Food security data and measurement

Food Systems Summit 2021: Stage 2 dialogue report
Dialogue Date: April 27, 2021
Convened by: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Link to Dialogue event webpage on the Gateway (available in English only): https://summitdialogues.org/dialogue/14351/

Participation

Number of participants[1] from each stakeholder group
Small/medium enterprise/artisan 3
Local non-governmental organization 10
Indigenous people 4
Science and academia 12
Government and national institution 18
International non-governmental organization 2
Private foundation / partnership / alliance 2
Local authority 2
Consumer group 1
Total 54

1. Participants self-identified stakeholder group at Dialogue registration.

Major focus

Canada has committed to achieving zero hunger and food security for all Canadians and to achieving food security related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030. The opening speech of Canada's 2020 parliament (Speech from the Throne) emphasized that every Canadian deserves to have nutritious food on the table. The need to continue working with partners – including directly with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Nation – to address food insecurity in Canada was also highlighted. With these commitments in place, it is crucial that Canada has the ability to measure progress towards achieving the Food Policy's priority outcomes.

The focus of the Food Security Data and Measurement Dialogue was to identify how current methods of measuring food security can be improved upon in order to better track the achievement of Canada's food security commitments. A key rationale for identifying data and measurement issues is the urgent need to develop appropriate actions targeting vulnerable people so that Canada will be on the path to meeting the SDGs relating to the food system including zero hunger, good health and well-being, responsible production and consumption, and climate action. The Dialogue was motivated by the following future statement:

By 2030, Canada will have the data needed to assess the ability of all those living in Canada to access sufficient amount of safe, nutritious, and culturally appropriate foods. Such data will be used to monitor and track Canada's progress towards achieving SDGs and indicators in the Food Policy for Canada. As a result, progress will be made toward the SDGs.

The future statement was closely aligned with the UN Food Systems Summit Action Track 1: Ensure access to safe and nutritious food for all by 2030. The Dialogue focused on fostering a diverse discussion with partners, stakeholders and rights holders about how to achieve the future statement. The attendees were specifically asked to provide their perspectives and input on the following four areas:

  • identifying current data gaps
  • approaches to close the identified data gaps
  • barriers and challenges in meeting the future statement
  • identifying stakeholder and rights holders' roles in meeting the future statement.

Main findings

While participants commended the recent creation of a Food Policy for Canada they stressed the need for key organizational changes and investments into improving both food security related data collection and governance including data dissemination and access. The Dialogue provided a space for participants to share their perspectives about current food security data and measurements and ways to improve them.

Main Finding 1: The role of the federal government in collecting, disseminating, and utilizing data to address food insecurity needs to be well defined and collaborative.

  • Most participants opined that the federal government could play a much bigger role in addressing the barriers or challenges in collecting and accessing food security data. Participants noted that they do not feel that the role of the federal government in addressing food insecurity is well defined and that there is opportunity for increased collaboration and coordination. Many participants believed that the current data collection efforts by the federal government have missed some opportunities to complement each other to provide a comprehensive picture of Canada's food insecurity status across geographies and time. Participants expressed frustration about the lack of institutional memory, political will, co-operation and collaboration, lack of federal expertise on the issue and long-term commitments within the federal government on food insecurity. Participants believe there is a need to show a clearer connection between the programs and policies put in place by the federal government and the impact these have on reducing food insecurity. A concerted effort to dismantle the “silos” and create “ownership” of the issue at the federal level was highlighted by many participants as an urgent need.

Main Finding 2: There is a need for the federal government to increase investment in data collection methods that reflect the regional variation of food systems and populations across Canada. Increased focus on measuring and monitoring food insecurity within vulnerable populations is needed.

  • Many noted that the federal government needs to do more to address food insecurity by making investments to improve data collection and access. In addition to quantitative data collection through surveys, participants urged for more resources and investments to understand the experiences of food insecure Canadians, especially in remote communities through qualitative data and case studies.
  • Many participants voiced their concerns about the current sampling methods for population surveys. Some participants felt these sampling methods do not appropriately capture the information of marginalized and vulnerable populations who are much more prone to be food insecure. Due to such small sample sizes governments, researchers, and NGOs are unable to identify specific issues within vulnerable populations. Also, most data are aggregated at the household level, not accounting for nuances and unique circumstances within household members. Increased popularity of online surveys was flagged as an area for concern as some marginalized groups may be excluded from collection. Disaggregated data enabled by oversampling across such marginalized groups and geographies is needed given that any policy intervention tackling food insecurity needs to focus on such population sub-groups.
  • Participants emphasized that regions face different challenges around food availability based on their unique demographic and geographic circumstances. Participants felt that, currently, food security data does not adequately reflect the regional variations of food systems and populations across Canada, especially when data is aggregated at the national or provincial levels.

Main Finding 3: Governments and organizations who collect data to measure food insecurity can improve data collection by supporting partnerships with target groups.

  • Participants stressed that data collectors need to focus on partnerships with target groups to improve data collection and mutual understanding. Much of the data that researchers and community organizations use are from reports by academia, municipalities, and NGOs. Participants noted that lack of investment inhibits these organizations' ability to build capacity, connect with communities, and improve long-term data collection. As a result, participants emphasized that consistent, long-term funding contracts would improve data collection.

Main finding 4: Transparency in the collection, use and dissemination of data needs to be improved. Target groups should be consulted throughout the entire process including survey design, analysis, and providing access to and/or ownership of final data products.

  • Dialogue organizers heard from participants that issues related to a lack of transparency in data collection and subsequent use of such data have compounded existing mistrust surrounding data collection. Participants emphasized that the federal government needs to respect Indigenous data sovereignty and work with partners to ensure that data collection is supported. Indigenous partners must maintain their right to collect, own and use their own data, respecting the principles of reconciliation.
  • Some participants felt that communities and vulnerable populations were not adequately consulted about their specific data needs to address food insecurity issues faced by them. Target groups must be informed on the role of data as supporting evidence for policies and programs to promote trust and appreciation of the data collection process.

Main Finding 5: There is a need for a food security definition that reflects the complexity of the dimensions of food security in Canada. A clear definition of both food sources and security are important when collecting data and measuring the status of food security.

  • Participants indicated that the existing definitions of food security do not support the depth and breadth of the needs of researchers and communities. Participants felt that the many dimensions used to measure security are not being captured simultaneously that is, accessibility, affordability, adequacy, acceptability and sovereignty. When studying food security, participants commented that all food sources need to be taken into account including market foods, traditional foods, local harvesting, and non-market foods (such as food banks and community food sharing). Improved clarity and consensus of definitions would improve data collection and use. As a result of a lack of consensus on definitions and measurement, there are inconsistent measurements across organizations. Participants felt that increased definitional clarity and specification of each aspect of food security would result in better policy and program assessments.

Main Finding 6: A comprehensive understanding of the interconnectedness of food costing and household income is necessary to understanding the affordability of food.

  • Food security is multifaceted and participants felt that in Canada we tend to only focus on affordability and households' financial access to market foods. Even with this narrow approach, participants indicated that there are gaps in the data around food costing and food affordability and how these intersect with household income. A large number of participants mentioned that regional differences are not adequately measured and the number of food products that are considered for food costing do not give an accurate picture of the situation. Effective and disaggregated measures of the food budget would improve understanding of regional differences.

Main Finding 7: There is a need for up to date, timely data on the current food security situation across Canada.

  • Participants noted the importance of timely data as the COVID-19 pandemic showed how quickly the food security situation can change. Prior to the pandemic, the time lag between the data collection and dissemination was already an issue. The participants observed that present national food security surveys are lacking in several key technical areas to aid with monitoring: frequency, consistency, speed of dissemination, accessibility, and a lack of longitudinal data. Participants emphasized that there is no current, centralized system to check indicators for threats to food security across Canada and in specific regions of concern. Participants were particularly concerned that the main source of Canada's comprehensive food security data is voluntary for provinces in select years. Some of the data are not released due to confidentiality concerns.

Discussion topic outcomes

In discussion groups of up to 10 individuals representing diverse dimensions of Canada's food systems, participants discussed their perspectives and brainstormed ways to address the identified food security data gaps. Each of the eight groups identified unique data gaps and solutions but many groups identified outcomes under common themes. These key outcomes identified by participants are listed below:

Establish a federal lead for achieving food security, increase collaboration between departments and fund further data collection.

Many participants felt it would be helpful to have one federal body responsible for food security and the achievement of food security goals. Currently, participants believe there is considerable duplication and incoherency in efforts and as a result progress is being delayed. The lead department or agency should set a clear goal and strive to eliminate food insecurity with strategic milestones that can be gauged for progress over time through performance metrics. Further to setting goals, this government department or agency should take ownership of the process to gather data and develop strategies to foster partnerships with all stakeholders and rights holders by gaining their respect and mutual understanding of the significance of collecting information. This would include cataloguing all existing data that is being collected by stakeholders and rights holders (civil society, non-profit groups, other levels of government, and academia).

Improve data collection for vulnerable groups. Increasing sample size would help better assess the needs and food security levels of vulnerable groups.

Participants recommended that the federal government increase sample size for marginalized groups when collecting data so programs and policies can be better targeted and assessed. Small sample sizes of marginalized demographic groups lead to an inability to measure the food security status of these demographic groups at a granular level. In particular, participants identified that the federal government needs to investigate ways that Indigenous-led data collection can be supported. Participants suggested that the federal government needs to focus on inclusive design and better reach for underrepresented groups by offering surveys in different languages and delivery methods while respecting their personal experiences. Participants felt that current data collection may exclude marginalized groups, especially online survey collection.

Develop and support partnerships with food security stakeholders and rights holders.

While partnerships require a more intensive process and more resources, participants believe they would enable a deeper dialogue and understanding of food insecurity. Toward this goal, it was recommended by participants that the government work with stakeholders and rights holders to catalogue current data and measurements. Also, it was recommended that the federal government provide stable funding so that organizations can plan long-term priorities for data collection and invest in their organizations. Local groups have experience with the specific food security issues and can work to build trust within the community.

Regarding Indigenous communities, it was suggested that the federal government needs to better protect and respect Indigenous data sovereignty and support Indigenous-led data collection. Data collection requires dialogue on a nation-to-nation basis to respect community developed data collection and sharing and ownership protocols.

Defining and measuring food insecurity

Food insecurity is multifaceted and participants felt that in Canada we tend to only focus on affordability and households' financial access to market foods. Restricting the focus to an income-based model neglects the broader cultural considerations and social and geographical barriers to achieving food security. Participants proposed that the definition of food security should be expanded to include access to other alternative food systems (traditional/country food systems, local harvesting, community food sharing, and food banks) and other closely linked insecurities (nutritional and water security). The federal government needs to consult those who consume traditional foods to better understand these diets and ensure these food security dimensions are incorporated into surveys.

Increasing transparency

Participants recommended that the federal government conduct a thorough analysis of food security programs to prove their effectiveness or request academics to undertake such analysis. Participants expressed that currently, they do not know whether programs and funding are actually reducing food insecurity. The linkage between data collection and policy development needs to be transparent. Participants noted that the federal government should improve communication about how data will be used as evidence in policy making when it is collected and provide follow up reports to convey the importance of the communities' participation in data collection. Transparency and communication between the government and both rights holders and stakeholders in collecting data is key for coordinated efforts to advance food security data and measurement.

Data accessibility

Participants urged governments to work on reducing the time lag between data collection and dissemination. Further, the need for a greater level of data granularity was highlighted. Organizations and researchers urgently need data to track who is most affected by food insecurity, the magnitude of the problem and how it is changing over time.

Frequent food insecurity data collection

Participants felt that the inconsistent data collection in some provinces and in some years makes it more difficult to identify problems and trends. Therefore, participants urged that the federal government and provinces work together to ensure data is collected annually in order to avoid gaps in the data. The current lack of longitudinal data restricts research into whether the same households are becoming more or less food insecure over time. Thus, a longitudinal survey is needed.

Canada needs a national food system surveillance system to act as an early warning for food security threats

Participants believed that with appropriate data enhancements Canada could establish a system of data collection and dissemination, with a defined and broad set of food security performance metrics, including nutrition-related data, based on aspirational goals and targets. A key component of timely food security updates is frequent monitoring of food insecurity levels within the population. Participants suggested that after food security data sources are catalogued, the government could support organizations to access this data. One example proposed is a country foods database as a way to capture the availability of country food sources, hunting activity, and monitoring eco-systems.

Measuring the impact of climate change on food security

Related to the need for a surveillance system, participants expressed the importance of understanding the impact of climate change on food security. Climate change is likely to have an impact on growing food, sustainable practices, and the seasonality of food access for remote communities. Participants recommended that the federal government track the impact of climate change on traditional food sources in remote and Indigenous communities, furthering the need for a country foods database.

Qualitative data collection

Participants felt that in many areas there is a lack of qualitative data to complement the quantitative data. Qualitative data gaps exist around measuring the personal experience of food insecurity as well as the role of food in economic development and food sovereignty. Participants noted that there needs to be investment in case studies within remote communities who are excluded from current data collection and vulnerable groups who are not well represented in current data collection. Participants noted that case studies would help capture and communicate the experience of individuals and add context to the quantitative data collected.

Areas of divergence

While most participant groups came to similar conclusions, there were a few areas of divergence.

More research and data versus taking immediate action

  • The most salient area of divergence was between those who focused on the need for more data and those who felt that Canada has enough data and the government needs to take immediate action to eliminate food insecurity. In the same token, some participants noted that this Dialogue was not ambitious enough to address food insecurity issue and that Canada needs to take action now and 2030 is too far away. These participants felt that between now and 2030, Canada needs to have concrete actions implemented to eliminate food insecurity not just to get the right data and measurements.

Focusing on the collection of standardized data versus region-specific data

  • Participants identified the need for a standardized methodology across time and place to measure food insecurity. However, some participants noted that there is a need for regional approaches and tailored surveys to specific populations.

Data on food bank use

  • The need for more data collection on food bank usage and food insecurity was noted. However, other participants emphasized that, in their view, food banks should not be considered a viable long term solution to food insecurity. As such, they felt that focusing data collection efforts on food banks would be expending effort in the wrong place.

Focus on income versus a holistic food systems approach

  • Some participants felt it was important to look at food security as an income issue and focus on making food more affordable and increasing incomes. Others preferred to focus on the broader cultural and geographic barriers impacting food insecurity.

Food waste data

  • Some participants felt that more data collection was needed related to food waste. Other participants felt that food waste and food security are separate issues. While there is some overlap between the two issues, these participants did not feel that a focus on food waste would significantly help advance food security objectives.

Expanding the definition of food security

  • Many participants believed the definitions of food insecurity needed to be expanded. This included a greater focus on non-market foods and cultural foods, issues of food sovereignty and the inclusion of nutrition and water security. There were, however, divergent opinions about which aspects should be prioritized and included.

Timely data versus quality data

  • Many participants noted the need for timely data collection and dissemination, especially due to how quickly the food security situation changed during COVID-19. However, some participants cautioned against prioritizing speed over quality and coverage. These participants pointed to recent examples such as the quick turn-around online surveys conducted during COVID-19 (the Canadian Perspectives Survey Series); they felt that such a survey with its shortened format and time frames likely excluded marginalized groups.

The role of government, academia and non-governmental organizations

  • It was identified by most participants that the federal government has a lead role in combatting food insecurity and that one federal department should be in charge of the food security file. Many participants noted that the federal government needs to fund more standardized surveys targeting vulnerable populations. However, some participants identified non-governmental organization (NGOs) as the most appropriate data collectors as they better understand vulnerable populations and can act as knowledge brokers. There was a divergence of views on the data collection approach between those who think that the federal government needs to act as a singular source for food security information and those who believe the role of NGOs should be expanded.
  • Some believed that more social scientists needed to be hired by government to undertake more food insecurity related research. In contrast, others believe that data should be more accessible so that academia and NGOs can conduct the research themselves instead.
  • Some participants felt that the federal government has not historically been as respectful as it should have been as data stewards regarding transparency and full accessibility, especially concerning Indigenous populations. There was a divergence of opinions between those advocating for data sovereignty and the need to fund Indigenous-led (as well as NGO-led) data collection; and those who prioritized a centralized, standardized data collection and central sharing system for data. Participants noted that placing more responsibility on NGOs and Indigenous-led organizations may result in overburdening NGOs by involving them too much in constant data collection without additional support.