Food Insecurity and Social Policy: A Comparative Analysis of Welfare State Regimes in 19 Countries.

0 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Seth A Berkowitz, Connor Drake, Elena Byhoff
{"title":"Food Insecurity and Social Policy: A Comparative Analysis of Welfare State Regimes in 19 Countries.","authors":"Seth A Berkowitz, Connor Drake, Elena Byhoff","doi":"10.1177/27551938231219200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We sought to determine whether a country's social policy configuration-its welfare state regime-is associated with food insecurity risk. We conducted a cross-sectional study of 2017 U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization individual-level food insecurity survey data from 19 countries (the most recent data available prior to COVID-19). Countries were categorized into three welfare state regimes: liberal (e.g., the United States), corporatist (e.g., Germany), or social democratic (e.g., Norway). Food insecurity probability, calibrated to an international reference standard, was calculated using a Rasch model. We used linear regression to compare food insecurity probability across regime types, adjusting for per-capita gross domestic product, age, gender, education, and household composition. There were 19,008 participants. The mean food insecurity probability was 0.067 (SD: 0.217). In adjusted analyses and compared with liberal regimes, food insecurity probability was lower in corporatist (risk difference: -0.039, 95% CI -0.066 to -0.011, p  =  .006) and social democratic regimes (risk difference: -0.037, 95% CI -0.062 to -0.012, p  =  .004). Social policy configuration is strongly associated with food insecurity risk. Social policy changes may help lower food insecurity risk in countries with high risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":73479,"journal":{"name":"International journal of social determinants of health and health services","volume":" ","pages":"76-86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10954393/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of social determinants of health and health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27551938231219200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We sought to determine whether a country's social policy configuration-its welfare state regime-is associated with food insecurity risk. We conducted a cross-sectional study of 2017 U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization individual-level food insecurity survey data from 19 countries (the most recent data available prior to COVID-19). Countries were categorized into three welfare state regimes: liberal (e.g., the United States), corporatist (e.g., Germany), or social democratic (e.g., Norway). Food insecurity probability, calibrated to an international reference standard, was calculated using a Rasch model. We used linear regression to compare food insecurity probability across regime types, adjusting for per-capita gross domestic product, age, gender, education, and household composition. There were 19,008 participants. The mean food insecurity probability was 0.067 (SD: 0.217). In adjusted analyses and compared with liberal regimes, food insecurity probability was lower in corporatist (risk difference: -0.039, 95% CI -0.066 to -0.011, p  =  .006) and social democratic regimes (risk difference: -0.037, 95% CI -0.062 to -0.012, p  =  .004). Social policy configuration is strongly associated with food insecurity risk. Social policy changes may help lower food insecurity risk in countries with high risk.

粮食不安全与社会政策:19 个国家福利国家制度的比较分析》。
我们试图确定一个国家的社会政策配置--其福利国家制度--是否与粮食不安全风险相关。我们对来自 19 个国家(COVID-19 之前的最新数据)的 2017 年联合国粮食及农业组织个人层面的粮食不安全调查数据进行了横截面研究。各国被分为三种福利国家制度:自由主义(如美国)、公司制(如德国)或社会民主主义(如挪威)。根据国际参考标准校准的粮食不安全概率是通过拉施模型计算得出的。我们使用线性回归法比较了不同制度类型的粮食不安全概率,并对人均国内生产总值、年龄、性别、教育程度和家庭组成进行了调整。共有 19 008 名参与者。平均粮食不安全概率为 0.067(标准差:0.217)。在调整分析中,与自由主义体制相比,公司主义体制(风险差异:-0.039,95% CI -0.066至-0.011,p = .006)和社会民主主义体制(风险差异:-0.037,95% CI -0.062至-0.012,p = .004)的粮食不安全概率较低。社会政策配置与粮食不安全风险密切相关。社会政策的变化可能有助于降低高风险国家的粮食不安全风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信