Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland

of Pakistan
Abdullah a,⇑, Deyi Zhou a, Tariq Shah b, Sajjad Ali a, Waqar Ahmad a, Izhar Ud Din c, Aasir Ilyas a
a
College of Economics & Management, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070 Hubei, PR China
b
Department of Economics & Development Studies, University of Swat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
c
College of Public Administration & Land Resource Management, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, Hubei, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The purpose of this study is to explore the factors that affect rural household food security in northern
Received 7 October 2016 area of Pakistan. The random sampling technique was applied to collected data from 294 rural house-
Accepted 4 May 2017 holds through a face to face interview. A binary logistic regression technique was used to determine
Available online xxxx
the factors that influence household food insecurity. The results of our study revealed that age, gender,
education, remittances, unemployment, inflation, assets, and disease are important factors determining
Keywords: household food insecurity. Moreover, gender played a dominant role in food insecurity as female headed
Northern Pakistan
household were food insecure while male headed household were food secure. The policies should be set
Food security
Logistic regression
to promote education, more focus on female headed household and encourage the inflow of remittances.
Malakand Ó 2017 The Authors. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University. This is an
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction This definition consists of four central parts: availability, stability,

Food availability is a problem for everyone and especially for
the developing world. Food security means the provision and
access to nutritionally sufficient and culturally accepted food by
each member of the household for healthy life obtained through
socially acceptable ways. Food insecurity, on the other hand, is
the uncertain or limited access to nutritionally adequate and safe
food (Andersen, 1990; FAO, 2006). Food security is multidimen-
sional in nature and that makes accurate measurement and policy
targeting quite challenging for the policy makers. However, food
security means ‘‘consistent, dependable access to enough food for
active, healthy living” (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2011). The definition
of food security in this study is based on the FAO’s definition; ‘‘a
situation that exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social,
and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food that meets
their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”.
⇑ Corresponding author at: College of Economics & Management, Huazhong
Agricultural University, No. 1, Shizishan Road, Hongshan District, Wuhan 430070,
Hubei, PR China.
E-mail address: abdeco@webmail.hzau.edu.cn ( Abdullah).
Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
accessibility and utilization. A food system is said to be vulnerable
when one or more of the four components of food security are
uncertain and insecure (FAO, 2008).
Food insecurity has become a worldwide concern due to the
increasing number of people which remain undernourished
amounting to 842 million, approximately 12% of the total world’s
population. Developing countries are intensely affected. This is
really true in the case of Asia and Africa where more than 92% of
the world’s undernourished people are living; 552 and 226.4 mil-
lion respectively. About 294.7 million people are food insecure
only in South Asia which is almost 35% of the total undernourish-
ment world population (FAO, 2013). Almost one out of ten house-
holds is still unable to secure its food despite the considerable
efforts put forward by both public and private sectors to assist poor
household in getting their food needs (Nord et al., 2005). More than
three million children live in households classified as ‘‘very low
food security” (Nord et al., 2005).
Food security has many dimensions, ranging from global, regio-
nal, national, local, and household to the individual level. The
determinants of food security differ at different levels i.e. from glo-
bal to regional and national to household and individual level
because food security is deemed to be a multidimensional phe-
nomenon encompassing climate change, civil conflicts, natural dis-
asters, and social norms. The (WB, 2001) has recognized three
significant factors which affect food security i.e. availability of food,
accessibility of food and utilization of food. Availability of food

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
1658-077X/Ó 2017 The Authors. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of King Saud University.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
2 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
means ample food available through personal production. Accessi-
bility of food means a reduction in poverty, merely the availability
is not enough, and the poor household should have the ability to
purchase it. Utilization of food means food having all the required
nutrients in it (Doppler, 2002).
According to (Rukuni, 2002) Sub-Saharan Africa is facing a huge
challenge, how to feed the ever increasing population. About 90%
of the rural population depends on agriculture for their livelihoods,
do not have the power to resolve the problem of food insecurity,
and this is mainly due to low productivity and belligerent agro-
ecological factors. World food summits and international develop-
ment has only one agenda; reduction of hunger and food insecurity
since 2001 and 1996 respectively.
Pakistan is one of the developing countries of south Asia with an
average per capita income of $ 1512 in 2015. For the improvement
of the agriculture sector, the government of Pakistan introduced
various modern and scientific methods and techniques. Agriculture
is responsible for contribution to GDP by about 20.88% and to
employment by 43.5%. The agriculture sector has both mediated
and unmediated connections with other sectors of the economy
and is playing an indispensable role in socio-economic uplift of
the country. Presently, Pakistan is the sixth populous country in
the world having an estimated population of 191.71 million with
a growth rate of 1.92%. Out of the total population, about 75.19
million are living in urban areas while 116.52 million in rural areas
in 2015. The percentage of rural population reduced from 61.4% to
60.8% during one year period, while that of the urban area
increased from 38.5% to 39.2 by 2015. Rural population directly
or indirectly depends on agriculture for its livelihood. Pakistan
Vision 2025 seeks a Pakistan where ‘‘all people, at all times, have
physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food
to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and
healthy life” (Pakistan Economic Survey, 2015).
Pakistan and India are among the largest cereal producers in the
world and still 500 million people go to bed hungry, hence south
Asia is considered one of the food insecure regions of the world.
Pakistan is also suffering from this evil of food insecurity (Asghar
and Muhammad, 2013). According to the report of Sustainable
Development Institute Policy (SDPI), about 48.9% population is
food insecure, ranking 11th and is placed at ‘extreme risk’ by the
Food Security Risk Index (FSRI) (SDPI, 2009). In Human Develop-
ment Index (HDI) Pakistan is placed at 147th out of 188 countries
in 2015. Pakistan’s HDI value is 0.538 out of one which is lower
than Asia’s average value of 0.607 and world’s average value of
0.711 (Pakistan Economic Survey, 2015). Food security in Pakistan
has been divided into four categories by SDPI (a) Extremely inse-
cure, (b) insecure, (c) at the borderline, and (d) reasonably secure
(SDPI, 2009).
The results of the SDPI report revealed that the situation of food
security in Pakistan went from bad to worse from national to
household level as compared to 2003. The number of food insecure
districts in Pakistan was 38 while this number rose to 102 by 2009.
This clearly shows the food insecurity situation in the country.
Enhanced agricultural production is required for food security
which will make the farming system less susceptible to climate
change (SDPI, 2009). To see Pakistan free from hunger and malnu-
trition, Pakistan has joined Scaling up Nutrition (SUN) movement
in 2013 to reduce the malnutrition by 50% (Pakistan Economic
Survey, 2015).
Food insecurity has affected Pakistan for the last many years. A
number of historical and significant factors are accountable for this
like the war on terror, military operations in the residential areas,
devastating floods which destroyed infrastructure and crops, and
most recently the earthquake. This is clear from the Global Hunger
Index (GHI) which shows the degree to which the problem has
persisted. Pakistan rank 93 out of 104 countries on Global
Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
Hunger Index, though the score decreased from 43.6 to 33.9
during the period 1990 to 2015, but the situation remain the same,
as Pakistan is still in the category of ‘extremely alarming’ (IFPRI,
2015).1
Food security is indeed a key problem in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
(KPK) as the province is not producing enough quantity to meet the
demand and is importing food from other provinces which are sub-
sidized. It is stressed to increase the yield of different crops by
adopting advance tools and technology to bridge the gap between
food supply and demand (The Nation, 2017). According to Inte-
grated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC, 2017) the province
of KPK is classified into moderately food insecure as four districts
are highly food insecure; ten districts are moderately food insecure
and eleven districts are generally food secure including district
Malakand as shown in Fig. 1.
Malakand (Pashto: ‫ )ﻣﻼﮐﻨډ‬is located in the north of Pakistan and
is a district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. The total area of dis-
trict Malakand is of 952 km2 (368 sq mi) and having a population
of 567,581 with a density of 600/km2 (1500/sq mi). The majority
of the people belong to Pashtun tribe and Pashto is their native lan-
guage. The main source of income includes trade, public service
and agriculture. The major source of income is agriculture and
the total cultivatable land being 456,600 hectares (1763 sq mi).
Malakand is a hilly area; its soil is loamy and moist and is irrigated
by the Swat River which flows from Swat, through Kohistan and
joins the river Kabul near Peshawar. The average rainfall in the area
is not enough; hence, the soil needs artificial irrigation. The district
of Malakand is surrounded by high mountains rich with mineral
resources which are yet to be exploited. Agriculture is the main
activity in the area and the important crops grown are rice, maize,
millet, tobacco, sugarcane, barley and grain. The agriculture sector
of this area is in transition phase and new technology is being
adopted quite rapidly by smallholder farmers and as a conse-
quence the production as well as the food security situation
improved over the last few years.
The determinants of food security have been investigated for
various countries including Ethiopia (Bogale, 2012), Ghana
(Owusu et al., 2011), Zimbabwe (Mango et al., 2014), Kenya
(Kassie et al., 2014), Brazil (Felker-Kantor and Wood, 2012) and
Nigeria (Arene and Anyaeji, 2010). Some studies for Pakistan are
(Asghar and Muhammad, 2013; Shaikh, 2007; Sultana and Kiani,
2011), but they are either for whole Pakistan (Gill and Khan,
2010) or for another province i.e. for Punjab (Bashir et al., 2013a)
and some studies also utilized secondary data (Asghar and
Muhammad, 2013; Sultana and Kiani, 2011). A study examining
the determinants of food security with respect to district Malakand
KPK is missing, therefore, this research is planned to fill this gap.
The purpose of this research is to examine the socio-economic
factors that influence food security in district Malakand of the pro-
vince of KPK, Pakistan.
2. Literature review
2.1. Definition of the concept
The determinants of food security differ at different levels i.e.
from global to regional and national to household and individual
level because food security is deemed to be a multidimensional
phenomenon encompassing climate change, civil conflicts, natural
disasters, and social norms. Since world food crisis of 1972–74 and
food price shock of 2006–08, food insecurity has attracted much
attention from program implementers and policy makers due to
1
The categories are low (GHI
4.9), moderate (5.0
GHI
9.9), serious
(10.0
GHI
19.9), alarming (20.0
GHI
29.9), and extremely alarming (30.0)
 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 3

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Food Security Phase Classification

(based on acute food insecurity analysis conducted
from 18th - 21st May, 2015)

å
Chitral
GILGIT BALTISTAN

04080 20
±
Kilometers

å å
Upper ä
Swat
Kohistan
AFGHANISTAN Dir

Lower å
Dir
ä Shangla å
Batagram
å
å
Malakand å Tor Mansehra

å
Buner Ghar

å Mardan
Charsadda
å å å
å Swabi å Abbottabad
Peshawar
å
Nowshera
Haripur
AJK
ISLAMABAD

ä å
Kohat
Hangu

å
Karak

å
Bannu
ä
FATA PUNJAB Food Security Phase
Lakki
Marwat Generally Food Secure
1
(Minimal Food Insecure)

å
Moderately Food Insecure
2 (Stressed)
Tank
3 Highly Food Insecure (Crisis)

ä
CHINA
GILGIT Severely Food Insecure
BALTISTAN 4 (Emergency)
D. I. KP
AFGHANISTAN
Khan PAK Outlook
FATA

PUNJAB
ä
ä Likely to improve

Likely to deteriorate

IRAN
BALOCHISTAN

INDIA
å Likely to be stable

International Boundary
SINDH
Province Boundary
District Boundary
Arabian Sea
Line of Control

Fig. 1. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Food Security Phase Classification.

the high impact of hunger and malnutrition on people (Gebre, world, are hit hard by such crises because food is deficient and
2012; Sasson, 2012). It is suggested based on the evidence from prices are skyrocketed and out of their purchasing power (Gebre,
these two periods that poor household, especially from developing 2012; Tyner, 2013).

Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
4 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
2.2. Factors determining food security
A number of factors influence household food security including
household assets (Guo, 2011); homeownership (Rose et al., 1998);
household saving (Frongillo et al., 1997); financial constraints
(Chang et al., 2014); access to credit (Gundersen and Gruber,
2001; Ribar and Hamrick, 2003); education (Kidane et al., 2005);
ownership of livestock (Ali and Khan, 2013); jobs loss and low level
of income (Loopstra and Tarasuk, 2013); knowledge of the house-
hold about food storage, processing, nutrition and management of
illness (Riely et al., 1999); corruption, fiscal imprudence, huge
debts and policy inconsistency (Akpan, 2009); non-farm work
(Owusu et al., 2011); gender of the household head (Kassie et al.,
2014); size of the family, cultivated land size, fertility of soil, irriga-
tion access, number of extension visits, fertilizer use and improved
seed (Bogale, 2012); remittances and access to market information,
and age of the household head (Mango et al., 2014); dependency
ratio, electricity connection, irrigation availability (Asghar and
Muhammad, 2013); monthly income, structure of the family
(Bashir et al., 2013a); and infrastructural availability (Gill and
Khan, 2010).
2.3. Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa is facing a huge challenge of feeding the
ever increasing population. About 90% of the rural population
depends on agriculture for their livelihoods, still they are suffering
from the problem of food insecurity, and this is mainly due to low
productivity and belligerent agro-ecological factors. World food
summits and international development has only one agenda;
reduction of hunger and food insecurity (Rukuni, 2002), but still
some household remain deficient in food resources. South African
governments pledged to half poverty rate from 2004 to 2014. It
is hard to manage this goal with household food security. Hence,
in 2002, the government adopted Integrated Food Security Strategy
(IFSS). The vision of this strategy is: ‘‘to attain universal physical,
social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food by
all South Africans at all times to meet their dietary and food prefer-
ences for an active and healthy life” (IFSS, 2002). According to IFSS,
South Africa is confronted with various key challenges regarding
food security. Nevertheless, South Africa still is lacking precise
and recognized ways to measure food insecurity and presently
has no controlled method of monitoring the status of food security.
(De Cock et al., 2013) examined the food security situation in Lim-
popo Province. Both qualitative and quantitative data were utilized
for the purpose of analysis. The study found that 53% of the rural
households were food insecure. Important determinants were
human capital (education), household size, dependency ratio,
household income and the area in which the study was
undertaken.
(Bogale, 2012) examined the factors which determine the
household level of susceptibility to food insecurity by utilizing
method of expected poverty approach having data obtained from
277 randomly selected household in Ethiopia. The food insecurity
of household is associated with many factors including the size
of the family, cultivated land size, the fertility of soil, irrigation
access, number of extension visits, fertilizer use and improved
seed. The cut-off level has been computed and household whose
expenditure falls below the specified level was identified as vul-
nerable. The total number of food insecure household was lower
(103) than vulnerable household (111). According to (Owusu
et al., 2011) non-farm work affect household food security in
Ghana and the result of the study supported the widely accepted
view about non-farm income; that it adds to eradication of pov-
erty, while (Mango et al., 2014) investigated factors affecting
household food security in district Mudzi of Zimbabwe by using
Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
data obtained from 120 randomly selected household through a
structured questionnaire. Age of the household head, education
of household head, household labor size, and ownership of live-
stock, remittances and access to market information were found
to be positively influencing household food security.
2.4. Mexico and USA
The (WB, 2001) has recognized three significant factors which
affect food security i.e. availability of food, accessibility of food
and utilization of food. Availability of food means ample food avail-
able through personal production. Accessibility of food means a
reduction in poverty, merely the availability is not enough, and
the poor household should have the ability to purchase it. Utiliza-
tion of food means food having all the required nutrients in it
(Doppler, 2002).
(Appendini and Quijada, 2016) conducted a study for Mexico in
which the main focus was on food security and quality. The study
suggested motivating small farmers to produce high-quality maize.
The Economic Research Service (ERS) of the United States Depart-
ment of Agriculture (USDA) report said that about 14.9% American
household were found food insecure, means that they were defi-
cient in food and having trouble maintaining their healthy lifestyle,
sometime during the year. In addition, 5.7% of American household
had to reduce their quantity of food intake, this situation is rightly
termed as ‘‘very low food security” by the USDA (Coleman-Jensen
et al., 2011).
2.5. Logistic regression model
Different researchers employed different methods for the anal-
ysis of the data, but many of them utilized logistic regression tech-
nique including (Amaza et al., 2006; Arene and Anyaeji, 2010;
Felker-Kantor and Wood, 2012; Haile et al., 2005) because of the
nature of data. The determinants of household food security in
Nigeria were investigated by employing logistic regression model
and it was found that about 60% of the households were food inse-
cure. Results revealed income and household head age to be the
most significant factors determining food security (Arene and
Anyaeji, 2010). The Brazil bureau of the census carried out a
national household survey consisting of 121,708 representative
households in 2009. They applied logistic regression analysis and
find that female-headed household are more insecure as compared
to male-headed household. In addition, the result discloses that the
existence of young children aging between zero and ten and older
children age between 11 and 18 leads to food insecurity (Felker-
Kantor and Wood, 2012). The factors influencing household food
security in Nigeria were examined by Amaza et al. (2006) using
logistic regression methodology. Results of the study revealed that
household size is the key determinant of food security. Food inse-
curity increases with the increase in the number of family mem-
bers and vice versa. (Haile et al., 2005) probed the determinants
of food insecurity by employing logistic regression methodology
on data collected from the household. The factors held accountable
for food security are farm size, ownership of ox, use of fertilizer,
household head education, the size of the household and house-
hold per capita production.
2.6. Role of gender
Gender of the household has an important role in household
food security. (Kassie et al., 2014) investigated association between
food security and gender of household head in the rural area of
Kenya. Some discernible and indiscernible characteristics were
held accountable for the difference in food security between male
headed household and female-headed household. The study
 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
suggests that even if the household head has same visible charac-
teristics; invisible qualities are responsible for the difference in
food security level. (Ibnouf, 2011) showed that women as com-
pared to men are more likely to play a positive role in household
food security; the latter group migrates seasonally and sometimes
permanently. But (Felker-Kantor and Wood, 2012) found that
female-headed household is more insecure as compared to male-
headed household. According to (Ibnouf, 2011) women are solely
responsible for household food preparation, processing and preser-
vation. The study revealed that the major problems which women
face as a producer are lacking access to advanced production tech-
niques such as high-quality seeds, fertilizers, credit access, pesti-
cides and marketing services due to gender-biased traditions.
2.7. Food security in Pakistan
Various studies have been undertaken in case of Pakistan to
analyze the determinants of household food security encompass-
ing (Ali and Khan, 2013; Asghar and Muhammad, 2013; Bashir
et al., 2013b; Gill and Khan, 2010; Shaikh, 2007; Sultana and
Kiani, 2011).
(Asghar and Muhammad, 2013) examined the determinants of
food insecurity for the general household as well as for farmers.
The data is obtained from Pakistan Social and Living standard Mea-
surement (PSLM) 2007–08 survey which is conducted by the Fed-
eral Bureau of Statistics, Pakistan. Some variables like household
size, income, number of rooms, dependency ratio, electricity con-
nection, irrigation availability, and the age of household head were
found significantly different from zero. The calorie intake method-
ology was utilized by Bashir et al. (2013a) in examining the deter-
minants of food security for Punjab. The data was collected from 12
districts and were consists of 1152 household. Results of the study
indicated that about 23% of the household were found to be food
insecure. A number of factors were found to play a significant role
in household food security like livestock ownership, monthly
income, and size of the family, the structure of the family, age
and education of the household head.
(Sultana and Kiani, 2011) analyzed the determinants of house-
hold food security for Pakistan by utilizing logistic regression tech-
nique on microdata obtained from PSLM 2007–08. Some factors
were identified to have significant and positive impact on house-
hold food security: place of residence, dependency ratio, social cap-
ital, the status of employment and educational attainment. While
(Gill and Khan, 2010) examined the determinants of household
food security at the district level and come up with the conclusion
that household food poverty is higher for rural areas as compared
to urban areas. A number of factors account for this i.e. infrastruc-
tural availability, access to education and health, gender, purchas-
ing power and public utilities like safe drinking water and
electricity. Food security at the national level does not imply food
security at provincial, district or household level. The disparity
exists among provinces, and even within household, it cannot be
ensured that each member of the household is food secure, disre-
garding the fact that household as a whole is food secure. They
emphasized on social factors and deemed it significant for policy
makers.
3. Methodology and data
3.1. Data collection
The data was collected by employing simple random sampling
technique through a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire
was pre-tested before the actual survey and then it was delivered
verbally to the majority of the participant due to the prevalence of
Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
5
widespread illiteracy in the study area. A total of 294 households
were covered in this study. About 196 respondents were taken
from Tehsil Batkhela and 98 from Tehsil Dargai due to their size
of population e.g. 339,442 and 228,139 respectively (KPBOS,
2017). Because of the extended family system and due to current
transition in the family structure we consider household as those
people who work and eat together and share the income and
expenditures as one household. The survey covered many demo-
graphic and socioeconomic variables that affect household food
security. The important socio-economic variables include age, gen-
der, household head education, family size, credit access, owner-
ship of assets (crop, land and livestock), respondent perception of
his food security status, remittances, unemployment and inflation.
We also inquire about the sources of food, whether they produce it
by themselves or purchase from the market. Furthermore, they
were asked about the causes of food insecurity. Several factors
were identified as potentially responsible for food insecurity and
the respondents were ask about them, like inflation, unemploy-
ment, selfish behavior of the household, unequal distribution of
wealth, etc. In developing world people generally try to get enough
food for their family and they do not care about the nutritional
value of food.
3.2. Model specification
In this study we have used the definition of FAO for food secu-
rity which states ‘‘a situation that exists when all people, at all times,
have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutri-
tious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an
active and healthy life” (FAO, 2008). Since the dependent variable
food security is qualitative in nature means dichotomous, it can
only take two values either the presence of something or absence,
so by pursuing the conventional method of binary response it will
either take the value of 1 or zero. This value of 1 means that house-
hold is food secure and zero means otherwise because this mea-
sure of food security in binary manner yields results which have
more policy implications (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2011).. This can
be achieved by using the linear probability model (LPM). But this
LPM is plagued by many problems including heteroscedasticity of
the error term, the possibility of ‘y’ lying outside the range (0, 1).
To avoid the problems associated with the LPM, we should model
the relationship in such a way that ‘y’ is unobservable variable and
the relationship is given by
Y ¼ 1 if Y > 0
0 if Y < 0
where 1 stands for food security and zero for food insecurity.
Logistic regression technique can be used to model the relation-
ship between the dichotomous dependent variable and set of inde-
pendent variables that are hypothesized to affect the outcome. The
logistic regression model characterizing the adoption of household
food security is given by Wooldridge (2010)
 
Pi
Ln ¼ b0 þ b1XIi þ b2X2i þ    þ bniXni ð1Þ
1Pi
This [Pi/(1  Pi)] is simply the odds ratio in favor of food secu-
rity i.e. the ratio of the probability that the household is food
secure to the probability that it is not food secure. The subscript
‘i’ shows the ith observation in the data. b0 is the intercept of the
model, while X1, X2, X3. . . Xn are the explanatory variables. It
should also be kept in mind that the estimated coefficients do
not directly affect the change in corresponding explanatory vari-
ables on the probability of the outcome. Rather, the coefficients
reflect the effect of individual explanatory variables on its log of
odds. The positive coefficient shows that the odds ratio will
6 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Table 1
Description of the variables used in the model.

Variables Description and measurement

Dependent variable
Food security status D = 1 if HH is food secure; 0 = otherwise
Independent variables
Age (A) Age of HH head in number of years
Gender (G) D = 1 if HH head is male; 0 = otherwise
Education (ED) D = 1if HH head is literate; 0 = otherwise
Household size (HS) Number of household members
Remittances (RM) D = 1 if HH Receive Remittances; 0 otherwise
Unemployment (U) D = 1 if food insecurity is caused by unemployment; 0 = otherwise
Inflation (INF) D = 1 if food insecurity is caused by inflation; 0 = otherwise
Assets (AS) D = 1 if HH owns Assets; 0 = otherwise
Labor (LR) D = 1 if food insecurity is caused by lack of labor; 0 = otherwise
Distance from main road Number of kilometers by which the villages is away from main road
Livestock ownership D = 1 if HH own livestock; 0 = otherwise
Credit (C) D = 1 if HH has access to credit; 0 = otherwise
Market access (MA) D = 1 if HH has access to market; 0 = otherwise
Food Aid (FA) D = 1 if HH receive food aid; 0 = otherwise
Food price (FP) D = 1 if HH food insecurity is caused by Food price; 0 = otherwise
Money (M) D = 1 if HH food insecurity is caused by lack of money to buy food items; 0 = otherwise
Flood (FL) D = 1 if food insecurity is caused by flood; 0 = otherwise
Diseases (DS) D = 1 if food insecurity is caused by diseases; 0 = otherwise
Drought (DR) D = 1 if food insecurity is caused by drought; 0 = otherwise

increase as the explanatory variables increases, and conversely, the

Table 2
odds ratio will decrease as the explanatory variables decreases. The Characteristics of households.
logistic regression coefficients are estimated by utilizing the max-
Variable Frequency Percentage
imum likelihood estimation methodology.
As we know that the dependent variable, food security is a Gender
Male 233 79.3
dummy variable in its nature, we hypothesized the following
Female 61 20.7
demographic, socio-economic and some other factors to be influ-
Age
encing the food security status accounting for the specific locality
Less than 20 3 1
as shown in Table 1, because the literature suggests that food secu- 20–29 16 5.4
rity varied considerably from one state to another, and even within 30–39 93 31.6
the same region (Bartfeld and Dunifon, 2006; Coleman-Jensen 40–49 107 36.4
et al., 2011). 50 & above 75 25.5
Education
Primary 96 32.7
4. Results and discussion High School 35 11.9
College 52 17.7
University 44 15
The aim of this research is to examine the factors influencing
Other 67 22.8
household food insecurity in northern rural areas of Pakistan.
Household size
Quantitative data were collected during the period from June
2–3 Members 14 4.8
2016 to July 2016 from 294 households. The information gathered 4–5 Members 77 26.2
include demographic characteristics of the respondents as well as a 6–7 Members 90 30.6
host of other factors that are deemed to affect household food inse- 8–9 Members 75 25.5
curity. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the food secu- 10 & above 38 12.9

rity status in northern area of Pakistan. In addition, logistic Occupation of HH

regression analysis was utilized to identify the factors influencing Farmer 20 6.8
Fisherman 4 1.4
household food security.
Shopkeeper 53 18
Govt Employ 83 28.2
4.1. Characteristics of the household Daily Wager 74 25.2
Other 60 20.4

Table 2 shows the characteristics of households.. The household

head was contacted for collecting information because all the deci-
sion regarding households and especially those of monetary terms
are related to him. The respondents were divided gender wise as
233 (79.3%) male and 61 (20.7%) females. In majority of the house-
hold male is the head of the household as it is a male dominant
society and also it is considered the responsibility of male member
to provide food and shelter to his family members. In few cases
females also leads the household due to death of husband or some
other reasons. The respondents were quite mature with respect to
ages and could provide food to their family members, they were
distributed 3 (1%) in less than 20 category, 16 (5.4%) in 20–29,
93 (31.6%) in 30–39, 107 (36.4%) in 40–49, and 75 (25.5%) in 50
and above. The education of the respondents were not too bad as
96 (32.7%) had primary schooling, 35 (11.9%) high school, 52
(17.7%) college, 44 (15%) university and 67 (22.8%) did not dis-
closes their education level. Many respondents 83 (28.2%) were
government employees and were earning stable income and hav-
ing security of job. Some were shopkeeper 53 (18%) and having
good running business, but the most vulnerable section in the
study area is of daily wagers 74 (25.5%), farmers 20 (6.8%) and fish-
erman 4 (1.4%) while others 60 (20.4%) had not reveal their occu-
pation. The daily wagers were the most disadvantage section of
the society, as their days work is insecure and so their nutritional

Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 7

intake of food is negatively affected. One other factor with respect Table 3
to food security is household size. In the study area the majority of Household food sources.

the household had big family size because it is considered as a Source Frequency Percent
norm to have high number of family members. The distribution Own production 4 1.36
of household size is 14 (4.8%) had 2–3 members, 77 (26.2%) had Own + Market purchase 37 12.58
4–5 members, 90 (30.6%) had 6–7 members, 75 (25.5%) had 8–9 Market purchase only 253 86.05
members, and 38 (12.9%) had 10 and above members. In the study Total 294 100

area big family is considered as a social and economic norm and

every household wish to have a bigger family. In addition, they
prefer male babies over females, because males can work and earn Table 4
Status of household food availability.
some money while females do not.
Question items Frequency Mean/%
4.2. Rural household food sources Household fear that food will run out 65 22%
Number of meals per day (Mean) 294 2.89
With the passage of time the nature of society is changing con- Number of days meat, fish or chicken is taken 294 1.26
per week (Mean)
tinuously. In the current scenario, most people prefer to work in
Food is sufficient always for all members of the HH 238 80%
the offices and avoid jobs involving physical labor. Although the
study area is a rural one but still people are inclined towards busi-
nesses or government jobs and they avoid farming. As it is clear
from Table 3 that most of the rural households about 253 (86%) Table 5
were net purchaser of food. Some produce their own food and also Food insecurity causes.
purchase from the market 37 (12.58%), while only 4 (1.36%)
Food insecurity causes Frequency Percent
depends on their own production for food which is extremely
Inflation 75 25.51
low percentage. Table 4 indicates the food security situation, about
Unemployment 70 23.8
22% of the respondents fear that food will run out in the near Lack of enough labor 72 24.48
future. This means that they have access to food and were consum- Unequal distribution of wealth 27 9.18
ing a handsome amount of it, but their source of income is vulner- Disease 32 10.88
able. Moreover the mean of the meals per day is 2.89 which is less Selfish behavior 12 4.08
Other 6 2.04
than the normally required three meals a day, and the number of Total 294 100
days meat, fish or chicken is taken per week is 1.26 which is extre-
mely low and results in malnutrition in children. Furthermore,
exactly 81% of the respondents claimed that food is always suffi-
unable to find jobs of their own choice or unemployed for other
cient for them indicating that the food security situation is quite
reasons which lead to food insecurity because household would
satisfactory and people had access to food, while 19% fear that food
not have enough money to purchase food items. The lack of enough
is not sufficient for them.
labor is another cause of food insecurity. People consider male
child as an asset because he can earn some money for the family,
4.3. Food insecurity causes
while females are not considered as a labor because they usually
do not work outside. The fourth most important cause of food inse-
The household food insecurity means that people either does
curity according to respondents was unequal distribution of
not have access to food or are unable to purchase it. In either case
wealth. Many people are wealthy and have enough money to meet
they had to suffer from the hardships of hunger and poverty. The
their basic needs while few are unable to fulfill their basic needs of
problem of food security has been debated for decades. It is a com-
life.. A famous saying ‘‘Health is wealth”. If someone is not healthy
plex and multidimensional phenomenon. There are no universal
how could he be able to work and earn money. Health conditions
causes of food security but vary with different countries and cul-
are considered very important in causing food insecurity among
tures. Previous literature suggests that causes of food insecurity
the rural households. Moreover, most of the households belong
include long period of poverty and lack of adequate productive
to lower income group and if disease occur, they spent all of their
resources (Barrett, 2010), education of the household, size of the
income on health related issues and do not had enough money left
household, livestock ownership, access to market and remittances
to purchase food. In addition, the behavior of the dwellers also
(Mango et al., 2014). In addition, low income is a major cause for
matters. They do not take care of their neighbors which lead to
household food insecurity because they do not have enough money
the problem of food insecurity.
to meet their food requirements (Asghar and Muhammad, 2013).
Moreover, the role of productive resources such as agricultural
technology has a transformative effect on the performance of agri- 4.4. Logistic regression model results
culture (Kassie et al., 2011). Agricultural technology has the poten-
tial to reduce food insecurity. For example such as improved seeds Various factors are responsible for food security including sup-
leading towards higher productivity (Kassie et al., 2012), while the ply side factors, demand side factors, market related factors and
risk of crop failure can be reduced with the help of irrigation many more. The socio-economic characteristics of the household
(Hagos et al., 2012). By conducting the survey this research identi- are crucial in determining household food security. The most vul-
fied many significant causes of food insecurity in the northern area nerable groups to food security are rural households; they do not
of Pakistan as shown in Table 5. The most important cause is infla- produce food by themselves and are net purchaser of food items.
tion as 75 (25.5%) of the respondents believe that it is the crucial Vulnerability means the factors that place people at unfavorable
factor in determining food security. The rate of inflation remained situation where they are food insecure. During the interview it
consistently on the rise for the last few years and had decreased was found that majority of the households were living in extreme
the purchasing power of the households resulting in food insecu- poverty and suffering from malnutrition. In the study area the rela-
rity. The second most important cause in the eyes of the respon- tionship between food insecurity and poverty was very strong.
dent is unemployment. Sometime the inhabitants might be Poverty not only leads to food insecurity but also decreases pur-

Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
8 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Table 6
Logistic regression coefficient showing the factors influencing the status of household food security.

Variables Coefficient Odds ratio Std. Err. Z P-value

Gender HH (GHH) 2.113 0.12 0.0768 3.32 0.001***
Age HH (AHH) 0.977 2.656 0.981 2.64 0.008*
Education HH (EHH) 0.498 0.607 0.108 2.8 0.005**
Size HH (SHH) 0.095 1.099 0.339 0.31 0.758
Occupation (OC) 0.214 0.807 0.183 0.94 0.346
Remittances (RM) 4.448 85.496 119.099 3.19 0.001***
Unemployment (UN) 3.192 0.041 0.079 1.64 0.101*
Inflation (IN) 3.401 30.017 38.659 2.64 0.008*
Assets (AS) 2.211 9.132 9.284 2.18 0.03**
Labor (LB) 0.866 2.377 1.678 1.23 0.22
Distance (DS) 0.088 1.092 0.243 0.4 0.69
Livestock (LS) 0.817 0.441 0.279 1.29 0.197
Credit Access (CA) 0.659 1.933 1.747 0.73 0.466
Market Access (MA) 0.557 1.745 1.981 0.49 0.624
Food Aid (FA) 0.832 2.299 1.708 1.12 0.262
Food Price (FP) 0.882 0.413 0.84 0.43 0.664
Lack of Money (LM) 1.335 0.263 0.307 1.14 0.254
Floods (FL) 1.011 2.749 2.39 1.16 0.245
Disease (DE) 1.348 0.259 0.217 1.61 0.108*
Drought (DR) 0.067 1.069 0.535 0.13 0.893
Pseudo-R2 0.390
*
Significance level of 10%.
**
Significance level of 5%.
***
Significance level of 1%.

chasing power for other goods and services such as housing, energy
and water. Logistic regression model was applied to examine the
effect of various independent variables on dependent variable, food
security status. The food security status was modeled as a binary
response variable where 1 = food secure and 0 = not secure. The
overall predictive power of the model was high indicating that
dependent variables had significant impact in explaining the food
security status. The chi-square (96.85, p < 0.01) with df = 20). The
independent variables which were found significant are gender,
age, education, remittances, unemployment, inflation, assets and
disease while the rest were found insignificant. The results are
given in Table 6.
Age is an important factor in determining household food secu-
rity status. The economic modeling indicates that age was signifi-
cant with (odd ratio = 2.65, p = 0.008). It was found in our sample
data that household food insecurity varied significantly among dif-
ferent age groups. Household with older household were food
secure and household with smaller heads were not food secure.
The results are consistent with previous studies; all these studies
confirm that older household head tend to have food security.
In this research study, household were asked about assets, Does
the household own assets (crop + land)? The variable was set by
keeping in view the study area, because most of the household
had not any asset at all. Assets in this study include crop and land
or both. The effect of an asset on food security status was found
significant (Odd ratio = 9.13, p = 0.03), meaning that household
having assets were food secure compared to non-assets holders.
The finding of this study is in conformity with other studies. For
example, the lack of resources is associated with increased food
insecurity at all levels of income (Chang et al., 2014). Moreover,
the assessment of food security at household level will be impor-
tant for policy makers as most of the household grow their own
food. The result of the study revealed that both physical and
non-physical assets are important in determining food security
status of household (Mango et al., 2014).
Expenditure on health by the government is an important indi-
cator of health situation in a country. In addition, civil society, indi-
viduals and other organizations also contribute in financing the
health sector in Pakistan. According to World Bank the prescribed
level of spending per capita on health is $44 while in Pakistan it is
$37. However, the expenditure on health has increased to 0.45% of
GDP over the period of one year. still it is lower than the prescribed
level. The loss of job and low income level were found to be the
most important factors affecting food insecurity (Loopstra and
Tarasuk, 2013). Income of the household cannot alone explain
the food security status. Almost 58.9% of the household were living
in poverty but were food secure while there were about 7% of the
households in America whose income was high but were food inse-
cure (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2011).
In this study education means the number of years the house-
hold head has attended the school. Approximately 28.2% of the
respondents were government employees. Education was found
significant (odd ratio = 0.60, p = 0.005). The odd-ratio is positive
in case of higher education; people with higher education were
more likely to get higher paying jobs. Education also gives them
knowledge and awareness and increases the chances of obtaining
job. Education played a key role in household food security. Specif-
ically, female education is important because food preparation and
serving is done by them (Asghar and Muhammad, 2013). The result
of this study indicated that education has a positive influence on
food security status. The more the educated household head is
the more food secure the household will be and vice versa. The
results of this study are consistent with (Amaza et al., 2006;
Asghar and Muhammad, 2013; Bashir et al., 2013a, 2012; Gebre,
2012; Idrisa et al., 2008; Kaiser et al., 2003; Makombe et al., 2010).
The PSLM Survey 2015 indicated that there is an improvement
in the literacy rate to 60% from 58% last year. The rate of literacy is
higher in urban areas compared to rural areas and higher among
male than female. The province of KPK is third in Pakistan with
53% literacy rate. Education is significant in determining rural
household food insecurity. So the food security level can be
enhanced by promoting the level of education in the study area.
The global food prices increased as reported by Food and Agri-
culture Organization. The current inflation rate of Pakistan is
reported to be 4.2% in 2015. Rural Households are vulnerable to
high inflation rate. Currently, inflation is a burning issue in Pak-
istan. In the study area the question related to inflation was formu-
lated as Does inflation leads towards food insecurity? The study
shows that inflation has negative impact on food security status
of the rural household in northern area of Pakistan. High inflation

Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
leads to lower purchasing power and ultimately affects food secu-
rity status. The fall in oil price in international market was one of
the important factors that result in decreasing the inflation. Still
household believe that inflation is the major factor influencing its
food security status. The Benazir Income Support Program (BISP)
is an effective program providing cash to poor household all over
the country. The purpose of the program is to reduce poverty
and promote equitable distribution of wealth. The rapid increase
in population affects the development objectives of the govern-
ment. The rise in population negatively affects employment, social
security programs and economic resources.
Remittances had always been remained one of the important
source of income and external finances for many poor people
across developing countries and a promising source of economic
growth (Jebran et al., 2016). In the current study area, majority
of the people (at least one member from each family) are outside
of the home and doing jobs in different foreign countries, espe-
cially in Gulf region. Every year they send a lot of money to home
country. The household were asked whether they receive remit-
tances or not? The effect of remittances was found significant
(odd ratio = 85.496, P = 0.001). People receiving remittances were
found food secure while those who do not receive remittances
were lacking food security. Remittances provide an alternative
form of income (Nyikahadzoi et al., 2012). Those household who
receive remittances can purchase a variety of foods and are food
secure. Household with remittances are food secure compared to
that without remittances. Remittances are deemed an important
source of foreign earnings that can support different segment of
the economy in developing countries. Remittances are the second
largest source of foreign earnings after exports. Despite the
decrease in oil prices, remittances remain on the same rate from
GCC countries. During the fiscal year (2015) a high growth was
observed in remittances about 18.2% and reached to 18.7 billion
dollars. Similarly in 2016, the value of remittances reached to
16.034 billion dollars. A number of factors lead to the increase in
remittances including the reduction in cost of sending money, skill
matching and strengthening Pakistan remittance initiative (PRI).
PRI is playing a key role in facilitation and efficient flow of remit-
tances in the country. PRI encourage people to send their money
through proper channel.
It remains one of the most important problems in Pakistan. The
respondents were asked whether food insecurity is caused by
unemployment. It was found significant at 10% level. People who
were unemployed were food insecure and vice versa. Development
and population growth are interconnected. Through this develop-
ment resources are produced which can be used to improve health
and education. But huge increase in population can be problematic
for a country as it is difficult to provide health and education to the
ever increasing people. Population structure is very important
characteristics of populations as it gives us the overall population
by age or by sex. The division of population is made into the fol-
lowing groups: children (0–14 years), adults (15–60 years) and
old (more than 60 years). The dependent population includes chil-
dren and old people. It is necessary to understand the relationship
between household food security and employment because the
urban poor do not have enough resources to produce their own
production. The income of the worker is higher if he is working
as a full time rather than part-time. Therefore, this increased
income enables the household to buy food items and other
services.
5. Conclusion
The present study indicates that education as an important fac-
tor determining household food security in the study area. Surpris-
Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
9
ingly female education was found insignificant. There may be one
possible reason for it. In the study area all the decisions involving
financial matters are taken by males and females do not have any-
thing to say. Therefore, if a female has higher education it does not
matter in the affairs of household.
The purpose of this research is to examine the factors that affect
the food security status among rural household in northern area of
Pakistan. The method of logistic regression analysis is employed to
achieve the desired objectives. The food security situation in the
study area is not very bad as only 22% of the household fear that
their food will run out in the future while 80% of the respondents
do not fear such things. The major factors which affect household
food security status are gender of the household head, age, educa-
tion, remittances, unemployment, inflation assets (includes crop &
land) and diseases. These factors not only influence the food
requirements of household but also negatively affect their lives.
This study revealed that female headed household is more vul-
nerable to food security as compared to male headed household.
Therefore, the government as well as the international organiza-
tions needs to focus more specifically on female headed household
and provide them with social security allowance as most of them
are poor and do not have other employment opportunity. The sec-
ond most important factor is education. The dwellers should be
taught about the importance of knowledge and its role in uplifting
the standard of living of a person. The third factor is remittances. It
is suggested by Jebran et al. (2016) that government should focus
on the enhancement of remittances inflow. So that inhabitants
may have more income and quality life style. Lastly, assets includ-
ing crop and land are one of the key factors influencing food secu-
rity status of the household. Moreover, every year a lot of food
crops and products are wasted due to natural disasters, pest
attacks, miss-management and many more. A proper policy should
be formulated to safeguard the household from the negative effects
of natural calamities. The notion of crop insurance should be
introduced.
In the future the authors intend to investigate cultural diversity
with respect to food security as different cultures have different
food pattern and habits.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thanks China Scholarship Council (CSC) for
providing financial support to this study. In addition, we would
also like to extend our gratitude to anonymous reviewers for their
helpful comments and suggestions.
References
Akpan, Eme O., 2009. Oil resource management and food insecurity in Nigeria. In:
European Report on Development (ERD) Conference in Accra, Ghana.
Ali, A., Khan, M.A., 2013. Livestock ownership in ensuring rural household food
security in Pakistan. J. Animal Plant Sci. 23 (1), 313–318.
Amaza, P.S., Umeh, Joseph Chinedu, Helsen, J., Adejobi, A.O., 2006. Determinants and
measurement of food insecurity in Nigeria: some empirical policy guide. In:
international Association of Agricultural Economists Annual Meeting, August.
Andersen, Sue Ann., 1990. Core indicators of nutritional state for difficult to sample
populations. J. Nutr. 120 (11), 1555–1660.
Appendini, Kirsten, Quijada, Ma Guadalupe, 2016. Consumption strategies in
Mexican rural households: pursuing food security with quality. Agric. Hum.
Values 33 (2), 439–454.
Arene, C.J., Anyaeji, C., 2010. Determinants of food security among households in
Nsukka Metropolis of Enugu State, Nigeria. Pakistan J. Social Sci. 30 (1), 9–16.
Asghar Zahid, Ahmed Muhammad, 2013. Socio-Economic Determinants of
Household Food Insecurity in Pakistan.
Barrett, C.B., 2010. Measuring food insecurity. Science 327 (5967), 825–828.
Bartfeld, Judi, Dunifon, Rachel, 2006. State-level predictors of food insecurity among
households with children. J. Policy Anal. Manage. 25 (4), 921–942.
Bashir, M.K., Schilizzi, S., Pandit, R., 2013a. Impact of socio-economic characteristics
of rural households on food security: the case of the Punjab, Pakistan. JAPS, J.
Animal Plant Sci. 23 (2), 611–618.
10 Abdullah et al. / Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
Bashir, M.K., Schilizzi, S., Pandit, Ram, 2013b. Regional sensitivity of rural household
food security: the case of Punjab, Pakistan. JAPS, J. Animal Plant Sci. 23 (4),
1200–1206.
Bashir Muhammad Khalid, Steven Schilizzi, Ram Pandit, 2012. The Determinants of
Rural Household Food Security in the Punjab, Pakistan: an Econometric
Analysis.
Bogale, Ayalneh, 2012. Vulnerability of smallholder rural households to food
insecurity in Eastern Ethiopia. Food Security 4 (4), 581–591.
Chang, Yunhee, Chatterjee, Swarn, Kim, Jinhee, 2014. Household finance and food
insecurity. J. Fam. Econ. Issues 35 (4), 499–515.
Coleman-Jensen, Alisha, Nord, Mark, Andrews, Margaret, Carlson, Steven, 2011.
Statistical Supplement to Household Food Security in the United States in 2010:
AP-057. USDA, Economic Research Service http://www.ers.usda.gov/
publications/ap-administrative-publication/ap-057.aspx.
De Cock, Nathalie, D’Haese, Marijke, Vink, Nick, Van Rooyen, Cornelius Johannes,
Staelens, Lotte, Schönfeldt, Hettie C., D’Haese, Luc, 2013. Food security in rural
areas of Limpopo province, South Africa. Food Security 5 (2), 269–282.
Doppler, W., 2002. Farming and Rural Systems Approaches. Published Lecturing
Material, Hohenheim.
FAO, 2006. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2006). The state of food
insecurity in the world. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, Rome.
FAO, 2008. Foof and Agricultur Organizaiton (2008). Deriving Food Security
Information from National Household Budget Surveys: Experiences,
Achievements, Challenges. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United
Nations, Rome.
FAO, 2013. Food and Agriculture Organizaiton (2013). The State of Food Insecurity
in the World the Multiple Dimensions of Food Security. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Felker-Kantor, Erica, Wood, Charles H., 2012. Female-headed households and food
insecurity in Brazil. Food Security 4 (4), 607–617.
Frongillo, Edward A., Olson, Christine M., Rauschenbach, Barbara S., Kendall, Anne,
1997. Nutritional Consequences of Food Insecurity in a Rural New York State
County. Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Gebre, Girma Gezimu, 2012. Determinants of food insecurity among households in
Addis Ababa city, Ethiopia. Interdisciplinary Description Complex Syst. 10 (2),
159–173.
Gill Abid Rashid, Rana Ejaz Ali Khan, 2010. Determinants of Food Security in Rural
Areas of Pakistan. SSRN Working Paper Series.
Gundersen, Craig, Gruber, Joseph, 2001. The dynamic determinants of food
insufficiency. In: Second Food Security Measurement and Research
Conference. Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Report.
Guo, B., 2011. Household assets and food security: Evidence from the survey of
program dynamics. J fam. econ. iss. 32 (1), 98–110.
Hagos, F., Jayasinghe, G., Awulachew, S.B., Loulseged, M., Yilma, A.D., 2012.
Agricultural water management and poverty in Ethiopia. Agr. Econ. 43 (s1),
99–111.
Haile, H.K., Alemu, Zerihun Gudeta, Kudhlande, G., 2005. Causes of household food
insecurity in koredegaga peasant association, Oromiya zone, Ethiopia. Agrekon
44 (4), 543–560.
Ibnouf, Fatma Osman, 2011. Challenges and possibilities for achieving household
food security in the Western Sudan region: the role of female farmers. Food
Security 3 (2), 215–231.
Idrisa, Y.L., Gwary, M.M., Shehu, H., 2008. Analysis of food security status among
farming households in Jere Local Government of Borno State, Nigeria. J. Trop.
Agric. Food Environ. Ext. 7 (3), 199–205.
IFPRI, 2015. IFPRI, Concern Woldwide and Welthungerhilfe (2015). The Global
Hunger Index 2015. The Challenge of Hunger: Taming Price Spikes and
Excessive Food Price Volatility. Washington, DC.
IFSS, 2002. IFSS. (2002). Integrated Food Security Strategy. National Department of
Agriculture Policy Document, Pretoria.
IPC. (2017). <http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/kp_ipc_jun_
2015.pdf> (accessed on 23 February, 2017).
Jebran, K., Abdullah, Iqbal, A., Ullah, I., 2016. Effects of remittances on per capita
economic growth of Pakistan. Pakistan Business Rev. 18 (1), 1–18.
Please cite this article in press as: Abdullah, , et al. Factors affecting household food security in rural northern hinterland of Pakistan. Journal of the Saudi
Society of Agricultural Sciences (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2017.05.003
Kaiser, L.L., Melgar-Quiñonez, H., Townsend, M.S., Nicholson, Y., Fujii, M.L., Martin,
A.C., Lamp, C.L., 2003. Food insecurity and food supplies in Latino households
with young children. J. Nutr. Educ. Behavior 35 (3), 148–153.
Kassie, M., Jaleta, M., Shiferaw, B.A, Mmbando, F., De Groote, H., 2012. Improved
maize technologies and welfare outcomes in smallholder systems: evidence
from application of parametric and non-parametric approaches. In: Paper
presented at the 2012 Conference, August 18–24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil.
Kassie, M., Ndiritu, S.W., Stage, J., 2014. What determines gender inequality in
household food security in Kenya? Application of exogenous switching
treatment regression. World Dev. 56, 153–171.
Kassie, M., Shiferaw, B., Muricho, G., 2011. Agricultural technology, crop income,
and poverty alleviation in Uganda. World Dev. 39 (10), 1784–1795.
Kidane, H., Alemu, Z.G., Kundhlande, G., 2005. Causes of household food insecurity
in Koredegaga peasant association, oromiya zone, Ethiopia. Agrekon 44 (4),
543–560.
KPBOS, 2017. <http://kpbos.gov.pk/prd_images/1399372174.pdf> (accessed on 23
February, 2017).
Loopstra, R., Tarasuk, V., 2013. Severity of household food insecurity is sensitive to
change in household income and employment status among low-income
families. J. Nutr. 143 (8), 1316–1323.
Makombe, T., Lewin, P., Fisher, M., 2010. The Determinants of Food Insecurity in
Rural Malawi: Implications for Agricultural Policy Malawi Strategy Support
Program (MaSSP) Policy Note 4. International Food Policy Research Institute
(IFPRI), Washington, DC.
Mango, N., Zamasiya, B., Makate, C., Nyikahadzoi, K., Siziba, S., 2014. Factors
influencing household food security among smallholder farmers in the Mudzi
district of Zimbabwe. Dev. Southern Africa 31 (4), 625–640.
Nord, M., Andrews, M., Carlson, S., 2005. Household Food Security in the United
States, 2004. USDA-ERS Economic Research Report(11).
Nyikahadzoi, K., Siziba, S., Mango, N., Mapfumo, P., Adekunhle, A., Fatunbi, O., 2012.
Creating food self reliance among the smallholder farmers of eastern
Zimbabwe: exploring the role of integrated agricultural research for
development. Food Security 4 (4), 647–656.
Owusu, V., Abdulai, A., Abdul-Rahman, S., 2011. Non-farm work and food security
among farm households in Northern Ghana. Food Policy 36 (2), 108–118.
Pakistan Economic Survey, 2015. Government of Pakistan. Ministry of Finance
http://www.finance.gov.pk/survey_1516.html.
Ribar, D., Hamrick, K., 2003. An Analysis of Poverty and Food Sufficiency Dynamics.
USDA Economic Research Service, Washington, DC.
Riely, F., Mock, N., Cogill, B., Bailey, L., Kenefick, E., 1999. Food Security Indicators
and Framework for use in the Monitoring and Evaluation of Food Aid Programs.
Nutrition Technical Assistance Project (FANTA), Washington, DC.
Rose, D., Gundersen, C., Oliveira, V., 1998. Socio-Economic Determinants of Food
Insecurity in the United States. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service, NY, United States.
Rukuni, M., 2002. Africa: addressing growing threats to food security. J. Nutr. 132
(11), 3443S–3448S.
Sasson, A., 2012. Food security for Africa: an urgent global challenge. Agric. Food
Security 1 (1), 1.
SDPI, 2009. Food Insecurity in Pakistan. Sustainable Development Policy Institute,
Islamabad, World Food Program Pakistan, Swiss Agency for Development and
Corporation.
Shaikh, F., 2007. Determinants of household food security and consumption pattern
in rural Sindh: non-separable agricultural household model. IUB J. Social Sci.
Humanities 5 (2), 18–39.
Sultana, A., Kiani, A., 2011. Determinants of food security at household level in
Pakistan. Afr. J. Bus. Manage. 5 (34), 12972.
The Nation, 2017. <http://nation.com.pk/national/31-Oct-2013/food-insecure-kpk>
(accessed on 23 February, 2017).
Tyner, W.E., 2013. National and Global Market Implications of the 2012 US Drought.
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs. 2 May 2013.
WB, 2001. World Bank (2001). Nuts and Bolts. downloaded at <http://
wbinoo18worldbank.org/rdv/food,nsf>.
Wooldridge, J.M., 2010. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT
Press.