高(171vs120，p<；t；结论本研究论证了在设计食品安全干预措施时使用各种指标和多种指标组合的价值。人类发展数据显示，除了可获得性之外，食品安全还包括获得各种营养食品。与数月食品短缺有关的指标使人们能够更深入地了解粮食不安全的性质，Tsholotsho全年都会经历饥饿，这意味着原因是慢性的，而不是季节性的，而辣椒和人民运动联盟经历季节性饥饿。HFIAS有效地揭示了每个地点的食品安全状况，包括食物的可获得性、稳定性和摄入量
Background Rural households in contemporary Zimbabwe experience various levels of food insecurity and vulnerability Worsening macroeconomic conditions, a fragile political environment, poor rainfall, low incomes, deteriorating environmental conditions, and the impact of HIV and AIDS characterize their livelihoods Nongovernmental organizations have responded to the situation through a number of food interventions to alleviate food insecurity and povertyObjective To provide an analysis of food security indicators used to assess households benefiting from food interventions in 2006 in ZimbabweMethods A total of 60 households were chosen for each of three districts (Uzumba-Maramba-Pfungwe [UMP], Chivi, and Tsholotsho), targeting beneficiaries of the Agricultural Protracted Relief Programme Household food security indicators calculated on the basis of data collected by questionnaire included the Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS), months of food shortages, and the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS) Districts were compared by analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc analysisResults The mean HDDS differed between the districts, households in Chivi consumed foods from a greater variety of groups than households in Tsholotsho and UMP (4 7 vs 27 and 3 0, respectively, p < 001) Food shortages during the previous year were experienced by 76 4% of the households, with UMP having the lowest occurrence of food shortages (56 7%) and Tsholotsho the highest (95%) Households in Tsholotsho experienced hunger throughout the year, for households in UMP and Chivi, October to January were the critical months when households experienced the most hunger Spearman correlation analysis showed an inverse correlation between HFIAS and HDDS (r = -0425, p < 01) Households that experienced food shortages the previous year had a lower mean HDDS (3 2 vs 3 9, p = 013) and a higher mean HFIAS (17 1 vs 120, p < 001) than households that did not experience food shortagesConclusions The study demonstrated the value of using a variety and combination of indicators in the design of food security interventions The HDDS showed that beyond availability, food security also involves access to a variety of nutritious foods The indicator pertaining to months of food shortages allows a deeper understanding of the nature of food insecurity, hunger in Tsholotsho is experienced throughout the year, implying that the causes are chronic rather than seasonal, whereas Chilli and UMP experience seasonal hunger The HFIAS usefully revealed the condition of food security in each site in terms of the availability, stability, and intake of food