Tools for Assessing Household Food Deficit

38

2.9.2 Rationale for assessing coping strategies at the household level

Maxwell (1999) posits that household-level assessment of food deficit concentrate on deficit dynamics within and among families. These strategies depend on data from surveys; they gather more precisely access element of nutrition deficit than do methods that depend on countrywide combined information. Food access denotes economic and physical availability of diet; although, several methods utilised to measure food access really measure food consumption and acquisition (Bashir et al., 2012; Irohibe & Agwu, 2014). Again, the advantage of computing household food deficit at the family level arise from the fact that families at diverse stages of food deficit are influenced inversely, and therefore, respond differently to covariant threats. It is recognised that families are vital agents to consider when clarifying livelihood concerns and when developing the analyses of precise food deficit challenges. It is presumed that the choice making process on household socio-economic problems (i.e. household food insecurity) in emerging nations is less a separate inquiry than a procedure whereby family members discuss on a combined approach.

39

data gathered at the family stage. In light of the objectives of this research, background and preference of the investigator, the study used the HFIAS and the CSI to assess family food statuses and the coping mechanisms respectively.

2.10.1 Determination of Household Food Insecurity Access Scale (HFIAS)

This current research used the HFIAS to evaluate household food deficit statuses in Chipinge district. Webb et al. (2006) posit that the HFIAS was designed to address the requirement of using simpler food security assessment questionnaire as alternative measures of household food access. The HFIAS measure consists of nine items requesting participants to define their attitude and behaviour that recount numerous domains of food deficit familiarity (Hamilton et al., 1997). The HFIAS ask respondents to provide answers on the following key domains: a) the feeling of anxiety or insecurity over food availability in the household; b) the view that household food is of inadequate amount; c) the insight that the diet is of inadequate nutritional value; d) recounted decrease of food consumption; e) and the effects of food withdrawal. The contents of the items are linked to the indicators of food intake and poverty. The HFIAS is utilised among numerous nations and seems to differentiate the food insecure from secure families across diverse cultural backgrounds.

Household Food Insecurity Access score is a continuous assessment of the extent of household food deficit in the preceding 30 days. The score variable is measured for each family by summarising the codes for individual incidence items. Before summarising the incidence of occurrence codes, the incidence of occurrence was given a „0‟ code for all circumstances where the response to the equivalent incidence inquiries was “No”. The highest tally for a family was twenty-seven (the family which replied affirmatively to all the 9 incidences of occurrence items was coded with reply code of three) and the lowest tally was 0 (the family responded “No” to all items). The greater the tally, the more food shortfall the family was experiencing and the lesser tallies revealed that the household was less affected by food deficit.

The Household Food Insecurity Access Score gauge classifies families into four basic ranks of food deficit, that is, severely food insecure, mild, moderate, and food secure. Families were classified as food anxious whenever they answered affirmatively to more austere circumstances and/or faced such circumstances more often. FANTA, (2005) posits that a food secure household faces no incidences of food deficit circumstances, or just faces anxiety, but hardly with a total tally equivalent or less than ten. A mild family fears about not having sufficient diet occasionally or frequently, and fails to consume favoured diets, and/or consume monotonous food than preferred or some undesirable diets, but infrequently. However, a household

40

experiencing mild food deficit does not compromise on amount of food consumed nor face any of the austere circumstances (such as food withdrawal, sleeping without eating food, or spending the whole 24 hours without consuming food) with a tally ranging between 11 and 16. A moderately affected household compromises food value more often by consuming a repetitious food or portion of food or sum of mealtimes, infrequently or occasionally. However, a food secure household does not face the three most austere circumstances. The tallies range between 17 and 22. A severely insecure family reduces the portion size or total of meals frequently, and/or face the most austere circumstances (such as depletion of food stock, running out of food, sleeping without consuming food, or spending 24 hours without consuming food), even as rarely as infrequently. Thus, a family that faces one of these circumstances even on one occasion in past week is regarded as severely food insecure. Such households score between 23 and 27 points (FANTA, 2005). Thus, HFIAS addresses the necessity for using less expensive and simpler food security assessment items as alternative measures of household food access.

2.10.2 Coping strategy index (CSI)

The CSI as an indicator of food deficit is easy to utilise (Maxwell, 2011), produces precise data (FAO, 2010) and is rather fast to examine (Radimer et al., 1990). This tool was premeditated as a quick food security analysis tool for utilisation in disaster situations (Maxwell, 1996). The CSI was designed to circumvent the complications of gathering domestic food procurement statistics and the exorbitant data gathering expenses of at least one day recall (Radimer et al., 1990;

Mjonono, 2008; Maxwell, 2011). Thus, the CSI is used to gather sufficient data over a short period of time, without compromising data outcome.

Maxwell (1996) explicates that CSI measures household response to food deficit. These are activities that households do when they face food shortfall. Deprived households utilise a combination of coping mechanisms when faced by a food shortfall. Some of the coping strategies are non-erosive while some are failed strategies. Households which utilise austere coping options are more susceptible to food deficit. Household coping mechanisms are simpler, easy and quicker to observe. Therefore, the CSI is a suitable tool in circumstances where other approaches are not practical and appropriate.

The CSI comprises four classifications namely temporary strategies meant to increase food accessibility (gifts, consuming seed stock, borrowing), temporary strategies adopted to reduce family members in the household who consume food (seasonal movement), limiting, food withdrawal or handling the deficit (regulating food ration size, maternal buffering women

41

prioritizing men‟s interest, avoiding mealtimes and avoiding consumption for entire day) and dietary changes (examples include consumption of less favoured food). The data acquired is then weighted in relation to the incidence and apparent austerity of respective coping strategy (Maxwell et al., 1996). The weighted totals are summarised to provide an index that shows existing and supposed prospective diet security position (Maxwell, 1996). CSI is one of the data collection tools which can be used with limited resources.

According to Sognigbe et al. (2017), the CSI was employed by UN to assess changes in food deficit among immigrants from Burundi, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. In the Kenyan case study, the coping strategy index revealed up-to-date food security situation and it proved to be a perfect forecaster of prospective food security situation (Maxwell et al, 2003). Maxwell (1996) suggests that the coping strategy index is a reasonable technique which can be understood by both non-specialists and policy makers. According to Radimer et al. (1992), household coping strategies can be utilised as an indicator in evaluating food deficit. CSI are cheap, simple and offers valuable and timely data on diet status and coping strategies at the family level.