Measurement is critical for assessing and monitoring food security. Yet, it is difficult to comprehend which food security dimensions, components, and levels the numerous available indicators reflect. We thus conducted a systematic literature review to analyse the scientific evidence on these indicators to comprehend the food security dimensions and components covered, intended purpose, level of analysis, data requirements, and recent developments and concepts applied in food security measurement. Data analysis of 78 articles shows that the household-level calorie adequacy indicator is the most frequently used (22%) as a sole measure of food security. The dietary diversity-based (44%) and experience-based (40%) indicators also find frequent use. The food utilisation (13%) and stability (18%) dimensions were seldom captured when measuring food security, and only three of the retrieved publications measured food security by considering all the four food security dimensions. The majority of the studies that applied calorie adequacy and dietary diversity-based indicators employed secondary data whereas most of the studies that applied experience-based indicators employed primary data, suggesting the convenience of collecting data for experience-based indicators than dietary-based indicators. We confirm that the estimation of complementary food security indicators consistently over time can help capture the different food security dimensions and components, and experience-based indicators are more suitable for rapid food security assessments. We suggest practitioners to integrate food consumption and anthropometry data in regular household living standard surveys for more comprehensive food security analysis. The results of this study can be used by food security stakeholders such as governments, practitioners and academics for briefs, teaching, as well as policy-related interventions and evaluations.

Food security (FS) is one of the most elusive and sought-after objectives worldwide. Securing a country’s self-sufficiency— in the current COVID-19 pandemic era, more than ever—has become a prioritized mission. In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, FS is adversely affected by, among others, the scarcity of freshwater, harsh environment, regional conflicts, and rising temperatures. Following the eruption of the COVID-19 pandemic, exporters placed export restrictions on key food crops, affecting FS in import dependent regions, such as the MENA countries and, more specifically, the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This paper presented a conceptual framework on the key enablers for the UAE agri-food supply chains to obtain the necessary resiliency to achieve FS, through improving policy-making capacity. The proposed approach started with the assessment of the main vulnerabilities of the food system in a global context; from there, the factors that influence vulnerability were investigated, identifying the main global drivers that affect the local food systems, focusing on the UAE. The proposed framework was applied for the design and implementation of an early warning system concerning FS-related incidents.

Analysis of consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay (WTP) for sustainable foods produced using new agri-food technologies is required to enhance the uptake of innovations that accelerate the transition towards sustainable food systems. Consumers’ willingness to buy new food products, with no or limited consumption experience, mainly depends on their food choice motivational orientations (promotion- vs prevention-orientation). The objective of this study was to elicit consumers’ WTP for foods that are produced with microbial applications during the plant production phase with the aim to reduce the use of synthetic chemicals in crop farming, as well as to understand the associations of food choice motives, personal and socio-demographic factors with the WTP. We used contingent valuation to elicit consumers’ WTP for three food products (wheat bread, consumer potatoes and tomato sauce) through online surveys. Data were collected from 291 consumers, primarily from Italy, Germany and the Netherlands. Descriptive statistics, latent variable modelling and logistic regression were used to analysis data. Results show that more than two-third of the respondents are willing to pay premiums of at least 0.11 euro per kg of food products for reductions in synthetic chemical use by at least 50% due to microbial applications. The amount of WTP increases with the level of reductions in synthetic chemical use. The majority of the respondents are promotion-oriented consumers in relation to their food involvement, and are more likely to pay premiums for the sustainably produced food products. Environmentally concerned consumers are also more likely to pay premiums, whereas health concerned consumers are not. This study contributes to understanding of consumers’ attitude and perceived health risks towards foods obtained using microbial applications, and the heterogeneity of their preferences. Results provide insights for identifying potential buyers of foods produced using microbial applications, and to set prices according to the levels of consumers’ WTP.

The Swedish risk management case of Baltic fatty fishes, in which dioxin levels may be too high, is a typical multidimensional food safety decision problem involving public health, economic, environmental and socio-cultural aspects. To effectively address the dioxin food safety problem, the multiple dimensions and conflicting interests of stakeholders have to be considered systematically when evaluating competing risk management options. The objectives of this study were to illustrate the applicability of the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) method for multidimensional food safety risk management problems, and to evaluate the Swedish dioxin risk management using MCDA. The results show that the MCDA method is indeed a relevant tool for modelling the multifactorial Swedish dioxin problem and for initiating discussions amongst stakeholders to increase the acceptance of chosen strategies. Abolishing the derogation from the European Commission’s maximum limits for the presence of dioxins in Swedish fish is the dominant strategy for risk assessors, whereas the preferences provided by the other stakeholders would suggest a continuation of the derogation without providing consumer information. However, the preferences of female consumers match with the 2011 decision of the Swedish government to ask for a derogation in combination with consumer information. The conclusion drawn from our MCDA analysis is comparable to the government’s decision that—given the gradual reduction in dioxin concentrations in Baltic fish—the decision to continue providing consumer information or not mainly depends on how risk managers balance the preferences of the different stakeholders.