The percentage of Brazilian private housing units facing some level of food insecurity fell from 30.2% in 2009 to 22.6% in 2013. Last year, 52.0 million persons from 14.7 million households experienced some level of food deprivation, or at least worried about the possibility of facing deprivation due to lack of resources to buy food. Between 2009 and 2013, the number of households affected by food insecurity fell by 3.2 million (or 14.2 million residents).

Severe food insecurity recorded significant decline in comparison with previous surveys. This indicator fell from 6.9% in 2004 to 5.0% in 2009, and reached its lowest level in 2013: 3.2% In the surveyed households, not only adults, but also children, in case there were any, also experienced food deprivation.

Out of the 65.3 million private households in Brazil, 77.4% experienced food insecurity in 2013. Together, they made up 50.5 million housing units with 149.4 million persons, which is equivalent to 74.2% of the residents of private households in the country. That means increase by 9.1 million of households (or 21.7 million residents) affected by food insecurity in four years.

Food insecurity was highest in the North and Northeast Regions, reaching, respectively, 36.1% and 38.1% of the households, as well as the rural area (35.3%). Food insecurity was also highest in households inhabited by persons under 18 years of age (28.8%), by blacks and browns (33.4%) and by those with one to three years of schooling (13.7% facing moderate or severe food insecurity).

These are some of the occurrences presented by the supplementary survey to the National Household Sample Survey (PNAD) 2013 on food security. This survey was conducted by IBGE in partnership with the Ministry of Social Development and Combat to Hunger (MDS), similarly to the previous editions of 2004 and 2009. The complete publication relative to 2013 and reweighted data of 2004 and 2009 area available at www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/seguranca_alimentar_2013/ www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/seguranca_alimentar_2013/.

The survey adopts the classification of the Brazilian Food Insecurity Scale (EBIA, in Portuguese), and establishes as the reference period the three months prior to the date of interview. Food-secure households are those in which residents had access to adequate amount and quality of food and did not fear possible food restriction in a near future. Mildly food-insecure households are those in which residents had some worry about the amount and quality of food available. Moderately food-insecure households are those in which residents experienced regular food restriction regarding the amount available. Finally, in severely food-insecure households, besides adult members, children, if there were any, also faced food restriction, and it might even reach its most serious level, famine.

In 2013, the survey registered 65.3 million private households in Brazil. Out of these, 50.5 million (77.4%) were food secure. They made up 50.5 million housing units with 149.4 million persons, which is equivalent to 74.2% of persons in private households in the country. The remaining 14.7 million housing units (22.6%), with 52.0 million persons (25.8%), were facing some level of food insecurity.

Prevalence of mild food insecurity in households was estimated at 14.8% or 9.8 million households, encompassing 34.5 million persons (17.1% of all the resident population of private housing units). The proportion of moderately food-insecure households was 4.6% (equivalent to 3.0 million), in an area inhabited by 10.3 million persons (or 5.1% of the residents). Out of the total households, 3.2% (2.1 million) were classified as severely food-insecure. This condition was shared by 7.2 million persons (3.6%).

In relation to previous editions of the survey (2004 and 2009), the prevalence of food-insecure households recorded increase (65.1% in 2004 and 69.8% in 2009). In 2004, mild, moderate and severe food insecurity in households reached, respectively, 18.0%, 9.9% and 6.9%. In 2009, prevalence figures were 18.7%, 65% and 5.0%. That shows increase of the percentage of mild food insecurity and decrease of the percentage of moderate and severe food insecurity. However, from 2009 to 2013, food insecurity prevalence declined in the three catgories. In the period, the number of food-insecure households fell by 3.2 million (or 14.2 million residents), and that of food-secure households increased by 9.1 million households (or 21.7 million residents).

Moderate food insecurity is higher in the rural area (13.9%)

Food insecurity prevalence in the rural area surpassed the level observed in the urban area. In 2013, whereas 20.5% of the urban households had residents facing food-insecurity (6.8% moderate or severe), in the rural area, the proportion was 35.3% (13.9% facing moderate or severe food insecurity). Urban private households, considering moderate or severe food insecurity, had 7.4% of the population, whereas in rural ones, this figure reached 15.8%.

In the rural area, in relation to 2009, there was decrease of the proportion of moderately or severely food-insecure households (15.6%, in 2009, 13.9%, in 2013). Considering mildly food-insecure housing units, there was increase of proportion (19.5% to 21.4%). This way, food insecurity prevalence did not record significant change (64.8% to 64.7%) in this period. However, in the urban area, the proportion of food-secure households increased, having changed from 70.7%, in 2009, to 79.5%, in 2013. The prevalence of households in a state of moderate or severe food insecurity in the urban area, in 2013, was 6.8% (10.8% in 2009).

The five Major Regions recorded specific levels of prevalence of households in food insecurity conditions. The North and Northeast Region presented the biggest proportions (36.1% and 38.1%, respectively). In the remaining ones, the percentage of households in food insecurity conditions was below 20%: 14.5% in the Southeast; 14.9% in the South and 18.2% in the Central West. The uneven distribution by Major Region remains in terms of severe food insecurity. In the North and Northeast, the proportions of housing units where residents suffered from hunger were 6.7% and 5.6%, respectively. In the South and Southeast Region, prevalence was 1.9% and, in the Central West, 2.3%.

In relation to 2004 and 2009, there was increase of the percentage of housing units which did not have any worry about the retriction of food quantity, in all the Regions. However, in the period 2004 to 2013, the Northeast Region recorded the most significant increase (15.5 percentage points) of food insecure households, since, in 2004, less than half (46.4%) of the housing units were in such conditions. In 2013, this proportion changed to 61.9%, although it is still the lowest level of food security revalence among the Regions. Although only 26.2% of the private households are located in the Northeast, it concentrates 44.2% of the food insecure households.

After having presented slight increase of food insecurity prevalence from 2004 to 2009 (from 68.8% to 69.8%), the Central West Region recorded, from that year up to 2013, increase of 12.1 percentage points, reaching 81.8% of the households. The bigger proportion of food insecure households observed in the Central West was mainly present in the urban area, where it changed from 68.4% to 82.2%.

In all the Major Regions, in 2013, the proportion of food-secure households was bigger in the urban than in the rural area, differently from the situation in 2009, when, in the South and Central West Regions, food security prevalence was bigger in the rural area. The Northeast Region recorded highest percentages of moderately or severely food insecure households in the urban area (13.1%) and the Northeast, in the rural area (20.1%).

Considering Federation Units, in 2013, Espírito Santo presented the biggest food insecurity prevalence (89.6%), followed by Santa Catarina (88.9%) and São Paulo (88.4%). The Federation Units recording the lowest prevalence figures were Maranhão (39.1%) and Piauí (44.4%), which did not even reach half of the private households with guaranteed access to food. In relation to 2009, these states recorded increases of 3.8 and 3.0 percentage points, respectively.

In the Northeast, all the states state recorded prevalence rates of food security below the national average (77.4%). In the North, Rondônia was the only state recording food security prevalence above the national average (78.4%).

Buying on credit was the main action taken by families facing scarcity of food

For the first time, PNAD surveyed the strategy used by families facing food security. Buying on credit was the main action taken (43.3%), followed by borrowing money from relatives, neighbors and/or friends (27.8%); not buying superfluous items (7.2%); borrowing money (5.0%); eating less meat (3.5%); earning food from the community, neighbors, relatives and friends (2.8%) or other measures (7.1%). In the Major Regions, buying on credit was the main action taken in the Northeast (53.8%), North (50.2%) and Central West (37.3%). Borrowing food from relatives, neighbors and/or friends was the main action taken in the South (34.2%) and Southeast (33.5%).

Proportion of durable goods is lower in households facing food insecurity

As for the possession of goods, 98.3% of the food-secure households had a refrigerator, whereas, among severely food insecure ones, 85.8% had this type of good. These differences were observed for all the goods surveyed, and, the stronger the level of food insecurity, the bigger the proportion of households that had this specific good, considering any goods. The biggest differences between the proportion of food-secure households and those in a severe food insecurity state, in terms of possession of goods, occurred in washing machines (64.5%, versus 21.8%), personal computer (54.8% versus 13.8%) and personal computer with Internet access (48.2% versus 10.0%).

In relation to 2009, indicators showed, both for food secure and food insecure households, increase in the proportion of those with possession of goods investigated by the survey, even among households facing severe food insecurity. In 2009, 6.0% of them had a computer; in 2013, 13.8%. Also, considering severely insecure households, in 2013, 10.0% had a personal computer with Internet access, versus 3.3% in 2009.

In 2013, in terms of possession of goods, there were differences between households which did not have a fixed telephone line, but had a mobile telephone, and those with possession of a motorcycle. Among food secure households, 50.2% had only a mobile telephone. Considering those mildly food insecure, the percentage increased to 66.9%. For those with moderate food insecurity, to 69.2% and fell once more among the severely food-insecure ones (64.0%). Considering households which had a motorcycle, those with mild food insecurity recorded the smallest proportion (23.7%).

Food-insecure households have less access to services, but more residents

In relation to services surveyed, the higher the food insecurity state, the lower the proportion of households supplied with services. Mildly food-insecure households had proportionally less access to sewage disposal (44.2%) than food-secure ones (63.2%). The proportion of households in a state of severe food insecurity was still lower (34.4%). Among food secure housing units, 92.0% had daily garbage collection; 87.2% had general water supply system and 98.8% had a toilet. For those in a state of severe food insecurity, percentages were 75.2%; 73.6% and 87.5%, respectively.

The proportion of households with more residents was bigger among those in food insecurity conditions. Whereas only 1.7% of the food secure households had seven or more residents, for those facing moderate or severe food insecurity, the percentage was 7.4%. In households with at least one resident under 18 years of age, 3.6% had seven or more residents and in food insecure ones, 13.7%.

78.9% of the households facing moderate or severe food insecurity have per capita> income of up to one minimum wage

The distribution of food secure households by ranges of household per capita income shows that there is slight concentration of these in higher classes: 53.5% of the households in these conditions were in the monthly household per capita income range of above one minimum wage, being 23.9% in the range of more than two minimum wages. On the other hand, 78.9% of the food insecure households belonged to the range of per capita income of up to one minimum wage (except for those without income) and 2.2% to that of more than two minimum wages.

In the urban area, 56.4% of the food-secure households had per capita average monthly income above one minimum wage, whereas only 15.7% of the moderately or severely food insecure households had such income. Most of these households belonged to the range of more than half to one minimum wage (30.7%).

In the rural area, whereas 32.7% of the food secure households had per capita average monthly income above one minimum wage, in moderately or severely food insecure households the figure was 7.2%. In the rural area, whereas 35.9% of the moderately or severely food insecure households had income of up to 1/4 of a minimum wage and 28.9% had from more than 1/4 to 1/2 a minimum wage.

Households with persons under 18 years of age had higher food insecurity levels

Private households with at least one resident under 18 years of age recorded levels of food insecurity prevalence above those observed where only adults lived. Food insecurity reached 83.4% of the households without residents under 18 years of age, whereas the presence of a resident younger than 18 reduced the level of prevalence to 71.2%. This pattern was observed in all the Major Regions; the biggest differences being recorded in the Northeast (70.7% versus 54.7%) and smallest, in the South (88.3% versus 81.3%).

Between 2009 and 2013, food security prevalence increased in all the Major Regions. However, intensity was higher in those with residents under 18 years of age, especially in the Southeast (10.5 percentage points) and Central West (13.4 percentage points).

In Brazil, in 2013, severe food insecurity was a reality for 4.8% of the population aged zero to four and for 4.9% of the population aged 5 to 17. This proportion was 2.4% considering the population aged 65 or over. From 2009 to 2013, the increase of food security prevalence was more significant among younger age groups. In 2009, 8.1% of the children aged zero to four lived in households with no repot of worry about possible scarcity of food or lack of Money to buy it. In 2013, this percentage increased to 65.8%. In the group aged 5 to 17, food security prevalence increased from 57.9% in 2009 to 66.8% in 2013, whereas in the group aged 65 and over there was increase from 76.2% in 2009 to 82.4% in 2013.

Food insecurity is highest in households with a female reference person and with blacks and brown ones

The prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity was bigger in households with a female reference person, both in private households (9.3%) and in private households with at least one resident uner 18 years of age (10.7%). In households where the reference person was a men, percentages were 6.9% and 7.2%, respectively.

By Major Region, the proportion of households whose residents faced some kind of food restriction was, in general, bigger in those with a female reference person, except in the Northeast Region, where the estimate was 23.7% fo a male reference persons and 23.5%, for a female one. The North Region recorded highest levels of severe food insecurity prevalence when the reference person was a woman (7.7%) and when it was a man (6.2%). On the other hand, the Northeast recorded highest levels of moderate food insecurity prevalence: 9.6% of the housing units with a female reference person and 8.4% of those with a male one.

Households with a black or brown reference person recorded higher prevalences of food insecurity in all its respects in comparison with households with a white reference person. Among the households with a black or brown reference person, 29.8% were facing food insecurity, whereas among white persons, prevalence was 14.4%.

Higher level of schooling reduces occurrence of food insecurity

For Brazil, in urban or rural areas, the bigger the level of schooling of residents, the smaller the prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity. In 2013, 13.7% of the residents with one to three years of schooling were in a condition of moderate or severe food insecurity. For persons with 15 or more years of schooling, the percentage was 1.2%. Major Regions behaved similarly, however, the Northeast and North had higher percentages of persons with severe or moderate food security levels than the other regions, given any level of schooling. Between 2009 and 2013, there was decrease of moderate or severe food insecurity at all levels of schooling, especially among persons with one to three years of schooling (19.5% in 2009).

Out of the 55.5 million residents under 18 years of age, in the total private households, 79.8% were attending school or day care center, and among the 6.2 million who lived in food insecure housing units, this percentage was 75.7%. In comparison with 2009, although the percentage of residents under 18 attending school or day care center had increased (78.3%, in 2009) this fact was not so significant for those who lived in moderately or severely food insecure households (75.3% in 2009).

The ethnicity of residents exerted different impacts on food security prevalence. Out of the total 93.2 million white residents, 17.2% had a constant worry about not having food due to lack of money to buy some. Regarding the 106.6 million black or brown ones, this percentage rose to 33.4%.

There was not significant difference between the proportion of men and women subject to food restriction. In 2013, these percentages were estimated at 25.8% of resident men and women of private households. In absolute figures, it corresponded to 25.3 million men and 26.8 million women.

A total 54.7% of the persons in moderately or severely food insecure households worked were employed

In 2013, out of the 14.3 million persons aged 10 years of age and over who lived in households with moderate or severe food insecurity, 54.7% were employed. Among the employed, 31.5% worked in agricultural activities. Urban and rural areas differed in relation to activities. In the rural area, 73.7% of the employed worked in agricultural activities, versus 12.7% of those in the urban area.

Among the households with an employed reference person, 22.7% faced some level of food insecurity. The analysis of employment category shows that among employers there was the smallest prevalence level (7.0%) and own-account production or construction workers, 45.8% faced food insecurity. Among domestic workers, food insecurity prevalence was also high, 34.2%.