Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Socio-political indicators of food insecurity

A study of 24 US states

Bibliographic Data

ID15095695
AuthorsRishika Chakraborty (0000-0002-9319-6131, George Washington University, corresponding author), Katelyn F Romm (University of Oklahoma Health Sciences), Katelyn Romm (0000-0002-9552-0732, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center), Cassidy R Loparco (0000-0003-4206-4179, George Washington University), Ya-Ting Yang (0000-0002-0155-8490, George Washington University), Y Tony Yang, Carla J Berg (0000-0001-8931-1961, George Washington University), Carla Berg (George Washington University)
Year2026
Pages1-18
Publication date2026-03-26
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePublic Health Nutrition (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1368-9800 • E-ISSN: 1475-2727
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s1368980026102353
PMID41883134
OpenAlexW7140905373
LanguageEN

Objective: Food insecurity (FI) prevalence has increased globally, including the United States (US), and disproportionately affects certain subgroups (e.g. women). Both food-related and non-food-related sociopolitical indicators may impact FI rates; however, these associations are underexplored. This study assessed select state-level sociopolitical indicators among states with higher and lower FI rates compared to the national average. Design: Cross-sectional Setting: US Participants: We identified 25 states representing lower (n=18) and higher (n=7) FI prevalence compared to the 2021-2023 US average (12.2%) and used national data sources to characterize 16 sociopolitical indicators (selected via prior review) across 3 categories: 1) proximal to FI (related to food access/income/resources), 2) inequality (contributing to disparities), and 3) tobacco/alcohol/cannabis regulation (may exacerbate/perpetuate financial constraints). We described each indicator and explored their associations (using t-tests or Fisher’s tests) with state FI status (high vs. low). Results: For proximal indicators, low-FI (vs. high-FI) states had greater food environment scores, nutrition assistance program participation, minimum wage, and insured individuals. For inequality indicators, low-FI (vs. high-FI) states had narrower gender wage-gaps, greater racial equity, and more protective policies for sexual/gender minority populations and abortion rights. For substance-related indicators, low-FI (vs. high-FI) states had higher cigarette taxes and more likely had comprehensive smoke-free laws, legalized nonmedical cannabis, and provisions for expunging/pardoning prior cannabis-related convictions. Conclusion: Low-FI states had more sociopolitical indicators aimed at improving food access, financial resources, equality, and substance use-related regulations. Findings highlight the importance of adopting a holistic, sustainable, multilevel approach to effectively address the broader determinants of FI

Food security · Food supply · Food systems · MEDLINE · Multilevel model · Food Safety and Hygiene · Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations · Organic Food and Agriculture

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae