High prevalence of food insecurity, the adverse impact of COVID-19 in Brazilian favela

Abstract

Objective: To investigate food insecurity prevalence in two favelas in Brazil in the early weeks from physical distancing policy, between March 27, 2020 to June 1, 2020. Design: A cross-sectional study using online questionnaire to elicit information on socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, the types of stores visited to buy food and food insecurity screening. Experience of food insecurity was collected according to the Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale. Factors associated with moderate or severe food insecurity were investigated using the logistic regression model. Setting: Sao Paulo city, Brazil. Participants: 909 householders. Results: 88% of the households included young women working as cleaners or kitchen assistants and in sales services. One-fifth of the participants were recieving federal cash transfer programme, called Bolsa Familia. There were 92% households with children. The most frequent experience reported was uncertainty about food acquisition or receiving more (89%), to eat less than one should (64%), not being able to eat healthy and nutritious food (46%), and skipping a meal (39%). 47% of the participants experienced moderate or severe food insecurity. Factors associated with moderate and severe food insecurity were low income, being Bolsa Familia recipient, a low level of education, and households without children. Conclusions: Half of the participants experienced moderate or severe food insecurity, and close to ten per cent was hungry. Our data suggest that families with children were at lower risk of moderate to severe food insecurity. It is possible that nationally established social programs like Bolsa Familia were protecting those families.

Food insecurity measurement and prevalence estimates during the COVID-19 pandemic in a repeated cross-sectional survey in Mexico

“…Our findings strongly suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic is increasing food insecurity in Mexico on a monthly basis during the mandated lockdown. These results are consistent with previous studies that demonstrate how in vulnerable households food security declines during socio-economic shocks (4,5) and that as the pandemic advances food security can worsen even further (7,8) . Moreover, lockdowns associated with the pandemic might keep disrupting the food supply chain and food consumption patterns.…”

“…Yes/No). After computing the total summative score for the eight items, food (in)security was categorised into four levels: food security (total score = 0), mild food insecurity (1-3), moderate food insecurity (4-6) and severe food insecurity (7)(8). This method of estimation was followed in the current analysis; missing values for the food insecurity questions were minimal, with a maximum of 1•7 % in April.…”

“…A similar trend has been observed in middle-income countries. An online cross-sectional survey conducted between 27 March and 1 June 2020, in two favelas in Sao Paulo, Brazil, showed that 47 % of respondents experienced moderate or severe food insecurity; 89 % of them reported uncertainty to access food, 64 % eating less than they should, and 39 % skipping a meal (8) .…”

“…The current pandemic crisis has been long-lasting, and it is also affecting the food security of households that were not poor prior to the pandemic due to debt, temporary or permanent job loss or catastrophic illness (8) . In Vermont, USA, a cross-sectional survey collected from 29 March to 12 April 2020 showed a 33 % increase in household food insecurity, with 35•6 % of food insecure households classified as newly food insecure due to the pandemic and job loss being a main predictor of food insecurity (9) .…”

Social predictors of food insecurity during the stay-at-home order due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Peru. Results from a cross-sectional web-based survey

“…These findings are consistent with other studies, for example, in Jordan (36) it was reported that people who had a monthly income per capita below the poverty line were more likely to have moderate food insecurity (OR: 5·33; 95% CI: 4·44–6·40) and severe food insecurity (OR: 6·87; 95% CI: 5·542–8·512). In the same way, other studies that explored the determinants of food insecurity in the pandemic contexts reported a higher risk to have MSFI in low-income people (37) , people who lost their job (14, 38) or people substantially lost their income (39) .…”