Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminal Justice, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.
College of Social, Behavioral and Health Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.
Nutrients. 2022 Nov 2;14(21):4616. doi: 10.3390/nu14214616.
Many individuals make financial, health and food related trade-offs to cope with the challenges of food insecurity and to meet their household needs for healthy, affordable food. A survey ( = 652) was conducted in nine rural counties in South Carolina, USA, during the COVID-19 pandemic from August 2020 to July 2021. We examine if level of food insecurity predicts hunger-coping trade-offs, and whether this relationship is moderated by easiness in food access and dependence on different food source types. Nearly one-third of the respondents experienced food insecurity. Making trade-offs between paying for food and other household expenses was common among the rural residents as on average they made nearly one type of trade-off in the past three months. The number of trade-offs was the highest among highly food insecure respondents (mean = 2.64), followed by moderately food insecure respondents (mean = 1.66); low food insecure respondents had the lowest number of trade-offs (mean = 0.39). The moderating effects of easiness in food access and dependence on food sources varied by level of food insecurity. The results show that individuals at different levels of food insecurity use different strategies to fulfill their food needs and social programs are more often utilized than personal food sources. We conclude with implications for addressing food insecurity in order to reduce the possibility of making trade-offs.
许多人在经济、健康和食品方面做出权衡取舍，以应对食品安全问题的挑战，并满足家庭对健康、负担得起的食品的需求。本研究于 2020 年 8 月至 2021 年 7 月在 COVID-19 大流行期间在美国南卡罗来纳州的 9 个农村县进行了一项调查（=652）。我们考察了食物不安全感的程度是否能预测饥饿应对的权衡取舍，以及这种关系是否受到食物获取便利性和对不同食物来源类型的依赖程度的调节。近三分之一的受访者经历了食物不安全。在农村居民中，为食品和其他家庭开支支付费用之间进行权衡取舍是很常见的，因为他们在过去三个月中平均进行了近一种权衡取舍。在高度食物不安全的受访者中（平均值=2.64），做出权衡取舍的人数最多，其次是中度食物不安全的受访者（平均值=1.66）；食物不安全程度最低的受访者做出的权衡取舍最少（平均值=0.39）。食物获取便利性和对食物来源的依赖程度的调节作用因食物不安全程度的不同而不同。研究结果表明，不同程度食物不安全的个体使用不同的策略来满足他们的食物需求，社会项目比个人食物来源更常被利用。最后，我们得出了一些解决食物不安全问题的建议，以减少做出权衡取舍的可能性。
