What the study found
The study found that food security measurement in South Africa is complicated and that commonly used indicators can produce very different estimates of food insecurity. Most studies relied on the Household Food Insecurity Access Score (HFIAS), while fewer used the Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS), the Coping Strategy Index (CSI), or the Household Hunger Score (HHS).
Why the authors say this matters
The authors say these differences can lead to inaccurate assessment, monitoring, and targeting of food security interventions in South Africa. They conclude that more consistent and comprehensive measurement is needed, including indicators that capture sustainability and agency, such as the Agency Module, the Women Empowerment in Agriculture Index (WEAI), and the Women Empowerment in Livestock Index (WELI).
What the researchers tested
The researchers carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines. They searched Web of Science and Scopus, screened articles with Rayyan 1.6, assessed quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and used Forest and Funnel plots for meta-analysis of HFIAS and HDDS studies.
What worked and what didn't
A final sample of 82 articles was included from 1,155 records. HFIAS was used in 45 studies, HDDS in 24, CSI in 13, and HHS in 4, and only a few studies used a composite of indicators. The meta-analysis on HFIAS and HDDS showed limited heterogeneity and publication bias, but the indicators themselves gave very different prevalence estimates of food insecurity.
What to keep in mind
The abstract says more studies are needed using longitudinal designs, composite indicators across seasons, and data across urban, peri-urban, and rural settings. It also notes that routine national surveys should adopt full indicator modules, and it does not describe other limitations in the available summary.
Key points
- The review found that food security measurement in South Africa is methodologically complex.
- HFIAS was the most commonly used indicator in the reviewed studies.
- Different indicators produced very different estimates of food insecurity prevalence.
- The meta-analysis on HFIAS and HDDS showed limited heterogeneity and publication bias.
- The authors recommend longitudinal, composite, and fuller survey-based measurement approaches.
Disclosure
- Research title:
- Food security indicators gave divergent estimates in South Africa
- Authors:
- Blessing Masamha, Owen Gwanzura, Shingirirai S. Mutanga
- Institutions:
- Human Sciences Research Council, University of Pretoria, Nelson Mandela University, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
- Publication date:
- 2026-03-10
- OpenAlex record:
- View
Get the weekly research newsletter
Stay current with peer-reviewed research without reading academic papers — one filtered digest, every Friday.